patrick.net

Quigley says

but they're mostly involved with bidding up the prices on the best housing in the whitest school districts to ensure their child can go to the same Ivy League university that both ensured their professional establishment and their enslavement to debt.

Don't think there is shit ton of ivy leaguers from Orange County pub schools but I still fundamentally agree with the point

Patrick says

They do not allow any judgement of their own profession except by people highly regarded within it. Outside opinion is regarded as worthless.

See this with nearly every doctor I know...the 'argument from authority' fallacy. This is the great gift of educational systems that favor rote memorization over critical thinking

MMR says

You mean lying to themselves about having the same "got mine, fuck your attitude" that republicans have regarding living in good neighborhoods so that their kids can attend good schools?

I don't see putting a priority on living in a good school district as being a "got mine fuck you" attitude. That's insane.

MMR says

These schools do exist and some parents even send their kids to such schools, but it is a minority of the "limo lib" crowd.

True, but in major urban areas this is much more doable than it is in many places. IT has to fit with other things they want besides schools. If a suburban community and having a house with a yard etc. is more their thing, I don't see anything particularly evil (or phony) about that.

I don't know what a limo lib is, but I know liberals even in my own family who make decent (not super high incomes), and choose to fit your description somewhat. Nothing phony about it at all. Often times it's even substantially less expensive in say Boston or Chicago, to find an area to live and commute from, with good schools, that's going to be less costly than living in the city near a good diverse public school. And again there are many other lifestyle factors that go in to it. The other thing is that there is a substantial degree of diversity in the places that they do end up (the suburbs) and they aren't running from it as you describe.

What city do you live in may I ask, where you've gained your wisdom allowing you to judge others so well ?

Patrick says

"Listen Liberal!" by Thomas Frank

Let's see how much I match up...

- The lower 9% of the top 10% defines its self worth by the big-name universities they attended.
0 pt
I'm in the lower 9% of the top 10%, but this value is not held by me. College is a tax on entry into the workforce. Colleges are not to be respected. Intellectualism should be respected. Academia can go to hell. It's a scam. There should be a single virtual university that replaces all colleges in the country.

- They comprise the professional class: doctors, lawyers, engineers, professors, journalists, financiers, and they are all very interbred with each other.
1 pt
I and all my siblings are engineers, if you count doctors as engineers. They also married similar professionals. This is actually very common. Doctors marry doctors. Lawyers marry lawyers. Engineers marry engineers. The dual income from two high skill professions makes such a household considerably wealthier than the median household.

- They love inequality, because the are 100% certain that their own position is entirely due to their own merit.
0 pt
I like equality of opportunity, but results you do have to earn. And I believe that each individual should be able to decide how much of his or her life to pursue material wealth and how much to devote to other pursuits. I don't believe in redistributing justly gained wealth, but redistributing wealth parasites gain by siphoning it from others should be done.

Luck clearly dominates in the long run. The very existence of our species is due to luck. Had an asteroid not wiped out the dinosaurs, we would not be here. The very existence of every single person is due to luck. Had your grandparents not met when your granddad decided to get a coffee before walking to work, you would not exist. The random happenstances of luck are cumulative and thus dominate in the long run. However, in the short term, your skill and perseverance dominates. Success is the result of many things, hard work, intelligence, perseverance , and dumb luck.

- They have contempt for unions and for ordinary working people, whom they regard as failures who had the same chance as themselves but were not as smart, or did not work as hard. They see unions as attempting to give ordinary working "uneducated" people wages that they do not deserve.
0.5 pt
This is partly true. Most people are lazy from childhood and well into adulthood. Most students don't give a rats ass about learning and becoming the best they can at some skill that doesn't pay off with higher social status like playing football or being a cheerleader. If they did, we'd have more matheletes than athletes.

Unions are corrupt and do reward the lazy, but the owner class also screws over labor. IT is often screwed over because it never unionized. Doctors don't get screwed over because they have a guild, which is far more powerful than any union could ever be.

- They make their good living by monopolizing information and restricting competition via licensing and deliberately obscure terminology.
0 pt
Maybe other professions do this, but the typical software developer does not even have this option.

- They do not allow any judgement of their own profession except by people highly regarded within it. Outside opinion is regarded as worthless.
0 pt
This is certainly true in general, but I'd respect the opinion of any knowledgeable, intelligent, and honest person. Unfortunately, such people are extremely rare. Then again, my personality type challenges every idea.

