Location: Melbourne.
US Politics
- Thread starter Nick 0208 Ldn
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) is joined by CEO Duncan Drasdo and Financial Director Andy Green from the Manchester United Supporters Trust for a special episode on all things behind the scenes at Old Trafford including a brief history of MUST and their aims today, views on INEOS and Sir Jim Ratcliffe so far, and the Old Trafford regeneration.
Location: Melbourne.
He's right
Are they? I feel like this might be a little bit like the myth that psycopaths are smart. Incidentally, studies have found a higher concentration of psycopaths in roles such as CEO of big companies. I'll concede that billionaires are probably on average a little bit smarter than, well, average. But they're not a hundred thousand times as smart, despite being worth a hundred thousand times more.
Is it a coincidence that nearly half of all billionaires inherited a large part of their wealth (or all of it)? And while the rest didn't come from super-rich families, most of them certainly had a plethora of opportunities to succeed. Mark Zuckerberg is lauded as a self-made billionaire, but his parents were a psychiatrist and a dentist, he attended private schools and summer camps, and had a software developer as a private tutor (I'm sure that came in handy). He surely made the most of his opportunities, but even so he had opportunities that the vast majority of non-billionaires simply don't.
Make sure the wealthy pay their taxes by closing loop-holes and making it harder for money to make money simply by... well, being money. Regulate their business so they do not take advantage of their workers. I'm not looking for some kind of Red Scare vision of Communist sameness, but it is possible to make sure people from different backgrounds have the same opportunities, or failing that at least more similar opportunities.
socdem scum
Here, you should join:
https://www.sv.no/
shamans isn't going to be convinced by a call for revolution, is he, so I tried to put it in terms he might understand. I'd do the same for you, 's only fair.
You're arguing two different things. It's not black and white and obviously you need a helping hand. Bill Gates for instance had a mother who was very well connected in the IBM circle because of which he was able to sell his software and his company grew to billions. Bill Gates was also one of the smartest kids at his under grad (and iirc contributed to some algorithms).
Mark Zuckerberg had every resource and opportunity to succeed but you have to be special to do what he did. It's quite evident from his undergrad/school days that Zuckerberg was really intelligent. Same goes for Bezos. I believe he was a quant at DE shaw -- a job that requires a lot of intelligence. Shahid Khan was at the top of is class in Engineering school (and also an immigrant from Pakistan so he didn't have a fancy background either)
Now of course most of these people had a head start in life but they took full advantage of it. Of course there is a problem (people who don't have this advantage) and we have to do our best to fix that.
I'm all for regulations (where it makes sense). I do think money will (should) always make it easier to make more money and yes I agree it should only be to a certain extent.
The capitalism we have is by no means flawless. Experts should sit down and think of better regulations. It is still the best general direction we can take compared to other "general" alternatives.
For instance, we have regulations in banking (which is why these big tech companies have not owned banks as of yet) and I think that's a good step in general but banking technology is also ancient -- God knows what someone like a Bezos or Zuck could do to completely modernize it. It's not as simple as just "pfft they're rich cuz they went to private school".
An exaggeration. American dream has been a reality for many people and still to this day is. It has its flaws and criticism is valid but you'd think countries like Australia are enjoying this perfect life with living standards going up -- ain't true.
I’d take no guns, a working universal healthcare system, minimum wage of ~ 15 US dollar, compulsory paid leave/holiday/maternity leave, low prison population over yours everyday of the week, and then some. And we have all that still with billionaire scums like Rupert Murdoch and Gina Reinhardt, and the current government is the conservatives here.
Also what I originally said was basically a paraphrase of George Carlin. Is that American enough for you?
"It's called the American Dream because you have to be asleep to believe it."
With billionaires its about power.
They have all the material things.
The only way to deny them the power is to take away the source.
And they will gladly give it up to survive.
They have all the material things.
The only way to deny them the power is to take away the source.
And they will gladly give it up to survive.
Don't you feel like things are moving in a backwards direction in Australia though. The minimum wage at current exchange rate is around $13 USD and that combined with higher prices and cost of living is not vastly superior to the US minimum wage and the healthcare system is definitely not Universal with rising GAP fees. The only GP you can visit without paying Gap fees are doctors who barely speak english and the only service I'd visit them for is to get a medical certificate to miss work.
What's that go to do with American dream?
U.S has a problem with guns, every country has their problems. Healthcare is a complicated issue and most are working to solve it. It's broken but there are legit challenges most people like to ignore.
You're just pinpointing the specific areas America has issues with. I don't know what that has to do with the concept of "American Dream". In case you didn't know that doesn't mean everyone here can have the time of their life.
There will always be those who are more than willing to spout off about things that they've no experience of.
