New Zealand To Greatly Tighten Gun Laws After Christchurch Massacre

[tankasnowgod]

Utterly disgraceful. You have no concept of the loss and pain this kind of thing causes because you live in a bubble.

Hey, you're the one who wants more people to be massacred by disarming them.

 

[sunraiser]

What is this authoritarian nonsense doing on a Ray Peat forum?

Go cheer on taking away people's rights somewhere else.

My social and political views are very much in line with Ray Peat's - the posts I've detailed in this thread are not views Ray would disagree with. A lot of his philosophy is derived from the ideas of Noam Chomsky, alongside his experiences growing up observing racism, inequality and government exploitation of minorities.

Ray even mentions he was harassed for being a suspected communist during the cold war era!

So, my question would be what on earth is this fear-driven, individualistic and racial hate driven rhetoric doing on a Ray Peat forum? It's funny because you could easily question why I'm here from my posts on physiology - I respect RP's work in research but my experiences simply don't lead me to similar conclusions about how health is achieved, at all.

Yet morally, socially and politically I'm on a pretty similar page to Peat.

 

[Waremu]

My social and political views are very much in line with Ray Peat's - the posts I've detailed in this thread are not views Ray would disagree with. A lot of his philosophy is derived from the ideas of Noam Chomsky, alongside his experiences growing up observing racism, inequality and government exploitation of minorities.

Ray even mentions he was harassed for being a suspected communist during the cold war era!

So, my question would be what on earth is this fear-driven, individualistic and racial hate driven rhetoric doing on a Ray Peat forum? It's funny because you could easily question why I'm here from my posts on physiology - I respect RP's work in research but my experiences simply don't lead me to similar conclusions about how health is achieved, at all.

Yet morally, socially and politically I'm on a pretty similar page to Peat.

Ray Peat is right when it comes to a lot of nutritional stuff, but that doesn't mean just because everyone agrees with his views on health, that his views on everything else is the Gospel.

I think Peat's views on political matters are probably inspired by the post WW-2 boomer-left generation which was indoctrinated to have so much collective guilt for being European that they see racism and Nazism in every aspect of life that they view through a critical lens --- while ignoring or advocating much of the collective slave morality that caused communism to murder far more people within the same century-period of time. The Overton window has now shifted so far to the other side since WW-2, that the real threat isn't Nazism, but rather, radical equality-of-outcome progressives who are on a crusade of purity to purge the world of so-called racism and sexism under the guise of 'social justice' (LOL). They are very much like the radical Victorians and religious puritans who went on witch hunts or the Catholic church when it burned heretics for speaking against the religious dogma of the church. Today, those who deny the religion of social justice and all of it's science denial are often exposed to the same moral panic and religious-type of witch hunts.

Using the same Marxist infiltration tactics of consistently re-defining words, equality which originally meant 'equal opportunity' has now become equality of outcome, which is really what was behind the same ideology of the communists. And you wonder why many call people who hold such views communist? Because they really are, when you peal away all the silly word salad and address their moral views and slave master morality which they hold.

You seem to hold much of the same silly grievance-based politics these guilt-ridden boomers like Chomsky push. Ray Peat is smart on nutrition, but he is wrong on other such matters. His explanation of why the non-aggression principle isn't right was quite comical, actually. And he pushes an old failed social-economic system, such as Marxism, as a means to understand many things today. (Yes, he said that in one interview).

In a free society, inequality always will exist and that is a good thing. That after all is how natural selection works. Your system at the core will always be immoral if we are to judge by outcome because it incentivizes the unfit, lazy, and dumb, or unproductive to reallocate resources from the fit and intelligent to reproduce via state violence because they are not able to compete in a free and open system. If that is how natural selection worked for all of our history, then we would have never progressed to this point. The Marxist totalitarians operate from the same collective slave morality framework fascists do, and for that reason, no matter how much they try to dress up their views as just or moral, they never will be just or moral because their absolutist framework will always require the violence and force of the state, just like the 'fascists.'

You may be similar to Ray Peat politically, but I am not. His political views are contradictory and cannot work because it relies on humans having a nature that is not flawed and the refusal to address the flaw of human nature is what causes these seemingly nice-sounding theories on paper to end up with the high body counts that they have created in real life.

 

[Cirion]

The social justice dogma has been severely entrenched to the point where anyone who does not toe the SJW line is automatically the enemy of humanity. My ex-gf who was a SJW if you ever saw one, did finally admit to me one time that "Bernie Sanders' ideas" would never be able to be funded with our debt the way it is now, yet she still voted for him and wanted his policies to pass. Prime example of someone putting emotions over logic.

What I think is the case is that SJW's think that conservatives have no emotion or empathy. This is completely wrong. We just know how to separate emotion from logic based decisions.

 

[sunraiser]

Sorry if I sounded argumentative at all. Trying to be as matter of fact as I can in this following post.

I don't mind if you sound argumentative - you're arguing for something you believe in, not arguing for the sake of being difficult. Having passion about these things is natural as they're usually divisive.

