If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Guy)   Progressive student: "We should tax the rich to give the poor more opportunity." Conservative: "So you'd be cool with me taking some points off your GPA to give the dumb some opportunity, right?" Progressive student:   (thelookingspoon.com) divider line 631
    More: Amusing, GPA  
•       •       •

6168 clicks; posted to Politics » on 17 Apr 2011 at 8:03 PM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



631 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-04-18 01:24:43 AM  

Psumek:
Sort of. The Ivy league is full of valedictorians, saluditorians and people with 4.0s. You have a weird mix of legacies from Phillips Exeter and poor kids from Brooklyn Tech, but rarely do you have the middle class kid from Peoria, IL who has 4.0 but not the name nor the story to get into Harvard.


Harvard is expensive. The kid from Peoria will be fine at some crappy school like Notre Dame. The poor kid from Brooklyn Tech attending Harvard is on a need based total scholarship and probably can't afford Notre Dame.
 
2011-04-18 01:26:08 AM  
Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.
 
2011-04-18 01:28:05 AM  

impaler: Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.


Or leverage your GPA to keep other people from making GPA.
 
2011-04-18 01:34:28 AM  

Lenny_da_Hog: impaler: Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.

Or leverage your GPA to keep other people from making GPA.


Or inherit a GPA you didn't earn.
 
2011-04-18 01:38:44 AM  

GreenAdder: Lenny_da_Hog: impaler: Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.

Or leverage your GPA to keep other people from making GPA.

Or inherit a GPA you didn't earn.


Or use your GPA to impress women.
 
2011-04-18 01:41:41 AM  
The difference is there are some libtards that have a GPA to give up. That's why it's bad.
 
2011-04-18 01:43:36 AM  

HeartBurnKid: When you can, and indeed must, use grade points to put food on your table and a roof over your head, then we'll talk.


And that's why you hate affirmative action?
 
2011-04-18 01:52:10 AM  

drewkumo: GreenAdder: Lenny_da_Hog: impaler: Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.

Or leverage your GPA to keep other people from making GPA.

Or inherit a GPA you didn't earn.

Or use your GPA to impress women.


Or use 85000 GPA points to buy a new rug for your office.
 
2011-04-18 01:52:37 AM  

hillbillypharmacist: Hey, I've never heard that old bullsh*t before!

Let's hear about the guys who go to dinner and split the bill, or the one about how your car insurance doesn't pay for oil changes? Those are fresh and accurate, too!


Almost 300 posts off a retarded chain e-mail. Priceless.
 
2011-04-18 01:55:57 AM  

Mentat: drewkumo: GreenAdder: Lenny_da_Hog: impaler: Unlike money, you can't use your GPA to create GPA.

Or leverage your GPA to keep other people from making GPA.

Or inherit a GPA you didn't earn.

Or use your GPA to impress women.

Or use 85000 GPA points to buy a new rug for your office.


Or embezzle someone else's GPA, then use those high grades to bribe Congress into acquitting you.
 
2011-04-18 02:01:47 AM  
beinecke.library.yale.edu

Read it.
Analyze it.
Decide for yourself.

Marx's analysis has been brought into the 21st century by a number of his proponents, but both the core of his method and the beef of his criticism of capitalist political economy is still as relevant as they were in 1867.

If, after that you, want to ignore the rest of his and Engels' writing, go ahead. I could truly care less.

My best guess however, is that not a single Fark Independent or Conservative has made it through even Volume I of Capital. They don't know a bloody thing about the thing they most fear, which is likely in part why they fear it.
 
2011-04-18 02:06:59 AM  
Chimperror2 2011-04-18 01:41:41 AM
blah flarp libtards blah. That's why it's bad. (picks nose)

Have a peanut, sh*thead.
 
2011-04-18 02:08:57 AM  
Kittypie070:
baloney4145431441351551341: blah blab blah blaah blah blaaahhhh blab blab blah blah Jobs? Will the poor create jobs? Will those on blah blab blah blaah food stamps and blah blab blah blaah? No, Mr. Simple, it's the "rich," blah blab blah blaah of blaah blah blaaahhhh blab blab blah blah over $250,000 who own franchises, blaah blah blaaahhhh blab blab blah blah warehouses, print shops, etc., and the "super rich" blaah blah blaaahhhh blab blab blah blah who own blaah.

