I saw that article and thought about starting a thread on it. So, there are some young people left with some gumption. Makes me have a little hope for the future. Him not wanting to let his parents know so they wouldn't feel bad, reminds me of how I used to deal with the fact that I knew my parents only had so many resources so why bother them with it.Sounds like we could stand for this kid's work ethic to become contagious.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/this-teenager-was-walking-for-hours-to-and-from-work-—-until-a-police-stop-changed-his-life/ar-BBwOZIB?li=BBnb7Kz&ocid=mailsignout
But we have a 4.9% unemployment rate. More government lies to hide the truth.
Your lack of the intellectual skill sets that enable eskimo to reason at the, to you, incomprehensible level that he does are the same skill sets you would have to have and don't have that make his capacities invisible to you. When you wish to establish the authenticity of a gem, you don't ask a donkey if it is real. Your speciality lies in braying.Eskimospy will be here shortly to correct any anti-government conspiracy theory misconceptions, haha.
What is worth remembering is that boys used to be the group considered shortchanged by the schools. The idea that the schools shortchanged boys was part of the common wisdom through the 1970s. As Brophy (1985) reminds us:
Claims that one sex or the other is not being taught effectively in our schools have been frequent and often impassioned. From early in the century (Ayres, 1909) through about 1970 (Sexton, 1969; Austin, Clark, & Fitchett, 1971), criticism was usually focused on the treatment of boys, especially at the elementary level. Critics noted that boys received lower grades in all subjects and lower achievement test scores in reading and language arts. They insisted that these sex differences occurred because the schools were "too feminine" or the "overwhelmingly female" teachers were unable to meet boys' learning needs effectively.
Your lack of the intellectual skill sets that enable eskimo to reason at the, to you, incomprehensible level that he does are the same skill sets you would have to have and don't have that make his capacities invisible to you. When you wish to establish the authenticity of a gem, you don't ask a donkey if it is real. Your speciality lies in braying.
I'm very skeptical that we will hit that post-scarcity utopia without significant depopulation. One of the main reasons is that there are limits to human need; Marxists have predicted an inevitable uprising of the underclasses in light of inequality for over a century in all countries, but you only see it where real suffering (starvation, slavery, etc) occurs. Like everything else, human standards exist on a bell curve, and as long as enough of the population is content with cheap fast food and cheap entertainment, they will never work more than it takes to fill those needs. We might (and almost certainly will) figure out how to exploit alternative energy sources better, and how to automate our basic consumption further, but we'll be limited by popular demand overall. No one will ever invent a porno holodeck if man of the 22nd century decides 3d goggles and a robotic fleshlight are good enough. Our productivity per capita is as high as ever iirc, but only because of technology, which everyone aside from the inventor class uses as a crutch to spend less man-hours on actual work. The most optimistic view I can take is that the 0.1% of the best minds will be happy enough to create just for the fun of it, but even then, I think you may begin to see a plateau of human curiosity or a wall where even geniuses can't push any further.
All of that is just a bit of a tangential rant anyways since we're not very close to approaching that. Wages continue downwards, skilled jobs are increasingly replaced by the billions from the developing world eager to take them, or by robots that are even cheaper than human wage-slaves. Meanwhile the population continues to grow exponentially, and living space is more cramped and expensive. I don't see anything dystopian about encouraging one-child policies or informing mothers than their fetus will grow up to be a defective human, if it means that those actually alive have an improved quality of life. If a person is going to be born, they may as well be born an ubermensch. Far less dystopian to me than a future of 50 billion consumers living in entertainment pods fully dependent on advances in genetic modification to keep staple crop production on par with demand.
Well I think the argument that young people are lazy isn't a very helpful one. All things considered, I imagine today's generation has roughly equal innate genetic capability and disposition as yesterday's. So that really means the difference is entirely environmental. So there really doesn't seem to be a benefit to blaming the individuals.
I wonder, then, what is it about today's society and/or the society that today's young people grew up in that accounts for this?
Maybe a society with problems blames the victims while the victims blame anybody else.Well I think the argument that young people are lazy isn't a very helpful one. All things considered, I imagine today's generation has roughly equal innate genetic capability and disposition as yesterday's. So that really means the difference is entirely environmental. So there really doesn't seem to be a benefit to blaming the individuals.
I wonder, then, what is it about today's society and/or the society that today's young people grew up in that accounts for this?
So what you're saying is, consistently appealing to authority is actually 3-Dimensional chess?