"Taxing the rich" really gets under my skin too. The rich already pay the VAST majority of taxes. Also "rich" is vague. Some people think $250,000 a yr is rich. Actually, in some places in CA, it's almost poverty. "Rich" is used as a means to tax EVERYONE more, including middle class (which most people are).

You have to look at tax in relative terms. A person earning way less money often pays a higher proption of their ACTUAL income in taxes in the UK. The total amount of money from an individual wealthy person is obviously higher, but the proportion of their income is often not. The below article shows the values in Britain (we have taxes beyond income tax, like council tax and road tax).

"The poorest 10 per cent of households in the UK pay a greater proportion of their income in tax than the richest 10 per cent, new analysis has revealed.

Officials statistics show the lowest tenth of earners pay an average of 42 per cent of their income in the form of income tax, national insurance, VAT and council tax.


In contrast, the richest 10 per cent see around a third (34.4 per cent) of their earnings go to the taxman, according to analysis by The Equality Trust."

The poorest pay higher taxes than richest, according to new figures

The ratios in the USA likely aren't quite as bad, but you have to look at the impact on a person's life. A person earning 100k could easily stand to lose 30k without having a true detriment on their wellbeing, but a person earning minimum wage is going to have a choice to make between food and rent, or food and school shoes for their kids. People obviously get comfortable in their situation and comfort and insulation from societies problems can easily turn into greed.

I have nothing wrong with this at all. If someone is business savvy, plays smart and works hard, what's wrong with making money? I don't get mad at people for being rich. I acknowledge they're rich and I'm not because they put in the work that I'm not willing to. How do you define equality? Such a vague word. My definition of equality is equality of opportunity not equality of income.

(My parents never funded me beyond around $10,000, after that I was on my own)

The problem is your world view stated above is based on what's easy for you to believe. It's also based on huge media interest in that idea being perpetuated. Western media does a terrible job at painting a reflection of actual society as they barely publicise the plight of the large swathes of working classes. Western media is also dominated by people that have come from privilege and therefore have no idea of the challenges people are facing.

The fact you think rich people simply worked harder is a reflection of your life experience (or lack thereof). Also, the fact you "only" got 10k from your parents for college really shows a lack of perspective. I'm sorry to be blunt, but while it might have been common in your peer group, the majority can't afford to get funding from their parents.

When you're born into a good situation so many things you don't consider are simply in place for you. It allows you to perceive that every experience is off the back of your own hard work because you haven't lived the experience of hundreds of millions of people that work unimaginably hard just to exist. People whose energy goes into dealing with domestic issues instead of school, people who are dealing with malnourishment and neglect because their parents didn't have the nurture they needed, people who have no support from social infrastrcture and no peace from which to build a good foundation for their kids.

THIS is the big place in which we differ. As a young child I had an amazing amount of privilege only for it all to be taken away as a teenager. I'm very lucky because early developmental years are so important, but many are BORN into this.

When I had privilege I was considered a hard worker, I was constantly praised for getting good grades and being popular and not being disruptive. It's easy to self aggrandise in these situations because the world favours those who have this privilege. Yet, when it all went away, despite not having the meritocratic achievements and praise, I was working harder than EVER just to exist. Nothing on paper said I was working hard, I just was.

You cannot judge a person's work ethic or work rate based on their station in life. It's closed minded and does not match up to real world experience. It's MUCH MUCH harder to exist in poverty, to struggle with the physiology linked to poverty and the social trauma that comes with it, despite not having a well paying job or being unemployed. It's FAR FAR harder work than it is to do a challenging but engaging job and earn lots of money.

The better the situation you arrive in the EASIER it is to have "success" in society - your hard work model is literally just based on your perception of hardwork, not grounded in reality. This is the big problem society is facing. Noone is aware of the class divide and the challenges normal people are facing anymore.

You perceive poor people to simply be not working hard enough but if you actually spent a good deal of time seeing what they're facing - and not what the media tells you they're facing - I promise you you'd realise the nuance and complexity of the situation and you'd have a massive social awakening.

I think this awakening of social responsibility and reflection about one's own privilege is a really humanising thing and I think it generally can make people happier. Instead of condemning half the human race and putting yourself on a pedestal you can start grow spiritually through nurturing your innate empathy.

I really really think some kind of national service should be put in place. Not neccessarily army, but ambulance and fire and police for a year or two (they do this in Austria). This could bring people from all walks of life together and get them to start seeing eachothers perspectives and points of view.

This was essentially enforced during WW2 and is a reason for a lot of the social reform in Western Europe.

A huge problem in the USA that you and @Waremu are effectively getting mixed up is that you don't perceive the class division anymore. You view the left wing to be people that are pro-immigration and tolerant of other races and sexualities. Unequivocally THIS IS NOT WHAT THE LEFT WING ACTUALLY IS.