WHAR JOBS
RICH PEOPLE,
WHAR?
\0/
|
/\


Basically, especially since the rich are totally reliant on the poor to survive.

They do after all do all the work and provide or the services and make the infrastructure that got them living out of caves put into place. Heck, without law enforcement and the military, most of them would have been raped to death and all their stuff taken along time ago. I guess they forget that we live in a society and everything is interconnected and reliant on every part of the society to survive.
 
2011-04-18 02:17:48 AM  
limeyfellow 2011-04-18 02:08:57 AM


Basically, especially since the rich are totally reliant on the poor to survive.

They do after all do all the work and provide or the services and make the infrastructure that got them living out of caves put into place. Heck, without law enforcement and the military, most of them would have been raped to death and all their stuff taken along time ago. I guess they forget that we live in a society and everything is interconnected and reliant on every part of the society to survive.


Well, OK. Now what?

They think they're gods.

Got any suggestions of how to disabuse them of that little notion?

I thought humanity had pretty much put an end to the divine right of kings a while back, but here it is again.
 
2011-04-18 02:21:40 AM  

tony41454: With all being said and done, you don't (over)tax those who create the jobs.


I know you're a genuinely stupid person, who actually believes this crap, but I have bad news for you. No matter how much you try to help the rich hang on to all their money, they will never give you any of it. They will not be at all grateful to you. They are laughing at you; the only feeling they have for you is contempt-- because you're so dumb you will support policies that hurt you, just because Rush told you to.
 
2011-04-18 02:25:38 AM  

Bocanegra: How's that whole "tax the rich" thing working out for Europe?

lulz


How's that whole "give the rich huge tax breaks" working out for the US?
 
2011-04-18 02:34:08 AM  

limeyfellow: Basically, especially since the rich are totally reliant on the poor to survive.

They do after all do all the work and provide or the services and make the infrastructure that got them living out of caves put into place. Heck, without law enforcement and the military, most of them would have been raped to death and all their stuff taken along time ago. I guess they forget that we live in a society and everything is interconnected and reliant on every part of the society to survive.


30.media.tumblr.com
 
2011-04-18 02:40:34 AM  
Pell Grants and other financial aid is what gives the poor more poor opportunities, but of course the conservaderps don't like that tax money is being used to pay for education on any level. That analogy is stupid on so many levels; for one, the poor are not all dumb, just like the rich are not all smart, some of the smartest people of the last century started off poor, Albert Einstein or Nikolai Tesla for instance.
 
2011-04-18 04:14:49 AM  
And he has put an end to commenting on his blog post.

Let's see some of his last words on the subject. In response to the objections that GPA can't be inherited, GPA doesn't serve the same function as money, GPA can't max out, low GPA can't kill you and so on, he says:

"Analogies compare similarities, so they would always fall apart if you take them to the degree that the libs have done here. The argument isn't in any way about how an earned GPA is the SAME as earned income."

Yes, pointing out that the reasons we have for treating money differently don't apply to GPA is just taking it too far, isn't it?

"The argument is about taking what is earned and giving it to people that didn't earn as much in the name of "fairness." That is really the only argument being had here."

Translation: Accept the caricature or GTFO.
 
2011-04-18 04:36:02 AM  

tony41454: So, the simple minded respond. NOWT can't come up with anything original so he/she shows their ignorance. Tell me, O master of the Low IQ, what group in this country is responsible for creating the most jobs? Creating business? What does this country need more of right now? Jobs? Will the poor create jobs? Will those on food stamps and welfare create jobs? No, Mr. Simple, it's the "rich," those with combined incomes of over $250,000 who own franchises, warehouses, print shops, etc., and the "super rich" who own factories. Fine, you can advocate your socialist wealth spreading, but you'll sit on your arse and collect welfare, because there will be no jobs. (Man, some people are just DENSE.)


You couldn't be more wrong. The business-owners don't create jobs.

Only one thing creates jobs - demand. From there, it's just simple game theory for a business owner to expand to meet demand - otherwise he won't realize the potential profits.

What creates demand? Two things:
1. Wealth in the pocket of the consumer (ability to meet price)
2. Desire for product.

The American economy has a lot of 2. It doesn't have much of 1. Most of the American wealth is not moving - it's being held by the wealthiest members - and if it is moving, it's moving out of the country to create foreign subsidaries and investment.

It's no wonder the economy is crashing.
 