U.S doesnt have a problem with guns then?
you are truly a brain genius
I think with the mining boom ending as Chinese demand declines its inevitable that there would be setbacks, and you have to jump through hoops to get access to welfare nowadays (AUD 700 a fortnight for a non-working couple is a joke), but on the whole a person without higher education here can still easily go into a trade and make 25+ dollars an hour as a casual, you won’t go bankrupt due to a medical emergency and even in the costliest place like Melbourne and Sydney you can live well with a sub 40 hours work week, that in my book is still better than anything the US has to offer for someone without a privileged background.
The American Dream is basically you can be whatever you want to be through hard work and determination. Yours is the only country in OECD with declining life expectancy, the prison population is higher than China with 4 times your population, millennials will hold only 7% of the national wealth when they reach 40. If you think ‘the American Dream’ is alive because Mark Zuckerberg can be a billionaire then I raise you China. Ali Baba owner Jack Ma was a school teacher and now worth an estimated us$ 40 billions. I don’t see anyone talking about the Chinese Dream.
It’s the casual equivalence I’m laughing at.
@shamans either hasn’t read Death of a Salesman or doesn’t understand it.
I'm struggling to see your point. Parents trying to provide their kids with the best start in life is hardly earth shattering news.
As long as you remember that you can't measure opportunities by outcomes.
Last edited:
Because historically people didn't 'dream' of going to China.
Historically people did dream of going to China. Middle Eastern authors wrote about the great wealth in the East, Portuguese and English merchants made their fortunes in tea before robbery became more profitable.
And your proposition actually opens a whole new can of worms, the founding myth of America, going to the New World/fresh start etc... which is all based on exploitation.
*American dream" is a ruse to stop government doing what they're supposed to.
And yet this multitude of authors and traders (robbers) didn't seem to dream of staying.
Based on the exploitation of immigrants?
Last edited:
So we move on to staying now? I raised you the Xiongnu, Wuhuan, Tianbi, Goturk, Khitan, Jurchen, Mongols.
Yes, the type who arrived on slave ships and penance voyages.
Well yeah. It's a self-evident truth that all Americans, bar Native Americans, can trace their roots to somewhere other than the United States.
Sticking with the present day and leaving history aside - America currently has highest immigrant population on earth. What are all these people attracted to I wonder?
Slaves weren't immigrants.
Most of the world’s population can trace their roots somewhere other than the place they live if you go back far enough, go back all the way and we were all out of Africa.
And slaves are absolutely immigrants, even if you go only by the dictionary definition.
And slaves are absolutely immigrants, even if you go only by the dictionary definition.
Most of the world's population can trace their roots to somewhere other than the country they were born in? Are you really sure about that?
African slaves weren't immigrants. They were bought and sold as property ffs.
Meriam Webster: a person who comes to another country to take up permanent residence.
‘Of his own volition’ isn’t there, so...?
And you can absolutely trace your lineage far enough and find some ancestors who weren’t from the country you are born in, it’s not even controversial.
‘Of his own volition’ isn’t there, so...?
And you can absolutely trace your lineage far enough and find some ancestors who weren’t from the country you are born in, it’s not even controversial.
What about the American nightmare? Where everything you've worked so hard for can be taken away in an instant by an asshole cop, incel with a gun, or by a terrible medical diagnosis.
The point is that a large portion of the super rich inherited parts of or the entirety of their wealth, while the majority of the rest were given opportunities that most people don't get. That means that wealth, status and opportunties are inheritable, which essentially turns billionaires (and millionaires) into an aristocracy. A major factor in whether or not someone succeeds in life is whether or not their parents succeeded in life, regardless of their own abilities. That's not a just society, and nor is it an efficient society.
Obviously I expect parents to give their children every advantage in life, whether they are rich or poor. As I said earlier, I am not focused on lining individual billionaires up against the wall. I am focused on having a more equal society, where being rich or having rich parents doesn't automatically give someone a massive advantage over people whose parents loved them just as much, but who weren't able to provide the same opportunties.
It's not about outcome, but equal opportunity. Which certainly isn't how society works right now - not even here in Norway, where the state has had that as a specfic goal essentially since WW2.
Wow... have you like, actually read a history book about China? Ever?
I didn't make any such casual equivalence. I'm comparing it to other problems and how its unrelated to the american dream. America has a gun problem. China has a human rights problem. There are similar extreme issues in almost any country. London just had another terror attack and has a problem with gangs.
America's gun problem is bad but if youd read my earlier post it was in response to it being unrelated to the aemrca
Can that not happen anywhere?
Anyway theres a reason a disproportionate number of entrepreneurs have their business in the u.s and not Europe. From technology to medicine all the ground breaking stuff happens here. So I'm not ignoring the negatives but it's a little extreme to suggest the American dream is completely dead. Also, a ton of other countries are benefiting from the tech/medicine advancements being made here so it's ignorant to bash the society completley like that.
Take @Eboue for instance. He hates billionaires but uses airbnb.