I'm not saying people should be intolerant, I'm saying you're in this strange war between Right Wing Party A and Right Wing Party B (republicans and democrats) and there's no longer passion for the actual neccessity for social reform. Bernie Sanders actually represents some centre left policies and he has absolutley nothing politically in common with Hillary Clinton (beyond not hating non whites).

We're not going to agree on this right now. I find people towards the middle can have a lot of movement via conversation, but people on the fringes will only be changed by EXPERIENCE. My words are unlikely to shift anyone here. I hope one day you'll go and do some teaching or charity work in South America or somewhere that has a really stark example so you can see just how trapped people are in their poverty without social infrastructure.

If you lived it and experienced it I don't believe you'd feel aggrieved at being taxed highly when you have plenty of comfort and wealth. To suggest the people with the most freedom and privilege are working the hardest when you've actually lived in the real world as opposed to being insulated from it (formative years are incredibly important, remember) is not a sustainable point of view.

If you're ever interested, a guy called "Destiny" on youtube used to share similar views to you but had a drastic change after various life experiences. He's relatively articulate and debates lots of people he'd previously associate with.

***EDIT TO ADD*** This seems a bit like an attack on you. I want to be clear, I literally would've been you if my life had continued on the same trajectory. You're a product of your experiences and I believe closing the class divide in society would create far greater humanity, empathy and prosperity in society.

Mixed market social democracy.

 

[sunraiser]

Using the same Marxist infiltration tactics of consistently re-defining words, equality which originally meant 'equal opportunity' has now become equality of outcome, which is really what was behind the same ideology of the communists. And you wonder why many call people who hold such views communist? Because they really are, when you peal away all the silly word salad and address their moral views and slave master morality which they hold.

I can't comment on much of your post but to be clear; neither me, nor Ray Peat, nor any country in Europe are communnist or anything like it.

Equal opportunity is exactly what I'm talking about, though. We agree strongly there. The people born into large wealth should not be able to buy their way into the best positions - government intervention is necessary to level the playing field.

To be abundantly clear when I talk about equality it's not in strict terms. It's a very abstract and broad notion - an equal SPECTRUM not literal man for man equality.

If you want the best and brightest to be in positions of influence in society then you need to enable people from all walks of life to have a chance. That cannot ever happen under minimised government free market conditions. Else the highest bidder will always get the best education as opposed to the brightest person in real terms. If you can't separate intelligence defined by meritocracy from actual aptitude and wisdom then you're not going to have a society that can thrive.

 

[postman]

I don't mind if you sound argumentative - you're arguing for something you believe in, not arguing for the sake of being difficult. Having passion about these things is natural as they're usually divisive.



You have to look at tax in relative terms. A person earning way less money often pays a higher proption of their ACTUAL income in taxes in the UK. The total amount of money from an individual wealthy person is obviously higher, but the proportion of their income is often not. The below article shows the values in Britain (we have taxes beyond income tax, like council tax and road tax).

"The poorest 10 per cent of households in the UK pay a greater proportion of their income in tax than the richest 10 per cent, new analysis has revealed.

Officials statistics show the lowest tenth of earners pay an average of 42 per cent of their income in the form of income tax, national insurance, VAT and council tax.


In contrast, the richest 10 per cent see around a third (34.4 per cent) of their earnings go to the taxman, according to analysis by The Equality Trust."

The poorest pay higher taxes than richest, according to new figures

The ratios in the USA likely aren't quite as bad, but you have to look at the impact on a person's life. A person earning 100k could easily stand to lose 30k without having a true detriment on their wellbeing, but a person earning minimum wage is going to have a choice to make between food and rent, or food and school shoes for their kids. People obviously get comfortable in their situation and comfort and insulation from societies problems can easily turn into greed.





The problem is your world view stated above is based on what's easy for you to believe. It's also based on huge media interest in that idea being perpetuated. Western media does a terrible job at painting a reflection of actual society as they barely publicise the plight of the large swathes of working classes. Western media is also dominated by people that have come from privilege and therefore have no idea of the challenges people are facing.

The fact you think rich people simply worked harder is a reflection of your life experience (or lack thereof). Also, the fact you "only" got 10k from your parents for college really shows a lack of perspective. I'm sorry to be blunt, but while it might have been common in your peer group, the majority can't afford to get funding from their parents.

When you're born into a good situation so many things you don't consider are simply in place for you. It allows you to perceive that every experience is off the back of your own hard work because you haven't lived the experience of hundreds of millions of people that work unimaginably hard just to exist. People whose energy goes into dealing with domestic issues instead of school, people who are dealing with malnourishment and neglect because their parents didn't have the nurture they needed, people who have no support from social infrastrcture and no peace from which to build a good foundation for their kids.

THIS is the big place in which we differ. As a young child I had an amazing amount of privilege only for it all to be taken away as a teenager. I'm very lucky because early developmental years are so important, but many are BORN into this.

When I had privilege I was considered a hard worker, I was constantly praised for getting good grades and being popular and not being disruptive. It's easy to self aggrandise in these situations because the world favours those who have this privilege. Yet, when it all went away, despite not having the meritocratic achievements and praise, I was working harder than EVER just to exist. Nothing on paper said I was working hard, I just was.