2011-04-18 05:04:10 AM  

GreenAdder: Did the student inherit his GPA without actually working for those grades?


t0.gstatic.com

Of course not.
 
2011-04-18 05:12:26 AM  
img828.imageshack.us
 
2011-04-18 05:15:19 AM  

Yankees Team Gynecologist: wealth is created


It's either printed or mined.

What is the best way to go about carrot and sticking, remains to be settled.
 
2011-04-18 05:24:37 AM  
In case no one has mentioned it:

Your blog sucks, subby. Truly. It's awful.
 
2011-04-18 05:45:00 AM  

EberhardKarl:
My best guess however, is that not a single Fark Independent or Conservative has made it through even Volume I of Capital. They don't know a bloody thing about the thing they most fear, which is likely in part why they fear it.


I dont know much about jumping out of an airplane without a parachute either. I do however know the results of both. Stalin alone murdered 60 million people. The problem with socialism is not socialism. It is in the method of implementing it --Force.
 
2011-04-18 05:52:22 AM  
If I was rich (I am not), I would be happy to pay more in taxes. It isn't that I wouldn't want to keep my money; it's just that I understand that money I pay in taxes goes towards paying for infrastructure and other things that made it possible for me to accumulate said wealth in the first place.

Heck... if I was truly rich, I would find deserving people each year and pay off all their bills, mortgages, cars, land, etc... putting them in a position to live more comfortably off what money they do have.

But I'm one of those strange folks that wants to see everyone around me prosper, not just myself. The disparity I see between rich and poor is getting wider every day. Sickening disparity, in fact.

Of course... I'm an artist. I don't really expect to get rich anytime soon, if ever.
 
2011-04-18 05:53:28 AM  

bigsteve3OOO: EberhardKarl:
My best guess however, is that not a single Fark Independent or Conservative has made it through even Volume I of Capital. They don't know a bloody thing about the thing they most fear, which is likely in part why they fear it.

I dont know much about jumping out of an airplane without a parachute either. I do however know the results of both. Stalin alone murdered 60 million people. The problem with socialism is not socialism. It is in the method of implementing it --Force.


So then you agree that socialism via a lawful, democratic government is different in kind from Stalinist tyranny.

Right?
 
2011-04-18 05:58:39 AM  

captain_heroic44: bigsteve3OOO: EberhardKarl:
My best guess however, is that not a single Fark Independent or Conservative has made it through even Volume I of Capital. They don't know a bloody thing about the thing they most fear, which is likely in part why they fear it.

I dont know much about jumping out of an airplane without a parachute either. I do however know the results of both. Stalin alone murdered 60 million people. The problem with socialism is not socialism. It is in the method of implementing it --Force.

So then you agree that socialism via a lawful, democratic government is different in kind from Stalinist tyranny.

Right?


If it is voluntary like the Mennonites, yeah what a great way to live. If it is forced at gunpoint no the not so much. But no I cant see how a vote to become a socialist country cant account for the people who vote no. lets say 350 mil Americans, 50 mil like me dont want it and vote no, do you kill us or imprison us?
 
2011-04-18 06:02:07 AM  

starsrift: tony41454: So, the simple minded respond. NOWT can't come up with anything original so he/she shows their ignorance. Tell me, O master of the Low IQ, what group in this country is responsible for creating the most jobs? Creating business? What does this country need more of right now? Jobs? Will the poor create jobs? Will those on food stamps and welfare create jobs? No, Mr. Simple, it's the "rich," those with combined incomes of over $250,000 who own franchises, warehouses, print shops, etc., and the "super rich" who own factories. Fine, you can advocate your socialist wealth spreading, but you'll sit on your arse and collect welfare, because there will be no jobs. (Man, some people are just DENSE.)

You couldn't be more wrong. The business-owners don't create jobs.

Only one thing creates jobs - demand. From there, it's just simple game theory for a business owner to expand to meet demand - otherwise he won't realize the potential profits.

What creates demand? Two things:
1. Wealth in the pocket of the consumer (ability to meet price)
2. Desire for product.

The American economy has a lot of 2. It doesn't have much of 1. Most of the American wealth is not moving - it's being held by the wealthiest members - and if it is moving, it's moving out of the country to create foreign subsidaries and investment.

It's no wonder the economy is crashing.


So much THIS.