- They have completely taken over the Democratic party, and turned it away from traditional working class issues, and toward race, gender, and gay issues.
0 pt
This is also true, but doesn't apply to me. I don't see how protecting civil rights interferes with economic reform. The two, if anything, are complimentary. However, I wouldn't waste time on stupid wedge issues like bathrooms. There are far more important things.

- They consider themselves "diverse" because they accept anyone from the Ivy League regardless of race, gender, or sexual preference. But they do not tolerate any ideological diversity at all. The "consensus of the educated" cannot ever be questioned.
0 pt
I've always made it clear that diversity is not measured by skin tone but with competing ideas and values. And diversity is not necessarily a good thing. You don't want to join forces with the pro-rape-and-murder crowd even though it might make your group more diverse.

- Their leaders absolutely worship Wall Street, far beyond any Republican, and give Wall Street everything it wants. Clinton and Obama in particular were instrumental in solidifying Wall Street power and very happy to cooperate with Republicans to eliminate banking regulation.
0 pt
This is true, but does not apply to me. I hate zero-sum games and believe in rewarding productivity.

- They see globalization as always and everywhere good, and do not care in the least if eliminates the jobs of the "uneducated", since it is their own fault for being uneducated. Except of course, when globalization threatens their own jobs. Then it is an outrage.
0.5 pt
Globalization is going to happen, like it or not. It is happening, like it or not. The best you can do is try to shape globalization to be in the interest of the population as a whole.

- The fight between labor and capital was utterly abandoned by these Democrats. They love capital and despise labor. They figure it doesn't matter in elections because the working class will have no choice but to vote for Democrats.
0 pt
True, but doesn't apply to me. I like intellectual labor, but it's still labor.

2 out of 11 points. I guess I don't fit in with my demographic.

rando says

Could we have a Labor party that is explicitly about getting higher wages and better benefits for labor, and letting less of the gains go to the very top?

What prevents such a party from forming?

Capitalism. The problem is that we have a capital class and a labor class. We should not. We should just have labor, whether that labor is physical or intellectual. If you aren't producing wealth, you should not be gaining wealth. Capitalism is precisely the separation of society into a small capital class and a large labor class and giving the power of production and distribution of wealth created by production to the capital class. If you take away the power to cut and distribute the pie from the capital class, then by definition, you are abandoning capitalism.

Any system in which the person cutting the pie also chooses who gets which slice will be inherently unjust. Even five-year-olds understand this.

rando says

And that's why all of the gains in wealth have gone to the top since the 1970's. It's not that people are producing less, it's just that it's being distributed like this:

That graph shows that the capital class is taxing the wealth producers the vast majority of their production. Even if the capital class were scraping by with siphoning nearly 0% of wealth in 1972, they would be siphoning over 55% of the worker's wealth production today. When you realize the capital class was damn rich even in 1972, that makes today's capital class's tax on the working class at least 65% and possibly close to 90%. That's a hell of a lot of taxing for the privilege of working your balls off.

Patrick, are you serious? You were that ignorant!?

I'm shocked.

I guess it's true about democrats, there all just ignorant.

You joining us rebel republicans?

rando says

It was news to me that white collar workers used to reliably vote Republican. I just assumed they always had voted for Democrats before I read this book. Apparently things started changing around the time of McGovern.

Related:

Declaring that Germany is in desperate need of migrants, the head of the umbrella group for employers’ associations has demanded the nation loosen border controls and recognise itself to be an “immigration country”.

“Germany is an immigration country. And Germany has to be made aware of this situation,” said Ingo Kramer, president of the Confederation of German Employers’ Associations (BDA).

According to the German Press Agency, Kramer said the nation will be ‘missing’ six million people of working age by the year 2030, and argued that politicians ‘must quickly realise that the country needs immigration”.

The Bremerhaven-born entrpreneur admitted, however, that this was not easy at a time when “there is some unease about migration — at least on the right of the political spectrum, because of the refugee crisis”.

But Kramer (pictured, far left) warned that the alternative would mean ‘trying to keep Germany going as an economic powerhouse with fewer people’.

As well as calling for new, ‘labour-oriented’ immigration policies, the employers’ associations chief said the state should be looking at expanding facilities — and the hours at which they operate — for looking after children so as to ensure that women work at maximum capacity.

