June 28, 2015

And the devil is in the details

The problem with addressing wage issues is that the entirety of the collapse has occurred to men, and any effort to help men gets screamed down. Can you actually imagine if someone in the modern left where to say "We must increase male wages 200%!" The screaming over "Male Tears" would be unending.

July 10, 2014

Ahem...

In 1300 norway the Lived Experience of the people was that the sun was a flaming chariot pulled across the sky by a bunch of goats. This turned out to be wrong in nearly every particular (the sun was on fire).

The problem with this OP is that in asserting lived experience as inherently valid, you are invalidating the lived experience of European peoples, which is that lived experience is frequently woefully incorrect because the viewer is limited in their point of observation. (the place they are observing from not presenting a clear enough picture to draw conclusions.)

Oh, and about respect. *re* means "again", and *spect* means "to look". If i examine your case twice and still find it lacking, then yes, i have respected you. Respect does not mean a assume your position to be correct merely because you are stating it, it means to reconsider the statement testing the validity of previous assumptions/methodology. It is entirely plausible that the assumptions/methodology prove equally valid on a second examination.

June 2, 2014

Troll, cute.

Because obviously anyone trying to address these issues from and intersectional perspective outside of a narrow gynocentric framework is obviously a troll.

Lets try this. First, addressing your point, nearly every pre-feminist progressive group recognized that in an oppressive system some person or group had a vested interest in perpetuating the oppression. The first thing communists/socialists decided was that the emancipation of the working class could only be achieved by the working class itself. That those with a vested interest in exploiting workers could not be expected to stop exploring workers simply because they where asked. The same was true of abolitionists, hence W.L. Garrison's statement "With reasonable men i will reason, with humane men i shall pleade, with tyrants i shall give no quarter, nor spend arguments where they will surely be wasted." I make no contention that rape culture exists and exploits women, but if this is the case then someone benefits from rape culture, and that group will be utterly indifferent to any attempts to persuade them to stop raping.

This is why #notallmen occurred, and what feminists have (again) managed to totally miss. #Notallmen is not a statement of solidarity or an excuse, men are telling you you are preaching to the choir, that those men who would listen to calls to cease rape would not have considered raping in the first place, and those men who would rape could not care less what you or anyone else thinks of that. The type of male who thinks rape is a viable norm is "alpha centric", earnestly believing that they are "superior" to other males and thus would not pay the slightest attention to the opinions of their "inferiors" (other males as well as women). Is this not what the homicidal loon in California said himself?

More broadly, I am rapidly becoming horrified with the complete failure of the modern left to concretely address issues of all forms because of its fixation that everything must be related to women. In 1965 the per employee output of the united states was $11,481 (719 billion in gdp, 62.6 million full time equivalent workers), Men's (median) where paid $6,598, women's median $3,816, meaning men where paid $0.57 for every dollar they produced and women where paid $0.33 per dollar output, on average. In 2008 we had a per employee output of $112,802, with median male pay at $47,779, for $0.42 per dollar output, and womyn's median pay at $36,688, or (Wait for it) $0.33! This has been hailed as a triumph of feminism.

Before you obviously attempt charging me with derailing, consider for a moment. You assert men are expressing feelings of "Entitlement", and this i concede fully. Why should men, having lost 21 trillion dollars in unpaid wages, not feel entitled to something in return? Particularly since this loss resulted in no meaningful gains for womyn? Why would a group of people who has seen their ability to secure first tier Maslow's needs destroyed to no concrete purpose not be expected to direct ire, even wrath at those celebrating its destruction? Why would this not invariably lead to a culture of hatred towards womyn? If a culture of misogyny exists, it stems from two equally important beginnings, neither of which as addressed in this video...

1) a group (likely not large) of males who concretely benefit from degrading women and could not care less what others think of that.

and

2) A group (probably quite large) of men outraged over the destruction of their ability to feed, cloth, and house themselves and its celebration as a victory by womyns groups.

I do not have the most infinitesimal shred of objection to women (or even womyn) receiving $0.60 for every dollar they produce, and the second source can be easily addressed by guaranteeing to all men and women a wage equal to $0.60 per dollar output. But if the first group exists, then no amount of admonishment, public or private, will deter them, any more then "The Liberator" deterred slave owners or "Iskra" deterred the Czar of Russia.

September 4, 2013

foreign relations testamony on Syria

http://www.foreign.senate.gov/hearings/the-authorization-of-use-of-force-in-syria
starts at 23;39
four hours we should all listen to. This is what they are basing their decision on; support of oppose, correct or flawed, this was what they got told. Succeed or fail, we must hold them to this.

July 30, 2013

BEA tacitly admits widescale failure of markets

http://www.kansascity.com/2013/06/18/4298502/the-art-of-revising-the-gdp.html Ok,setting the horribly stupid and inane article aside, this change to the GDP is...I don't even have words...Criminally negligent? Grossly incompetent? An outrageous attempt to justify the existence of "entrepreneurs"?

The BEA is the agency of government which keeps all the statistics about the economy. They are proposing adding the development cost of products to the current calculation for the Gross domestic product, on top of the current value. However, the Gross domestic product is calculated by adding together all the sale prices of all products made in the united states.

If markets are pricing efficiently, then all costs of production should be reflected in the final sale price. If it costs more to develop and build a washing machine then the price the washing machine sells for, then producers should stop selling washing machines until the price rises to the level at which all inputs are covered by the sale price. If producers continue operating at a net loss, then they go out of business, and again the price rises (since there are fewer washing machines) until the price exceeds the costs.

For the BEA to be adding the development costs into the GDP mean that the development costs are no included in the sale prices of goods and services in the market, OR that the BEA is trying to count the development costs twice. If the first, then we have wide scale market failure on a historic level. Literally, that would mean that markets are not now and have never set prices efficiently. If the second, then the official records of the US government have just thrown the effort of American workers under the bus for no credible reason other then to make entrepreneurs feel good. This is first tier Randian garbage, completely altering the basic measured of the economy to justify the wealth of the few, by counting their contribution twice. Either the price of development is already reflected in the final products price, or markets have failed. Its that simple.

March 17, 2013

JP morgan hearings video recording, six hours well spent.

If you should feel like listening to something while cooking, cleaning, working, playing games, or anything else, please, enjoy. http://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/chase-whale-trades-a-case-history-of-derivatives-risks-and-abuses