Putting more money in the pockets of the wealthy does not create jobs. Only one thing creates jobs: increased DEMAND, which in turn means that companies must hire workers to meet said demand. You want to create jobs? Put more money in the hands of the consumers-- don't increase their taxes in order to give the wealthy more money, which will most likely get invested overseas.

Corporate profits are at record highs, and unemployment is still flirting with 10%. Why? Because tony41454's argument is full of shiat.
 
2011-04-18 06:04:00 AM  

bigsteve3OOO: [...] lets say 350 mil Americans, 50 mil like me dont want it and vote no, do you kill us or imprison us?


I'm going to go out on a limb, here...
No?
 
2011-04-18 06:13:23 AM  

bigsteve3OOO: 50 mil like me dont want it and vote no, do you kill us or imprison us?


That seems pretty extreme.

I'd see 3 choices if that happened:

1. You go along to get along... You might not like it, but if that is the way the country went despite your vote, oh well... Lots of things get voted through that people don't like, yet they still enforce it.

2. You move to another country... If you don't like the way things are here, there are other places you could go. I don't think anyone would force you to stay.

3. You fight it (likely violently) and then yes... you are either killed or imprisoned. I suppose it's possible you could win the fight, but not very likely.

Although it's purely a hypothetical since no one of any consequence is proposing we become a socialist country. We do have programs that might seem "socialist" to people who have no interest in helping their fellow citizens at any point, but I think most of those programs are really just domestic investment, not a move towards socialism.

Besides... this whole idea that every man is an island is nonsense. We all rely intrinsically on each other for everything from our roads to our water to our food. I know of NO ONE who is entirely self reliant (grows their own food, supplies all their own water, builds their own house from wood they chopped down, produces their own electricity, etc. Not saying that there isn't anyone out there like that, I just don't know anyone who is.

Bottom line is... We are herd animals. It is good to take care of the herd.
 
2011-04-18 06:22:05 AM  

captain_heroic44: So then you agree that socialism via a lawful, democratic government is different in kind from Stalinist tyranny.

Right?


One will never work, because of human nature. The other was Stalinism.
 
2011-04-18 06:25:34 AM  

sendtodave: captain_heroic44: So then you agree that socialism via a lawful, democratic government is different in kind from Stalinist tyranny.

Right?

One will never work, because of human nature. The other was Stalinism.


Should we be praising Europe on their triumph over human nature then?
 
2011-04-18 06:26:02 AM  
Sorry subby, but the analogy is no good....

The student earned his good grades.
 
2011-04-18 06:26:58 AM  
"To give the poor more opportunity" is a stupid reason to tax the rich more. Did they really say this?
 
2011-04-18 06:30:50 AM  

Wyalt Derp: "To give the poor more opportunity" is a stupid reason to tax the rich more. Did they really say this?


It kinda makes sense though. If the rich keep hording all the money, what opportunity is there for the poor to accumulate any?
 
2011-04-18 06:35:19 AM  

Fail in Human Form: sendtodave: captain_heroic44: So then you agree that socialism via a lawful, democratic government is different in kind from Stalinist tyranny.

Right?

One will never work, because of human nature. The other was Stalinism.

Should we be praising Europe on their triumph over human nature then?


Fine, fine. Better to say that the Marxist idea of Communism (stateless, equal, etc.), supposedly the end-game of socialism, is impossible. European style is likely as far as we will get.

Mostly because people need a ruling class to tell them what to do.
 
2011-04-18 06:39:00 AM  

St_Francis_P: That headline might make sense if the Progressive student had a 5,000 GPA, but only needed the normal 4.0.


this, This, THIS!
 
2011-04-18 07:01:28 AM  
There is only one real way a student can sacrifice part of their grade to the better of his fellow students, they could do mediocre on an exam and hope the prof curves it for everyone.
 
2011-04-18 07:10:49 AM  

JohnnyC: If I was rich (I am not), I would be happy to pay more in taxes. It isn't that I wouldn't want to keep my money; it's just that I understand that money I pay in taxes goes towards paying for infrastructure and other things that made it possible for me to accumulate said wealth in the first place.

Heck... if I was truly rich, I would find deserving people each year and pay off all their bills, mortgages, cars, land, etc... putting them in a position to live more comfortably off what money they do have.

But I'm one of those strange folks that wants to see everyone around me prosper, not just myself. The disparity I see between rich and poor is getting wider every day. Sickening disparity, in fact.

