Are they dumb or just playing
- Thread starter exGOPer
- Start date
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/tpusas-...list-professors-why-dont-they-teach-for-free/
TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk on ‘Socialist’ Professors: ‘Why Don’t They Teach for Free?’
Why doesn't Charlie Kirk pay for his own cops, fire dept and roads? There's nothing in socialism that proposes people work for free. It's the opposite you dumbass.
TPUSA’s Charlie Kirk on ‘Socialist’ Professors: ‘Why Don’t They Teach for Free?’
Why doesn't Charlie Kirk pay for his own cops, fire dept and roads? There's nothing in socialism that proposes people work for free. It's the opposite you dumbass.
Socialism is in part a pragmatic approach to the same problem Jordan Peterson accounts in the US military. Though it seems hard to source his figures, lets just accept the principle because it sounds about right.
People with an IQ under 83 are a problem Peterson said, there is nothing you can do with them that is not counter-productive in the long term. They will mess up, they will create more problems than they can solve so the Army prohibits recruits under this level.
~10% of the population has an IQ under 83 Peterson said.
I have lived in two countries with generous social welfare systems, Ireland and the UK. What I learned is this, people who can work want to work, they don't want to be on the dole and that is a fact. You don't need to worry about the vast majority of people's self-motivation.
So while a socialist bias to capitalism is more than just this, we do need to factor in the people who are an actual liability to any employer because they are not smarter than a German Shepherd.
We could kill them however people seem against that left and right so.. instead of torturing them and hurting the economy trying to force them to be as productive as others we feed and clothe them, keep them out of the way.
Last edited:
Yes, he does seem to have issues with stating things that seems likely however may not be measured scientific fact. Took me a while to find this and it was in your link anyway.
On Smoking. Peterson throwing some big stupid wrenches into the cogs. 15 participant study.. supernatural? etc.
I quite smoking only after I got a good emphysema attack scare that chilled me deep into my subconscious. Ok, maybe this could be Peterson I something thing is opaque on his actual religious beliefs because he has some fairly wacky personal ideas on the actual supernatural.
Last edited:
Sorry, previous post is disjointed. I was writing on the phone while walking. 
Are these not the same type of lefties who were telling a private baker he had to create pro gay marriage cakes. Did the left worry about the baker's first amendment rights. His store is privately owned. So were his mind, his creativity, his hands.
How about the NFL owners forcing the players to stand?
How about Trump blocking twitter users.
Do you all see some nuance there? Yet?
As a Harvard Trained Attorney is it possible Cruz understands this issue a bit more deeply than most.
I am not saying I agree with Cruz because at the moment with respect to Facebook I do not but, his statement does cause me to examine the issue more deeply.
For instance when search engines start altering their results to discriminate against legal viewpoints I begin to wonder if maybe we need to reconsider. (I realize facebook is not the same as a search engine.) For instance one could make the argument the communication spectrums phones use are licensed (owned) by the Govt. An argument could be made that if a company is using them to disseminate info they should treat left and right political view points equally.
I am not there yet but I do think we should consider Cruz viewpoint. I do hope that search engines and Facebook voluntarily return to viewpoint neutral with respect to non criminal activity.
How about the NFL owners forcing the players to stand?
How about Trump blocking twitter users.
Do you all see some nuance there? Yet?
As a Harvard Trained Attorney is it possible Cruz understands this issue a bit more deeply than most.
I am not saying I agree with Cruz because at the moment with respect to Facebook I do not but, his statement does cause me to examine the issue more deeply.
For instance when search engines start altering their results to discriminate against legal viewpoints I begin to wonder if maybe we need to reconsider. (I realize facebook is not the same as a search engine.) For instance one could make the argument the communication spectrums phones use are licensed (owned) by the Govt. An argument could be made that if a company is using them to disseminate info they should treat left and right political view points equally.
I am not there yet but I do think we should consider Cruz viewpoint. I do hope that search engines and Facebook voluntarily return to viewpoint neutral with respect to non criminal activity.
Somebody doesn't understand the difference between discrimination as a public business based on inherited/permanent attributes versus regulating optional speech on a business premise.
But that's Cons for you, low intellect is their forte
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...rongly-linked-to-right-wing-attitudes.316043/
But that's Cons for you, low intellect is their forte
https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...rongly-linked-to-right-wing-attitudes.316043/
"Those with lower ability—reasoning skills, processing speed, and so forth—prefer simple and predictable answers, because that is what they are capable of processing." Its funny how that quote from your article seems to apply to this thread.
Here we have a thread discussing first amendment rights and whether Ted Cruz might be thinking in a more nuanced manner than most. A thread which did not have a hint of racism in it.
And then we have a lefty bringing out the race card and linking to an article discussing the fact that those with lowering processing skills may rely on simple patterns of behavior.
You convinced me to do a bit of research and democrat intelligence.
I created a thread in which a Berkeley study shows that strong dems and moderate dems skew to a low IQ whereas strong Republican and indpend near Republican skew to a high IQ.
Here we have a thread discussing first amendment rights and whether Ted Cruz might be thinking in a more nuanced manner than most. A thread which did not have a hint of racism in it.
And then we have a lefty bringing out the race card and linking to an article discussing the fact that those with lowering processing skills may rely on simple patterns of behavior.
You convinced me to do a bit of research and democrat intelligence.
I created a thread in which a Berkeley study shows that strong dems and moderate dems skew to a low IQ whereas strong Republican and indpend near Republican skew to a high IQ.
Last edited:
