patrick.net

The kicker:

"Finally, there’s the never-mentioned possibility: that the best-educated, most-affluent, most politically influential Americans like this result. They may wring their hands over inequality, but in everyday life they see segregation as a feature, not a bug. It keeps out fat people with bad taste. Paul Krugman may wax nostalgic about a childhood spent in the suburbs where plumbers and middle managers lived side by side. But I doubt that many of his fervent fans would really want to live there. If so, they might try Texas."

Bingo.

I've always suspected that wealthy liberals had contempt for average Americans. And we wonder why the New Deal Coalition is dead. And the top 0.1% is laughing all the way to the (bailed out) bank.

"What's the matter with Kansas?" Indeed!

wthrfrk80 says

the wealthy had contempt for average Americans

fixed this for you, agree with the rest though

tts,

I called out rich "liberals" specifically since they are the most hypocritical, at least in my mind. That was the whole point of that article: well educated folks with "liberal" political views screwing-over their less well-to-do brethren. Specifically with environmental policies that hurt low-income people the most.

Many want the credit for "caring about the poor" but then do everything in their power to make them even poorer. And god forbid they actually live near the poor.

Poor places are short on the capital that would make local labor more productive.

This particular statement is wrong. Just think about this specific statement and how wrong it is regardless of whether or not the rest of the article is correct.

Let's say in Massachusetts a steel worker produces $100 of wealth each day and takes home $80/day in compensation (wages and benefits). Let's say in Alabama a steel worker produces $100 of wealth each day and takes home $20/day in compensation.

Is the steel worker in Alabama more productive than the one in Massachusetts? No. They both produce exactly $100 a wealth every day.

The Alabama worker is not more productive, but rather more exploitable. The providers of capital can "fuck over" the Alabama worker more than the Massachusetts worker. This does not mean that one is more productive than the other even though the capital provider makes more money off of the slave laborer.

The individual capital provider is better off exploiting the worker with less bargaining power, but society as a whole and even capital providers as a group are better off if such exploitations do not occur. It is simply the tragedy of the commons. And when that tragedy is avoided, the economy is far more productive and everybody, even the parasites, are better off.

wthrfrk80 says

I called out rich "liberals" specifically since they are the most hypocritical, at least in my mind. That was the whole point of that article: well educated folks with "liberal" political views screwing-over their less well-to-do brethren. Specifically with environmental policies that hurt low-income people the most.

Rich "liberals'? Something like 75% of people making over 250k are registered republicans I read. Well educated and rich are not the same thing.

wthrfrk80 says

I called out rich "liberals" specifically since they are the most hypocritical, at least in my mind.

Sure but how many rich liberals are there out there?

It seems to me to be a distinction without much real world use.

If you really want to hate a particular group the ones who constantly go around saying, "I'm socially liberal but a fiscal conservative" and then go and vote Republican or Libertarian would perhaps be worthy of some hate. Most of them I've seen were intelligent and had some college but still effectively voted against their interests every time.

Ruki says

So, using your example with HOW the author meant he said, it would go along with like this.

Yet the solution I proposed in many threads still applies. Have the execs receive the same compensation as the median producer. Execs still need to maximize productivity to maximize their own wealth, but they cannot increase their wealth through parasitic behavior or zero-sum games with the producers.

Such a system would fulfill all the stated goals of both red states and blue states.

bob2356 says

Something like 75% of people making over 250k are registered republicans I read. Well educated and rich are not the same thing.

Well if that's true, I'm relieved. The rich "conservatives" are far less hypocritical at least.

bob2356 says

Something like 75% of people making over 250k are registered republicans I read.

I find it hard to believe that 75% of the people in any income bracket are even registered to vote.

If I get paid the same regardless of what I do I will sit on my ass and do nothing. If you try to evaluate my contribution I will game your system.

Let the market decide who should get paid what.

wthrfrk80 says

tts,

I called out rich "liberals" specifically since they are the most hypocritical, at least in my mind. That was the whole point of that article: well educated folks with "liberal" political views screwing-over their less well-to-do brethren. Specifically with environmental policies that hurt low-income people the most.

Many want the credit for "caring about the poor" but then do everything in their power to make them even poorer. And god forbid they actually live near the poor.

that's what the notion of race is all about.

they can discriminate against the poor freely by creating separate classes of race (who have no chance of marrying their daughter), and then declaring everyone 'equal'. Then they claim that the inequality is due to RACISM, and then bill the low class americans for their welfare.

The Spanish Empire championed this model. They have a distinct caste system employed in the new world.

In red states the Ghetto areas barely exist. Phoenix used to not have them until the liberals arrived with their racial equality.

wthrfrk80 says

bob2356 says

Something like 75% of people making over 250k are registered republicans I read. Well educated and rich are not the same thing.

Well if that's true, I'm relieved. The rich "conservatives" are far less hypocritical at least.