No, just demonstrating that when you point out a person's lack of sufficient skills to identify sone skill related ability, they will fail to understand the message and fabricate sone alternate fantasy for themselves, that the braying will continue.So what you're saying is, consistently appealing to authority is actually 3-Dimensional chess?
When the Job Creators have automation & foreigners do nearly all the work, what is a constructive alternative to govt redistribution of both work and income?
Technological progress dictates that we need new ways of looking at employment, whether we like it or not. Moralistic hurf burf isn't that at all, no matter how emotionally appealing that might be.
I also knew it without the study but at the same time its no different than disconnected men who turn to crime or drugs in terms of not participating in society. Considering the social contract is broken in alot of places if videogames are what make you realize people have completely checked out of the status quo then you've been living under a rock for awhile.
I was just reading up on MGTOW's. Can't say I blame them.
Paperwork on getting a job is more onerous than ever and I'm noticing mostly women or men in relationships having an easier time getting a job as well. Just because women tend to be a little better at that kind of stuff. Of course you aren't getting a girlfriend really without a job in alot of cases so.
Bottom line is everything is pretty fucked, but I'm ok, I do me. I ride till it blows over man.
Maybe a society with problems blames the victims while the victims blame anybody else.
No, just demonstrating that when you point out a person's lack of sufficient skills to identify sone skill related ability, they will fail to understand the message and fabricate sone alternate fantasy for themselves, that the braying will continue.
But perhaps you would be good enough to do an in depth analysis with references as to the condition you called appealing to authority. I would be fascinated to acquire more information on how deeply you have acquired expertise in identifying the difference between appeal to authority where the appeal is to real authority and when it isn't as your suggest you were able to identify in eskimo's case. I am anxious to learn more because as a nobody myself, with little expertise to offer, I find myself extremely impressed by his breadth of knowledge, intellectual acumen, and communication skills. It makes me wonder why I see in him a mountain and in you a mole hill. The odd thing is that like you I am absolutely convinced that the problem couldn't possible be with me.
Dude,either you are the man to get something done or you are not.Ah that makes sense. So you are suffering from what people colloquially call "hero worship." It's understandable in this political climate where both candidates are cults of personality. "I am in awe of his abilities, therefore he is always right." I mean in defense of him, you yourself basically used an appeal to authority argument. Since he often seems well spoken and impresses you with his vocabulary, therefore when he dismisses arguments from people with one liner responses like "conspiracy theories" without contrary evidence, he's already earned your trust, and thus does not have to explain himself. Makes perfect sense.
Ah that makes sense. So you are suffering from what people colloquially call "hero worship." It's understandable in this political climate where both candidates are cults of personality. "I am in awe of his abilities, therefore he is always right." I mean in defense of him, you yourself basically used an appeal to authority argument. Since he often seems well spoken and impresses you with his vocabulary, therefore when he dismisses arguments from people with one liner responses like "conspiracy theories" without contrary evidence, he's already earned your trust, and thus does not have to explain himself. Makes perfect sense.
There's not as many jobs available for the young men these days.
Provided they do want to work:The opporunity is not there as it was.
That is bad,VERY BAD
Sometimes it doesn't take a lot of words to point out dummy arugments, like for example denying that more sophisticated thinkers have a better chance of getting things right.
We could do this forever, I suggest ways for you to see your inability to properly assess the skills of a person greatly developed beyond your own level, in the last case by inguiring of you that you lay out for visible display the cogency of your appeal to authority remark, thereby clarifying for anybody interested that you in fact have some expertise in spotting that phenomenon other than that it arrived unbidden in your own mind like the sudden impulse of a donkey to let out with a bray. The result, of course, since you have no such developed skill on which to make such a claim rationally but do so only as a result of of this need of yours to spontaneously bray, was that you now imagine you detect tha phenomenon of hero worship. You have as little capacity to make that evaluation accurately as you do all the other things you flavor with the weak sauce you extrude.Ah that makes sense. So you are suffering from what people colloquially call "hero worship." It's understandable in this political climate where both candidates are cults of personality. "I am in awe of his abilities, therefore he is always right." I mean in defense of him, you yourself basically used an appeal to authority argument. Since he often seems well spoken and impresses you with his vocabulary, therefore when he dismisses arguments from people with one liner responses like "conspiracy theories" without contrary evidence, he's already earned your trust, and thus does not have to explain himself. Makes perfect sense.
Those who start by name calling have implicitly already lost the argument. It really doesn't come as a surprise then that the next statement is followed by a false equivalency by comparing statistical likelihoods versus being correct in any given circumstance.