You cannot judge a person's work ethic or work rate based on their station in life. It's closed minded and does not match up to real world experience. It's MUCH MUCH harder to exist in poverty, to struggle with the physiology linked to poverty and the social trauma that comes with it, despite not having a well paying job or being unemployed. It's FAR FAR harder work that it is to do a challenging but engaging job and earn lots of money.

The better situation you arrive in the EASIER it is to have "success" in society - your hard work model is literally just based on your perception of hardwork, not grounded in reality. This is the big problem society is facing. Noone is aware of the class divide and the challenges normal people are facing anymore.

You perceive poor people to simply be not working hard enough but if you actually spent a good deal of time seeing what they're facing - and not what the media tells you they're facing - I promise you you'd realise the nuance and complexity of the situation and you'd have a massive social awakening.

I think this awakening of social responsibility and reflection about one's own privilege is a really humanising thing and I think it generally can make people happier. Instead of condemning half the human race and putting yourself on a pedestal you can start grow spiritually through nurturing your innate empathy.

I really really think some kind of national service should be put in place. Not neccessarily army, but ambulance and fire and police for a year or two (they do this in Austria). This could bring people from all walks of life together and get them to start seeing eachothers perspectives and points of view.

This was essentially enforced during WW2 and is a reason for a lot of the social reform in Western Europe.

A huge problem in the USA that you and @Waremu are effectively getting mixed up is that you don't perceive the class division anymore. You view the left wing to be people that are pro-immigration and tolerant of other races and sexualities. Unequivocally THIS IS NOT WHAT THE LEFT WING ACTUALLY IS.

I'm not saying people should be intolerant, I'm saying you're in this strange war between Right Wing Party A and Right Wing Party B (republicans and democrats) and there's no longer passion for the actual neccessity for social reform. Bernie Sanders actually represents some centre left policies and he has absolutley nothing politically in common with Hillary Clinton (beyond not hating non whites).

We're not going to agree on this right now. I find people towards the middle can have a lot of movement via conversation, but people on the fringes will only be changed by EXPERIENCE. My words are unlikely to shift anyone here. I hope one day you'll go and do some teaching or charity work in South America or somewhere that has a really stark example so you can see just how trapped people are in their poverty without social infrastructure.

If you lived it and experienced it I don't believe you'd feel aggrieved at being taxed highly when you have plenty of comfort and wealth. To suggest the people with the most freedom and privilege are working the hardest when you've actually lived in the real world as opposed to being insulated from it (formative years are incredibly important, remember) is not a sustainable point of view.

If you're ever interested, a guy called "Destiny" on youtube used to share similar views to you but had a drastic change after various life experiences. He's relatively articulate and debates lots of people he'd previously associate with.

***EDIT TO ADD*** This seems a bit like an attack on you. I want to be clear, I literally would've been you if my life had continued on the same trajectory. You're a product of your experiences and I believe closing the class divide in society would create far greater humanity, empathy and prosperity in society.

Mixed market social democracy.

You can say it in any way you want but basically all left-wing parties are in favor of replacement migration, as the UN calls it. Unfortunately most of the right wing parties are as well, most of them just pretend not to be.

 

[LuMonty]

@DaveFoster I've read the manifesto. Your point, specifically?

 

[sunraiser]

You can say it in any way you want but basically all left-wing parties are in favor of replacement migration, as the UN calls it. Unfortunately most of the right wing parties are as well, most of them just pretend not to be.

Immigration is a separate issue to all of this. You can't be surprised at a refugee crisis when you invade and exploit half the known world over a 30 (100?) year period. This is probably the singular thing you and I might have a chance at agreeing on.

 

[postman]

Immigration is a separate issue to all of this. You can't be surprised at a refugee crisis when you invade and exploit half the known world over a 30 (100?) year period. This is probably the singular thing you and I might have a chance at agreeing on.

Some European countries did not take part in those wars yet they are still expected to accept hordes of immigrants. White guilt is absolute horseshit in 90% of cases. I agree you do have an argument when it comes to some countries like USA, France, and the UK though. If anyone should open their borders it's Israel, they are the biggest cause of all the conflicts in the middle east, and they along with the USA created the conditions for ISIS to form and flourish, on record. You talk about exploitation by whites, what about exploitation by jews? Neoconservatism is a jewish ideology.