If the Southerners are so bad to blacks, why on earth do they all live down there?

the fact is there are more REAL opportunities for blacks in the south than the liberal areas.

if you want to see some serious racism against Mesoamericans go to Mexico or just about any country south of there.

The Spanish are incredible racists whose culture invariably locks out anyone who is not of European descent. The Catholic Church maintains the social order through tried and true religious administration, etc.

another key point:

when you really talk to minority groups, there are a lot of differences of opinion between them.

some of the blacks or latinos favor the middle class model. THE CAPABLE ONES. The losers, the criminals, all favor the welfare model. When you really talk to a minority person, you learn that their aspirations amount to one thing: GETTING OUT OF THE GHETTO. In other words: getting away from other black/latino people and joining mainstream American society.

It's because the culture of RACE and EQUALITY/WELFARE promote the worst elements of society and make life impossible for anyone who lives amongst it... except of course for the elite cronies running the show in the nice part of town.

tts says

wthrfrk80 says

I called out rich "liberals" specifically since they are the most hypocritical, at least in my mind.

Sure but how many rich liberals are there out there?

It seems to me to be a distinction without much real world use.

If you really want to hate a particular group the ones who constantly go around saying, "I'm socially liberal but a fiscal conservative" and then go and vote Republican or Libertarian would perhaps be worthy of some hate. Most of them I've seen were intelligent and had some college but still effectively voted against their interests every time.

the Liberals themselves aren't typically rich, but the politics are for rich people.

it works like this: when the politics is about their yard, theyre conservative. When it's about other people's yard, they're liberal. They would never subject themselves or their family to this cultural garbage.

The promote liberal values in minority schools, but teach their children conservative values in private schools.

this is why when you go to a liberal city, there are ghettos, because liberals have a completely different set of standards depending on what race/class you are. Conservatives believe in universal values. As the article says, it leads to wealth convergence.

this is also why inter-racial breeding is considered so offensive to liberals. People who don't fit squarely into race categories can be incredibly socially disruptive. Typically, the people who posed the greatest challenge to Spanish authority during colonial times were Mestizos.

this is also why Liberalism is so complex.

It amounts to a huge byzantine complex of excuses for double standards.

most things like economics etc. are not very complex, but when you add in double standards that need to be explained in an acceptable way, then it becomes difficult to learn.

Some examples of double standards please.

"Liberals" and "Conservatives" are overused labels that mean very little.

Another reason why humanity is hilarious.

Patrick,

I've been following this site for a years. I can't help but notice how much you've gone in the liberal direction these days.

Liberalism is what is bringing down california and will probably destroy much of our economy. Californians are like Catholics, the system is so extensive they cannot even criticize a system that kills them.

Pretty soon you're going to witness all out riots in your cities. You'll wish you lived in a conservative, rule-of-law city. You will probably move to one if you're wealthy enough to afford it.

Some examples of double standards please.

this is also why Liberalism is so complex.

It amounts to a huge byzantine complex of excuses for double standards.

most things like economics etc. are not very complex, but when you add in double standards that need to be explained in an acceptable way, then it becomes difficult to learn.

Some examples of double standards please.

Peter P says

"Liberals" and "Conservatives" are overused labels that mean very little.

By "liberal" I simply mean those who are part of the "progressive" movement. They see humans as basically good, with history moving inevitably toward a better and better future (if they could only get those knuckle-dragging conservatives and religious people out of the way).

The original article I referenced spelled out a double standard inherent in "liberal" cities like NYC, Boston, DC, Portland OR, and SF. "Liberals" claim to stand for equality, opportunity, and "helping the poor", and yet low income folks are totally screwed by the lack of affordable housing in those cities. Environmentalism is used as a cover to prevent new housing from being built, protecting the property values of the "landed elite."

Californians have, as group, chose to ignore all the problems around them- many of which they were causing while they basked in their own sense of self-superiority. There's a sublime justice in this world, and California will get a big helping of it. All the signs were there for you and you did not heed them. Hang on tight this ride is going to be a wild one.

wthrfrk80 says

"Liberals" claim to stand for equality, opportunity, and "helping the poor", and yet low income folks are totally screwed by the lack of affordable housing in those cities. Environmentalism is used as a cover to prevent new housing from being built, protecting the property values of the "landed elite."

that's only the beginning. Look at how they view foreign policy. Look at their sheer hypocrisy regarding Israel. Liberalism is simply the tool of what is left of imperialism. It's the 'babylon system' we've been warned about.

illegal aliens? unsustainable debt? exploitation of all kinds? no problemo... lets just keep making money, making startups, making movies, more bullshit, more lies, more more more CALIFORNIA!!!!!! ITS AWESOME!!!! ITS THE GREATEST FUCKING PLACE ON EARTH!!!!!

WE ARE CALIFORNIA, OUR SOCIETY IS BROKE, ON DRUGS, AND OUR FAMILIES ARE COMPLETELY DYSFUNCTIONAL... BUT YOU MUST ACCEPT OUR VALUES AS ABSOLUTE TRUTH.