Of course... I'm an artist. I don't really expect to get rich anytime soon, if ever.


Hang in there, We'll all be down to your level soon.
 
2011-04-18 07:15:48 AM  

sendtodave:
Fine, fine. Better to say that the Marxist idea of Communism (stateless, equal, etc.), supposedly the end-game of socialism, is impossible.


Well its only the end-game in the distorted view of right wingers so thats kind of irrelevant no?
 
2011-04-18 07:18:00 AM  

sendtodave: Mostly because people need a ruling class to tell them what to do


You mean like a royal family or something right?
 
2011-04-18 07:22:44 AM  

kyrg: Hang in there, We'll all be down to your level soon.


What do you mean by that, exactly?

I would actually pull in pretty good money if there were jobs in my field available in my area. Sadly, in the rock bottom economy of Michigan, there just aren't many, if any, 3D artist jobs around (that I'm aware of). There was one a couple months ago that I interviewed for... sadly, I didn't get the position. A guy I was up against had more on the job experience than I do. Oh well... maybe I'll get the next one that comes up (assuming one does).
 
2011-04-18 07:30:50 AM  
Why are conservatives so bad at making analogies?
 
2011-04-18 07:37:11 AM  

JohnnyC: kyrg: Hang in there, We'll all be down to your level soon.

What do you mean by that, exactly?

I would actually pull in pretty good money if there were jobs in my field available in my area. Sadly, in the rock bottom economy of Michigan, there just aren't many, if any, 3D artist jobs around (that I'm aware of). There was one a couple months ago that I interviewed for... sadly, I didn't get the position. A guy I was up against had more on the job experience than I do. Oh well... maybe I'll get the next one that comes up (assuming one does).


Is moving an option? If not, why?
 
2011-04-18 07:44:18 AM  

gaspode: sendtodave:
Fine, fine. Better to say that the Marxist idea of Communism (stateless, equal, etc.), supposedly the end-game of socialism, is impossible.

Well its only the end-game in the distorted view of right wingers so thats kind of irrelevant no?


No, it's the end-game of Marxist socialism.

The advanced stage of socialism, referred to as "upper-stage communism" in Marxist theory, is based on the socialist mode of production but is differentiated from socialism in a few fundamental ways. While socialism implies public ownership (by a state apparatus) or cooperative ownership (by a worker cooperative enterprise), communism would be based on common ownership of the means of production. Class distinctions based on ownership of capital cease to exist, along with the need for a state. A superabundance of goods and services are made possible by automated production that allow for goods to be distributed based on need rather than merit.

Humans will never abolish class. We like comparing status too much. Heck, even small scale communes tend to fall prey to cult of personality around a strong leader.

slackist: sendtodave: Mostly because people need a ruling class to tell them what to do

You mean like a royal family or something right?


Royal family; president; chieftain; emperor; colonel; your jerk of a boss. Someone to look up to, and to emulate, to teach you how to properly look down on others.
 
2011-04-18 07:47:04 AM  

Anti_illuminati: Why are conservatives so bad at making analogies?



Progressive student: "We should tax the rich to give the poor more opportunity."
Conservative: "So you'd be cool with me taking some points off your GPA to give the dumb some opportunity, right?"
Progressive student: [realizes he's talking to an idiot and doesn't further respond.]
 
2011-04-18 07:49:03 AM  

Anti_illuminati: Why are conservatives so bad at making analogies?


Because they don't have to present a logical argument, only an argument that seems like a zinger to someone with the iq of a ham sandwich*.

*Not intended to insult ham sandwiches
 
2011-04-18 07:58:34 AM  

sendtodave: Humans will never abolish class. We like comparing status too much. Heck, even small scale communes tend to fall prey to cult of personality around a strong leader.


Assuming we don't kill ourselves, I think you're wrong in terms of economics, as it's inevitable that we will reach levels of engineering where productivity is far beyond society's rate of consumption (and I don't think the people in charge now will be able to maintain control of it forever). Though this will be replaced in the future, where "class" is a function of knowledge and personality, which I personally would welcome (even though I'm kind of a jerk half the time).
 
2011-04-18 08:01:47 AM  

BraveNewCheneyWorld: *Not intended to insult ham sandwiches


Of course not, we all know how much liberals love pork. Oink oink, libs!

Zing!

/I should get paid for this
 
Displayed 50 of 631 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report