 

[Cirion]

I absolutely 100% agree that some people are in bad situations and need some help but they also need to be trained how to get out of said bad situation, money management skills and whatnot. For example at a church I was going to they had a group that helped young women who got pregnant as teens and were broke and desparate (guy left the picture). Is this a bad situation that warrants help? Absolutely. Did they coddle the women and just give them handouts forever? No. Is some empathy needed to encourage them? Sure, absolutely. But while helping them they also gave them job training so they could get OUT of that situation and help themselves. That's the ultimate goal, no? I can agree that money management is not a skill that is readily taught and should be taught and I might not have been as good at it if I didn't have super frugal parents. A lot of churches are giving Dave Ramsey seminars these days which has been super helpful for many people including some that I know. I am not knocking poor people I am sure it is rough but there are avenues to get out. If it were me I would employ all the strategies I laid forth to live on a low income (which again, I've already proven I can do), while being on food stamps (if necessary), saving money, and looking for a better job / getting trained. There are many jobs you can get that require a much shorter time frame and often pay better - jobs like plumbers, electricians are always in short supply, high demand, and pay well. I admit I don't know the hiring process but I am pretty sure trucking jobs you can apply for with zero experience and they pay a lot of money, sometimes even more than what I make. Honestly if I were to re-live life I might not even go to college again.

The thing is all this SJW stuff is simply misguided. There is no pay gap (between men and women with equal position and stature in the same job at the same company), there is (very little) actual racism or class warfare. Of course the news media makes you think there is, but it is in fact the mainstream media that is pitting us against each other. In the real world people on average are very friendly to other races and genders. I am sure that there are some countries where this may be the case, but I don't see this to be the case in the USA. Racism and sexism is at an all-time low compared to decades ago. Sure there will always be bad apples, but as a whole the environment has never been better for minorities or women.

I don't know about UK laws but income tax clearly increases as you move up in income. One thing I will agree though that in general there are just too many taxes. This is in fact one huge reason I am against large governments. If you have gajillions of expensive programs? Where's that money gonna come from? Oh hey, let's just increase income tax. Oh hey, let's tax sodas. Oh hey, let's tax alcohol extra. Let's add taxes to property. And they have and did. It's endless. At least in the USA, we didn't have the income tax until WW1 and managed just fine then. If we didn't have so many taxes it wouldn't be a problem - for anyone, poor or rich alike. I could see how all the extra taxes can hurt if you're poor but again if you're savvy you can avoid most of that. If you don't own a car or a home, no property tax - for example. What's ironic is it is a vicious cycle. You increase taxes to pay for programs to help people, but now middle class is further encumbered and now more people have dropped from middle class to poor because they can't pay the taxes. Now more poor people, Rinse repeat. In fact, this is EXACTLY what we're seeing as we speak. I wouldn't even be opposed to restricting certain taxes to "TRULY" rich people and I don't mean myself and other middle class people. Isn't the income tax enough? 30% is a hefty chunk from someone who is not rich. Every time though when people say "tax the rich" it ALSO includes the MIDDLE class which IS NOT RICH. I can't emphasize that enough. There are a LARGE amount of middle class who are easily struggling as much as the poor class. My parents barely made ends meet for many many years. I think you got the wrong impression from my upbringing. They were hardly rich. Anyway, going back to rich paying most the taxes, again I dunno about the UK but you can clearly go to the official government website and I can't recall off the top of my head but I wanna say the top 10% pay 80% of taxes here in the states. The statistic is probably slightly wrong, but I'm very confident in saying it is quite close to this. I even calculated it myself one time to make sure it wasn't fake news (Yes, I even verify information from news that I trust). In the USA the poor pay virtually zero tax. Below around 20,000$ you pay zero income tax.

I am sure you're right that being brought up poor no doubt adds challenges, but doesn't make it impossible, and just means you have to learn to live with less (at least at first). I already named off many objective, clear cut ways to live with less in my previous post. It's hard no doubt, and again, we DO need to be better about teaching kids money management, I have no argument there. I am amazed it is not a skill that is taught in schools for how important it is. Again I'm not saying don't help people, but TRAIN people. People will continue to be poor until you teach them it's possible to break the cycle.

BTW just because I grew up in a somewhat reasonable households don't make assumptions that I had it easy. I had suicidal level depression most of my childhood. It isn't just poor people that have depression and anxiety.

FWIW I'm single and yeah sure I'm making OK money for now, but if I ever got married and was expected to shoulder the income for a wife and say two kids, I don't think I could do it. (Not without employing the extreme strategies). Again, middle class =/= rich, and often == poor. Almost all "middle class" americans can basically be considered poor. In fact, taxes are so bad on middle class that many people have ironically found out it's better to be poor than middle class. At least if you're poor you can get all sorts of tax breaks and freebies. I'm serious. I have literally seen people post on facebook saying "I know friends who don't work who make more money than me and I often think about just quitting my jobs and living on food stamps." BTW a lot of people do just that. And that's where all the taxes go to. That middle class people who are taxes heavily on to pay for. Who then go to be poor. Rinse repeat. Am I necessarily saying not have a safety net? No. But to give people a chance to rise out of being poor, the entry-level into being "Not Poor" needs to be easier to access. And it won't be, not as long as MIDDLE CLASS has such a prohibitive tax rate.