“Only then will women be able to fully exploit all the opportunities open to them in their careers,” Kramer said.

‘Einwanderungsland’, the term used by the BDA chief to mean ‘a country of immigration’, has traditionally been used to refer to countries such as the U.S., Australia, and nations in Latin America.

It's about low wages. Only economists could come up with a chart that showed a declining population needing the same or larger number of service workers.

And on the Democratic Party:

Again, I'm too expert to have gotten it wrong. If I failed, then "Listen All Y'all It's a Sabotage." Let's stop talking about the Democrats being out of touch and talk about the Intercept, Wikileaks, and Putler's Agent Trump!

Germany is partially right. It isn't close to replacement for population at 1.4 per couple. That's eventual crash territory, and should be addressed with urgency lest the problem persist. However, encouraging people to have children with incentives that matter like free childcare at young ages and flexible workdays for working mothers is more appropriate. If an entire generation is missing workers of adult age, careful importing of people with good values and work ethics and skills should be preferred.
Opening the doors to Muslim barbarians is a lazy and stupid response to this problem.

marcus says

don't see putting a priority on living in a good school district as being a "got mine fuck you" attitude. That's insane.

It is when it prevents less advantaged people from accessing those schools. Voting for welfare benefits doesn't assuage the problem in any meaningful way, other than to make the limousine liberal voter feel good about themselves.

Why should there be a variability in how funds for public schools are disbursed?. "Separate but equal" is what you seem to advocate as well as your relatives with your indifference.

marcus says

Often times it's even substantially less expensive in say Boston or Chicago, to find an area to live and commute from, with good schools, that's going to be less costly than living in the city near a good diverse public school.

Ok well if limousine liberals truly care about the welfare of those less advantaged, they would allow for busing of those students until taxpayer funds can be applied to improving the schools I. Their neighborhoods?

Public schools should be equal across the board even if it requires h1-b teachers to do the jobs that people like you don't want to do.

IMO, economic interdependence through trade provides for several advantages:
1) More peace / less war, because countries that trade don't want to shoot themselves in the foot by shooting each other.
2) More overall efficiency, as countries can specialize and more efficiently use natural resources by selling to the highest bidder.

One drawback for the US is that suddenly, the labor market for corporations just exploded, so the value of human labor went down. This happened across the board, but especially in the untrained / lower skill work. This coincided with mechanization which punched American labor in the face after trade kicked them in the nuts.

Mechanization is never going away. Free (fairly free) trade is very unlikely to get clawed back. It's not to say that the establishment (Dems and Republicans) don't care. It's just that there is no easy solution to this. If Trump could wave a wand and make these problems go away, I'm sure he would. Is he willing to spend a lot of political capital on this? Probably not. Will he be able to solve this problem? I highly doubt it. If he does, it will probably come at the expense of global peace. For better or for worse, he is preparing for this by trying to hugely increase military spending.

I don't think that professional class liberals have contempt for working lesser educated classes. But they probably do overvalue their own skillset as pretty much everybody does. That's just human nature. OTOH, the uneducated classes tend to undervalue the difficulty and hard work that usually goes into the professional class's education.

marcus says

What city do you live in may I ask, where you've gained your wisdom allowing you to judge others so well ?

Judge others? ...I went to some of the worst schools in the US. Gallup High in Gallup NM. Probably worse than the LA public school that you teach at. Nigga please

Voting for welfare is really about keeping coloreds on their side of track and promoting de facto segregation. Nothing phony about that whatsoever, right? But I guess limousine liberals like your relatives can pat themselves on back by saying they did something by voting for people who vote for welfare. Never mind that it doesn't work and education is their best chance, not welfare.

Living in North Jersey currently, the public school in my neighborhood is 4/10 on Zillow. West Orange high school.

Quigley says

Germany is partially right. It isn't close to replacement for population at 1.4 per couple. That's eventual crash territory, and should be addressed with urgency lest the problem persist. However, encouraging people to have children with incentives that matter like free childcare at young ages and flexible workdays for working mothers is more appropriate. If an entire generation is missing workers of adult age, careful importing of people with good values and work ethics and skills should be preferred.

There's also millions of unemployed Eastern Europeans and Greeks, who will fit in far better, and are actually members of the same EU club, and neighbors.