Ruki says

Should doctors be paid as the median nurse makes in the same hospital? Hell no.

Once again, you miss the point. Capital is not talent. Nor is management production. I did not say that any producer should take home more than what he or she produced. I'm saying that the wealth non-producers, who are at best overhead, should take home is limited to what the mean producer takes home.

Try thinking about what this means, then reply.

wthrfrk80 says

By "liberal" I simply mean those who are part of the "progressive" movement. They see humans as basically good, with history moving inevitably toward a better and better future (if they could only get those knuckle-dragging conservatives and religious people out of the way).

That is a fair description. I am definitely not a liberal because I think humanity will inevitably drive itself to destruction.

Peter P says

I think humanity will inevitably drive itself to destruction.

So do I.

The Original Bankster says

Liberalism is simply the tool of what is left of imperialism. It's the 'babylon system' we've been warned about.

What?

That's a little extreme don't you think?

wthrfrk80 says

The Original Bankster says

Liberalism is simply the tool of what is left of imperialism. It's the 'babylon system' we've been warned about.

What?

That's a little extreme don't you think?

no.

California has SLAVERY, WIDESPREAD DRUG USE, SEXUAL DEBAUCHERY, BROKEN FAMILY, POLITICAL CORRUPTION, IRREPARABLY DAMAGED FINANCES... sounds a hell of a lot like every failed empire in history.

but Californians insist their system is better because they allow gay marriage and they're sad when something bad happens to an Arab.

have you ever thought about what the social effects of leverage are?

everyone in California is so debt strapped they can't take any social risks... they MUST bring in that paycheck. They can't lose that job. It's just like Nazi Germany- everyone must conform or face a serious penalty(perhaps death).

It's dangerous when you have a whole society deeply in debt AND living frivolously. California is the worst thing that's ever happened to humanity.

Wealth is about financial stability, and leverage offers you none of that. It's the ILLUSION of wealth that it provides. It gives the illusion that wealth is distributed in society when in reality: CALIFORNIA IS THE MOST UNEQUAL PLACE ON EARTH. Californicators are starting to catch on.

The Original Bankster says

Wealth is about financial stability, and leverage offers you none of that. It's the ILLUSION of wealth that it provides. It gives the illusion that wealth is distributed in society when in reality: CALIFORNIA IS THE MOST UNEQUAL PLACE ON EARTH. Californicators are starting to catch on.

The San Francisco Treat

The Original Bankster says

have you ever thought about what the social effects of leverage are?

everyone in California is so debt strapped they can't take any social risks... they MUST bring in that paycheck. They can't lose that job. It's just like Nazi Germany- everyone must conform or face a serious penalty(perhaps death).

It's dangerous when you have a whole society deeply in debt AND living frivolously. California is the worst thing that's ever happened to humanity.

The San Francisco Treat

Dude, I think that Phoenix summer heat has gone to your head. Follow your bretheren to San Diego and enjoy what we in California have to offer.

New renter says

Dude, I think that Phoenix summer heat has gone to your head. Follow your bretheren to San Diego and enjoy what we in California have to offer.

http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/

http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/01/28/10260959-oakland-assesses-city-hall-damage-after-occupy-break-in

you Californians are going to go surfing while your state burns.

stupid asses.

I THINK ALL THE PROZAC HAS GOTTEN TO YOU BRO.

The Original Bankster says

you Californians are going to go surfing while your state burns.

Another far-right troll going on ignore...

wthrfrk80 says

The Original Bankster says

you Californians are going to go surfing while your state burns.

Another far-right troll going on ignore...

another far-liberal nutjob ignoring everything around him.

The Original Bankster says

They can't lose that job.

This is true of everyone who isn't rich right now in the US.

CA's legislature is clearly defective but it has nothing to do with being too far left or right, just good old fashioned corruption and stupidity.

Also your posts are becoming so over the top rhetorical I'm starting to wonder if you're really a troll trying to make use of Poe's Law to discredit the view point (left politics baaaaad) you keep espousing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

All in all banksters were all just bricks in the Wall.

Hey...teacher...leave those kids alone...

(interesting tidbit: those kids (now adults) actually sued Pink Floyd for lost "royalties" they felt they were owed)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4047533.stm

You'll fit right in. Come, live oThe Original Bankster says

you Californians are going to go surfing while your state burns.

stupid asses.

I THINK ALL THE PROZAC HAS GOTTEN TO YOU BRO.

While our state burns? It's 65F and projected to get as high as 79F today. How about in Phoenix where you are?

Given your liberal use of all caps I think its you who can use the Prozac. Don't worry of its too expensive for you in the US, just go cross the border and get it in bulk cheap in Mexico.

Sure is funny to watch you guys defending Californian politics while you faithfully wait for houses to become affordable.

guess what morons: HOUSING WILL NEVER BE AFFORDABLE.

The whole Liberal mindset is about locking out most people from the 'freedom' Liberalism promises. Maybe some day you'll realize that, but it's not likely.