 

[sunraiser]

I absolutely 100% agree that some people are in bad situations and need some help but they also need to be trained how to get out of said bad situation, money management skills and whatnot. For example at a church I was going to they had a group that helped young women who got pregnant as teens and were broke and desparate (guy left the picture). Is this a bad situation that warrants help? Absolutely. Did they coddle the women and just give them handouts forever? No. Is some empathy needed to encourage them? Sure, absolutely. But while helping them they also gave them job training so they could get OUT of that situation and help themselves. That's the ultimate goal, no? I can agree that money management is not a skill that is readily taught and should be taught and I might not have been as good at it if I didn't have super frugal parents. A lot of churches are giving Dave Ramsey seminars these days which has been super helpful for many people including some that I know. I am not knocking poor people I am sure it is rough but there are avenues to get out. If it were me I would employ all the strategies I laid forth to live on a low income (which again, I've already proven I can do), while being on food stamps (if necessary), saving money, and looking for a better job / getting trained. There are many jobs you can get that require a much shorter time frame and often pay better - jobs like plumbers, electricians are always in short supply, high demand, and pay well. I admit I don't know the hiring process but I am pretty sure trucking jobs you can apply for with zero experience and they pay a lot of money, sometimes even more than what I make. Honestly if I were to re-live life I might not even go to college again.

The thing is all this SJW stuff is simply misguided. There is no pay gap (between men and women with equal position and stature in the same job at the same company), there is (very little) actual racism or class warfare. Of course the news media makes you think there is, but it is in fact the mainstream media that is pitting us against each other. In the real world people on average are very friendly to other races and genders. I am sure that there are some countries where this may be the case, but I don't see this to be the case in the USA. Racism and sexism is at an all-time low compared to decades ago. Sure there will always be bad apples, but as a whole the environment has never been better for minorities or women.

I don't know about UK laws but income tax clearly increases as you move up in income. One thing I will agree though that in general there are just too many taxes. This is in fact one huge reason I am against large governments. If you have gajillions of expensive programs? Where's that money gonna come from? Oh hey, let's just increase income tax. Oh hey, let's tax sodas. Oh hey, let's tax alcohol extra. Let's add taxes to property. And they have and did. It's endless. At least in the USA, we didn't have the income tax until WW1 and managed just fine then. If we didn't have so many taxes it wouldn't be a problem - for anyone, poor or rich alike. I could see how all the extra taxes can hurt if you're poor but again if you're savvy you can avoid most of that. If you don't own a car or a home, no property tax - for example. What's ironic is it is a vicious cycle. You increase taxes to pay for programs to help people, but now middle class is further encumbered and now more people have dropped from middle class to poor because they can't pay the taxes. Now more poor people, Rinse repeat. In fact, this is EXACTLY what we're seeing as we speak. I wouldn't even be opposed to restricting certain taxes to "TRULY" rich people and I don't mean myself and other middle class people. Isn't the income tax enough? 30% is a hefty chunk from someone who is not rich. Every time though when people say "tax the rich" it ALSO includes the MIDDLE class which IS NOT RICH. I can't emphasize that enough. There are a LARGE amount of middle class who are easily struggling as much as the poor class. My parents barely made ends meet for many many years. I think you got the wrong impression from my upbringing. They were hardly rich. Anyway, going back to rich paying most the taxes, again I dunno about the UK but you can clearly go to the official government website and I can't recall off the top of my head but I wanna say the top 10% pay 80% of taxes here in the states. The statistic is probably slightly wrong, but I'm very confident in saying it is quite close to this. I even calculated it myself one time to make sure it wasn't fake news (Yes, I even verify information from news that I trust). In the USA the poor pay virtually zero tax. Below around 20,000$ you pay zero income tax.

I am sure you're right that being brought up poor no doubt adds challenges, but doesn't make it impossible, and just means you have to learn to live with less (at least at first). I already named off many objective, clear cut ways to live with less in my previous post. It's hard no doubt, and again, we DO need to be better about teaching kids money management, I have no argument there. I am amazed it is not a skill that is taught in schools for how important it is. Again I'm not saying don't help people, but TRAIN people. People will continue to be poor until you teach them it's possible to break the cycle.

BTW just because I grew up in a somewhat reasonable households don't make assumptions that I had it easy. I had suicidal level depression most of my childhood. It isn't just poor people that have depression and anxiety.

I understand where you're coming from. I don't think it's fair to trivialise poverty and poorness down to money management, though

It's an energy investment issue - people are dealing with stressors and environmental challenges that take away their ability to focus on the pragmatic and "useful" things that others can focus on. Coping mechanisms in that environment often have to be entirely different.

I agree that the media are pitting us against eachother. Also, acknowledging social responsibility doesn't mean diminishing your own achievements or shedding the self esteem you gain from them. It doesn't mean forgetting the challenges you've faced - it just means putting them into perspective.

They can become a platform to help and empower others from (and a base for your self esteem) instead of one to look down on those that aren't as fortunate.

I respect you. I understand you have empathy and that you're not a horrible human. I'm just stating my points as clearly as I can because I believe they're fundementally important to humanity and society.