That's why there's a landlord element to this as well. Lots of failing B&Bs and hotels are being leased to the Bundestag for Refugee housing. Something Poles, Romanians, etc. wouldn't get.

rando says

I think the point was that the Democrats have completely given up on class struggle since the party was taken over the 9%, abandoning the working class.

It's not completely true. Democrats see public unions as part of their constituency. In fact when they say "working family", it's code for "union members".

Although all this is just smoke and mirrors hiding their real constituency: the plutocrats.

In my view the 9% are just people who think they matter, and go along for the ride because:
1- they get crumbs at the table (they still profit far more than the rest of the population)
2 - because expressing empathy for poor immigrants and people of color makes them feel good.

They are the 90%

Bottom 9% of the top 10%, is places 91-100, when what you mean to say is places 11-100, which are the bottom 90% of the top 10%.

I'm interpetting
Patrick says

The lower 9% of the top 10% defines its self worth by the big-name universities they attended.

to mean persons 91 through 99 in a system with 100 people where person 100 is the wealthiest.

Technically, the top 10% would be persons 91 through 100, and the bottom 9% of that would be 90% of person 91. But, it's pretty clear that he meant 9% of the total rather than 9% of 10%.

100 people.

Persons 1-10 top 10%

Persons 11-100 the other 90%

YesYNot says

IMO, economic interdependence through trade provides for several advantages:

1) More peace / less war, because countries that trade don't want to shoot themselves in the foot by shooting each other.

2) More overall efficiency, as countries can specialize and more efficiently use natural resources by selling to the highest bidder.

The first is still to be tested by time. In a crisis, countries will fall back on protecting themselves and their economies. The ensuing collapse of trade will make things worse. Last globalization phase ended in WW2 for this very reason. You already have rampant reactionary nationalism in China and in the US. Where does it lead?

The second leads to absurd level of efficiency and crap products. When you have a few factories providing commoditized phones and socks, and everything else, for the entire planet population and a large portion of people is out of work, and unable to provide for themselves, then you realize something is very wrong with this picture. People should be able to produce their own stuff, customize it, make it unique, be proud of it, and have a job. In most situation "efficiency" from globalization just prevents that.

MMR says

You mean lying to themselves about having the same "got mine, fuck your attitude" that republicans have regarding living in good neighborhoods so that their kids can attend good schools?

Isn't it great to virtue signal how great it is to have mass immigration of third worlders, who can't afford to live in your neighborhood, whose kids don got to your kids' district, while you fight against halfway homes for drug addicts opening up nearby... meanwhile, you can brag about how "Welcoming" you are, as the rent you charge for your parents house in the former middle class inner suburb they left for you in their will goes up every month. And you no longer have to put up with Johnny to mow your lawn, when Jose does the same Job for $20 less.

And you can be full of smug goodness in the process!

Thanks, Maslow's Hierarchy!

SpecialSafe says

In most situation "efficiency" from globalization just prevents that.

Yes. Efficiency is usually the enemy of Robustness.

Back in the day, a hurricane hit and warehouses had tons of lumber, before the era of "Just In Time" Inventory.

Today, a hurricane hits and it takes week(s) to get enough lumber to patch things up. Due to the "efficiency" of JIT.

errc says

Persons 1-10 top 10%

Persons 11-100 the other 90%

I agree with that, but don't understand your previous comment.
Group 1) Person 1 is top 1%.
Group 2) Persons 1 to 10 is top 10%
Group 3) Person 1 is top 10% of the top 10%
Group 4) Persons 2-10 is bottom 90% of the top 10%
Group 5) Person 11 to 100 is bottom 90% of the total
People often refer to Group 4 as the bottom 9% of the top 10%, even thought it is really the bottom 90% of the top 10%.

SpecialSafe says

The second leads to absurd level of efficiency and crap products. When you have a few factories providing commoditized phones and socks, and everything else, for the entire planet population and a large portion of people is out of work, and unable to provide for themselves, then you realize something is very wrong with this picture.

You've identified two separate problems
1) crap products
2) people out of work

Crap products isn't really a problem with doing things efficiently. It's a problem with consumers going for price over quality, which is really the same thing as valuing more now over less hassle later.
People out of work is due more to the fact that they are competing against a bigger group of people than it is to efficiency. More efficiency at 95% employment means more goods are produced. More efficiency at the same amount of goods produced = many people unemployed, and all of the wealth going to the top (people who own the efficient production systems). I think that the level of production and distribution of wealth is what you dislike.