We're not quite in the same place and that's ok. It's important to have these conversations to share perspectives and views. Having the ideas of different people's wealth of experience in the back of your mind can help us all frame and shape a more cohesive and accepting world view.

 

[postman]

Obviously a mixed economy is the most humane and rational system, unfortunately almost everyone proposing it, at least in America, also wants to destroy everything that makes America America. Culturally, legally, demographically.

 

[Cirion]

I understand where you're coming from. I don't think it's fair to trivialise poverty and poorness down to money management, though

It's an energy investment issue - people are dealing with stressors and environmental challenges that take away their ability to focus on the pragmatic and "useful" things that others can focus on. Coping mechanisms in that environment often have to be entirely different.

I agree that the media are pitting us against eachother. Also, acknowledging social responsibility doesn't mean diminishing your own achievements or shedding the self esteem you gain from them. It doesn't mean forgetting the challenges you've faced - it just means putting them into perspective.

They can become a platform to help and empower others from (and a base for your self esteem) instead of one to look down on those that aren't as fortunate.

I respect you. I understand you have empathy and that you're not a horrible human. I'm just stating my points as clearly as I can because I believe they're fundementally important to humanity and society.

We're not quite in the same place and that's ok. It's important to have these conversations to share perspectives and views. Having the ideas of different people's wealth of experience in the back of your mind can help us all frame and shape a more cohesive and accepting world view.

Thanks for your respectful response.

Yes energy management is an issue for sure and absolutely people come from broken homes and situations. But I absolutely think our fundamental disagreement is how someone SHOULD get help - The government? Or your fellow man? Going back to my example from my church, this was the PERFECT solution. Not only did the women get the emotional and spiritual support they needed from other loving ladies, but they also got the training they needed. They had people who were not forced to be there by the government, they willing gave of their free time to help. You have to admire that. That shows genuine care for someone else. You're right, just training is not enough. They provided a holistic approach which also healed their emotional wounds. I totally get what having a stressed metabolism is like, I've lived it 95% of my life. It's literally what I know.

Government is not capable of providing for the emotional and spiritual support. Only our fellow man can. And this very well probably is why poor remain poor. Not just lack of money management skills but also lack of emotional support. Not only that, but I simply don't trust the government. That's where liberals and conservatives tend to diverge. They are not efficient with money, nor do they care about us at the end of the day. All they care about is money, and power. That's it. Maybe one possible improvement to the food stamps system is a system which includes a system much akin to the church? You'd get a mentor who helps you through both emotional and training needs. I still wouldn't want the government in charge, but it'd be better than what we got now.

It isn't that I don't want to help people. It's that I don't want the GOVERNMENT to tax me to make me do something against my will (and that's not limited to redistributing wealth).

I will admit, I do not necessarily know if churches around the country have enough funds to support all the poor. But I think you'd be surprised. Some churches are not helpful no doubt but every church I have been part of has been extremely good about providing help whenever its needed. Any church that is genuinely following what they preach will be HAPPY to have the opportunity to serve someone.

 

[DaveFoster]

@DaveFoster I've read the manifesto. Your point, specifically?

He viewed rapid government intrusion on civil liberties as preferable to a slowly boiling frog.

The fact that such an unabased and racist accelerationist did not mention jewish influence over western immigration law, culture creation, and war policy stinks to high heaven. Wouldn't surprise me if this was a Mossad operation. The Christchurch attack happened the very same day as Israel bombed hundreds of targets in Gaza, and Christchurch was uncovered as a Mossad hotbed a couple of years ago. Furthermore a total war between christians and muslims is exactly what zionist jewish leaders have been wishing for for a long time and it has been the direction that they have been pushing western nationalists in, for decades.

Tarrant says that 8chan influenced him, yet there's no shred of anti-Semitism in his manifesto. If you've ever been on 8chan's /pol/ board, then you'd find this beyond absurd unless he's trying to appeal to the philo-Semitic evangelical population in the U.S.

 

[cyclops]

Just want to say I really appreciate the incredibly thoughtful and civil dialogue between @sunraiser and @Cirion.

You guys are really getting into some great detail and nuance. You both seem like intelligent, logical, and compassionate people and it's been enlightening reading your discussion.

 

[LuMonty]

He viewed rapid government intrusion on civil liberties as preferable to a slowly boiling frog.

He got it in NZ, played them like a fiddle. Hasn't in America.

I said I'm anti-intrusion/pro-leaving 2A alone->You quote me and others asking if we even read the manifesto->your point is still unclear because none of those quoted were for intrusion and in fact, for the opposite,leaving 2A as is (though I speak only for myself).

I hope it's because of my lack of sleep, but I don't see how your points connect.

 

[DaveFoster]

He got it in NZ, played them like a fiddle. Hasn't in America.

I said I'm anti-intrusion/pro-leaving 2A alone->You quote me and others asking if we even read the manifesto->your point is still unclear because none of those quoted were for intrusion and in fact, for the opposite,leaving 2A as is (though I speak only for myself).