What is the top N% ranking based on:
- personal income?
- family/household income?
- family net worth?
- extended family net worth (i.e. counting one's inheritance)?
- some of the above but adjusted for age (e.g. net worth of people between 35 and 44 year old)?

The top N% ranking is indeed vague, but I doubt the various definitions vary all that much overall.

That is, if you're in the top 1% for personal income, odds seem good that you're also in the top 1% for all of the other definitions.

MMR says

Public schools should be equal across the board even if it requires h1-b teachers to do the jobs that people like you don't want to do.

I know you're trolling.

But at the same time, I know you're confused and don't understand. You think that the quality of teachers is what makes schools good ? It's a factor to a degree, it's important, but ultimately it's the quality of the community and the quality of the students that is going to attract/necessitate (you choose the word) the good teachers. But just as in college, the single biggest factor is ultimately the quality of the students (the competition) that makes the school good.

You think a bunch of foreign teachers that don't know our culture can come into rough districts with american kids that are 2 to 5 years behind grade level with behavior and attendance problems (not to mention tons of family and social problems) and turn it around better than the people coming in and trying now ? Are you trolling ? Or are you really that clueless ?

The current system is fairer than what republican want which is vouchers and destruction of public education. Under the current system, if one wants to they can find good enough rental housing in a great school district to optimize their child's education, or possibly get them into a magnet school (with bussing) if their child is somewhat gifted. Sometimes there are sacrifices involved. This is a game, where the squeaky wheel persistent parent gets the grease. Talk to people that know the game. This is better than saying, if you can't pay or earn a scholarship, in an all private school system, you're out of luck.

This is not to say that ongoing reform and pressure to improve isn't happening all the time. You just wouldn't know it if you only see the media. IF you're a parent that's on the ball, then you know (this totally does not include TPB).

MMR says

Voting for welfare is really about keeping coloreds on their side of track and promoting de facto segregation.

I see the flaws and the damage that welfare has done. But at the same time a see the complexity and am not going to oversimplify the situation to fit my biases as you do.

MMR says

Probably worse than the LA public school that you teach at.

I teach at a great school. Every year the graduating students I have had in my class are a wide spectrum of students including many that go to UC and cal state schools, many that go to great private colleges (on scholarships) and a one to three every year that go to the very best schools such as Stanford, Harvard, MIT or Ivy league schools.

Lashkar_i_Trumpi says

Isn't it great to virtue signal how great it is to have mass immigration of third worlders

When did not agreeing to support mass deportation of immigrants become the same as saying it's great to have mass immigration ?

Fun fact: immigration from Mexico is net negative according to many experts for many years now. Also, Obama deported more criminal mexican immigrants than any recent President.

Now, back to your bullshit...

MMR is not going to comprehend anything you just said.

rando says

if you're in the top 1% for personal income, odds seem good that you're also in the top 1% for all of the other definitions.

In my case, it depends on the definition.

I highly salute P's starting post; it is dead-accurate in every possible way

The problem with Marxism is, every practitioner understands it then they all want to be Stalin and everyone else gets to be the lowly field worker harvesting wheat for the motherland(party wealth)

marcus says

You think a bunch of foreign teachers that don't know our culture can come into rough districts with american kids that are 2 to 5 years behind grade level with behavior and attendance problems

Already doing it, although not necessarily well

marcus says

But at the same time a see the complexity and am not going to oversimplify the situation to fit my biases as you do.

So you are saying that it is not de facto segregation?

marcus says

I teach at a great school. Every year the graduating students I have had in my class are a wide spectrum of students including many that go to UC and cal state schools,

Exactly, I went to a much worse school, your point being what exactly. I still managed to become a doctor

jazz music says

There is a connection between poverty, hopelessness etc and violent crime and it really could come to your door too regardless of whether you give a shit about your fellow man in free fall.

Not to door of limousine liberals because they always vote to keep those undesirables on their side of tracks

marcus says

think that the quality of teachers is what makes schools good ? It's a factor to a degree, it's important, but ultimately it's the quality of the community and the quality of the students that is going to attract/necessitate (you choose the wor

Groundbreaking info really...since the good students can teach themselves with a bit of help from their parents, why are teachers like you needed exactly?

marcus says

MMR is not going to comprehend anything you just said.

please go back to your safe space...oh yeah, Patrick took that away