I hope it's because of my lack of sleep, but I don't see how your points connect.

I actually read, "I'm all for preventing carnage, but I agree with what you're saying. Power grabs and authoritarianism are bad, and playing on emotions to do it is awful," but I didn't read the next sentence, so my apologies.

Also, although I don't believe Tarrant mentioned it in his manifesto, Milo Yiannopolus posted this on Instagram following the shooting:

The Al Noor mosque in Christchurch targeted by Brenton Tarrant produced at least two terrorists, from a very small congregation: al-Qaida recruit Daryl Jones, killed by a drone, and Christopher Havard. The parents of these boys say their sons were radicalized by extremist preachers at Al Noor. The boys were in Yemen with the guys who trained the Charlie Hebdo killers. A 2014 story at Stuff.co.nz (now scrubbed from the internet) quotes a mosque attendee who says, “A visiting speaker from Indonesia talked about violent jihad and plenty shared his views.” Three questions: How many news reports have you read these details in? If you’d known that this mosque was a terrorist factory, would it have changed your feelings about the news at all? Finally, how does it make you feel to learn that the media has been not just ignoring these facts but deleting stories to hide them over the past 24 hours?

Source: MILO on Instagram: “The Al Noor mosque in Christchurch targeted by Brenton Tarrant produced at least two terrorists, from a very small congregation: al-Qaida…”

 

[thomas00]

Progressives essentially believe that government or the state is the answer all our problems. ​

I have never heard a progressive say such a thing. Can you prove this isn't just a crude caricature?

Both progressive and conservatives believe in state administration of certain services. With the former it tends to be hospitals and utilities. The latter is a military and police force with bottomless budgets.

I do not understand how conservatives believe themselves to be somehow anti-statist. They've consistently strengthened it's most violent parts.

I don’t read minds. What do you mean by SSE?

Supply Side Economics.​

 

[thomas00]

Ray Peat is right when it comes to a lot of nutritional stuff, but that doesn't mean just because everyone agrees with his views on health, that his views on everything else is the Gospel.

I think Peat's views on political matters are probably inspired by the post WW-2 boomer-left generation which was indoctrinated to have so much collective guilt for being European that they see racism and Nazism in every aspect of life that they view through a critical lens --- while ignoring or advocating much of the collective slave morality that caused communism to murder far more people within the same century-period of time. The Overton window has now shifted so far to the other side since WW-2, that the real threat isn't Nazism, but rather, radical equality-of-outcome progressives who are on a crusade of purity to purge the world of so-called racism and sexism under the guise of 'social justice' (LOL). They are very much like the radical Victorians and religious puritans who went on witch hunts or the Catholic church when it burned heretics for speaking against the religious dogma of the church. Today, those who deny the religion of social justice and all of it's science denial are often exposed to the same moral panic and religious-type of witch hunts.

Using the same Marxist infiltration tactics of consistently re-defining words, equality which originally meant 'equal opportunity' has now become equality of outcome, which is really what was behind the same ideology of the communists. And you wonder why many call people who hold such views communist? Because they really are, when you peal away all the silly word salad and address their moral views and slave master morality which they hold.

You seem to hold much of the same silly grievance-based politics these guilt-ridden boomers like Chomsky push. Ray Peat is smart on nutrition, but he is wrong on other such matters. His explanation of why the non-aggression principle isn't right was quite comical, actually. And he pushes an old failed social-economic system, such as Marxism, as a means to understand many things today. (Yes, he said that in one interview).

In a free society, inequality always will exist and that is a good thing. That after all is how natural selection works. Your system at the core will always be immoral if we are to judge by outcome because it incentivizes the unfit, lazy, and dumb, or unproductive to reallocate resources from the fit and intelligent to reproduce via state violence because they are not able to compete in a free and open system. If that is how natural selection worked for all of our history, then we would have never progressed to this point. The Marxist totalitarians operate from the same collective slave morality framework fascists do, and for that reason, no matter how much they try to dress up their views as just or moral, they never will be just or moral because their absolutist framework will always require the violence and force of the state, just like the 'fascists.'

You may be similar to Ray Peat politically, but I am not. His political views are contradictory and cannot work because it relies on humans having a nature that is not flawed and the refusal to address the flaw of human nature is what causes these seemingly nice-sounding theories on paper to end up with the high body counts that they have created in real life.

You understand nothing and are verbatim repeating the neurotic ravings of an SSRI-addled, carb phobic conservative psychologist who's own life advice didn't even work for him.

You crow about the force of the state and nazis but ironically have zero awareness that your outlook contains it's dogmas. Whether it's defense of state violence- 'inequality is natural" (neglecting the fact that it's caused by the state), the social Darwinism inherent to fascism and the convenient dismissal of criticism as mere grievance or marxism.

How do people compete (why should they in the first place?) when accumulated wealth finally accumulates *all* the wealth? Do you think a child who receives a 200k allowance from the age of 3 from his billionaire parents is not getting an unearned leg up?

Silly.