Society/Culture Hypocrisy of The Left - part 3

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
Mate, 'luck' is something you (personally) have no control over.

If you happen to board an aircraft where the Pilot is a nutter and intentionally flies the thing into a mountain, you got unlucky. Very ******* unlucky. Ditto if you find yourself the 1 in a million people who gets eaten by a shark, even though the shark meant to eat you.

The actions of others dont remove the element of luck. If the only reason the car that hit you on the way to work was even at that precise spot at that precise time was due to the driver sleeping in an extra second that morning, you got unlucky.

You dont control the circumstances of your own birth, even if other people (i.e. your parents) do. If you happen to find yourself existing as a disabled child of a poor rural Indian family in the slums of Delhi, or you happen to find yourself springing into existence as Barron Trump, it's something that boils down (subjectively, to you) as blind ******* luck.

What you then choose to do with that life is up to you (to an extent).
Except there is no chance you could wake up as an Indian child or Barron Trump. Zero. You have two possible outcomes for being. To be or to not be. That is all.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
It's a debate on how much those without are entitled to the work from those who do.

But first, we have to agree that money is a measure of work over time, directly related to how much your time and expertise are valued, the money you are paid represents the time you have worked.
...

Why would anyone - other than the wealthy - agree to that definition?

Some people are better at their jobs but are poor at saying so; some people are ingratiating and terrific at pushing the work at other people. Bureaucracies live off the notion that money is a measure of work over time, directly related to how much your time and expertise are valued, and bureaucracies are the worst thing to happen to your business most of the time. They become self serving and self perpetuating, just good enough at performing - by the standard measures - to keep themselves in place, but not performing at peak levels.
 

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
Luck only matters where an event can have a different outcome, which is determined by chance. Can you be born to anyone else?
No, but a different sperm can reach the egg before the one which created you did, of the thousands of sperm that made it that far.

The variables are infinite. Your mother could've had a fall just after conception, and the early pregnancy could be aborted. Luck isn't quite the right word, because you are not lucky, you are just incredibly unlikely. Each of our existences are unlikely, so to that extent, we are lucky to exist at all; if we are lucky to exist, then it follows that any permutations along the line (from wealthy to poor, good upbringing to abusive) are also lucky.

Ergo, yes, you are lucky to be born to wealthy parents.
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
No, but a different sperm can reach the egg before the one which created you did, of the thousands of sperm that made it that far.

The variables are infinite. Your mother could've had a fall just after conception, and the early pregnancy could be aborted. Luck isn't quite the right word, because you are not lucky, you are just incredibly unlikely. Each of our existences are unlikely, so to that extent, we are lucky to exist at all; if we are lucky to exist, then it follows that any permutations along the line (from wealthy to poor, good upbringing to abusive) are also lucky.

Ergo, yes, you are lucky to be born to wealthy parents.
Yes, that is the only luck. To exist or not. Not to be born poor or rich.
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
You don't think, if your existence itself is unlikely, then your existence being placed in a better location/situation is not also unlikely?
People who are born now are better off that 99% of people who ever lived. What if instead of being born now you were born 1000 years ago? Why even limit it to humans - what if you were born as a dinosaur not long before K-Pg event?
 

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
People who are born now are better off that 99% of people who ever lived. What if instead of being born now you were born 1000 years ago? Why even limit it to humans - what if you were born as a dinosaur not long before K-Pg event?
Exactly!

Why limit it in any way whatsoever? If you are lucky to be born at all, then you are equally lucky to be born now, to a wealthy couple, who sent you to good schools and provided the steps you needed to become successful; just as while you are lucky enough to be born at all, of all the creatures that have been born you were born as an infant primeval mosquito about to be eaten by a primeval spider.

Them's the breaks sometimes. I will say, though, you're reaching a little to avoid coming away from this saying, 'Yes, I am lucky that I was born to wealthy/stable parents!'
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
Them's the breaks sometimes. I will say, though, you're reaching a little to avoid coming away from this saying, 'Yes, I am lucky that I was born to wealthy/stable parents!'
If it’s mostly luck, how do you fix the problem? How do you say “oh well you were unlucky to have bad parents” and fix the bad parent problem? It’s not luck, is it?
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
The problem with the framing of luck as being mostly responsible for people’s relative advantage and disadvantage, is it makes it impossible to address justice.

Everyone agrees that it is better to be born in Australia than India. But why is Australia better than India? Is it:

- mostly luck; or
- mostly a result of a series of good decisions over centuries about how to create a better society?

If it’s the former, how can making good decisions now truly fix anything? You’re fighting against what you acknowledge is a much stronger influence: that of random chance.
 

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
In purely simple terms, the logic is as follows:

Premise 1: Any event which is considered statistically unlikely is defined as 'lucky'.
Premise 2: Being born to wealthy parents is statistically unlikely, given a) the fact that you need to be born, b) the fact that of all the things that have lived to this point, the variables that could've resulted in other outcomes.

Therefore: being born to wealthy parents is likely.

Is this logic wrong?
 

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
The problem with the framing of luck as being mostly responsible for people’s relative advantage and disadvantage, is it makes it impossible to address justice.

Everyone agrees that it is better to be born in Australia than India. But why is Australia better than India? Is it:

- mostly luck; or
- mostly a result of a series of good decisions over centuries about how to create a better society?

If it’s the former, how can making good decisions now truly fix anything? You’re fighting against what you acknowledge is a much stronger influence: that of random chance.
Oh, we're trying to use this for something? I was too busy trying to win...

:(
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
It could be that the implications of the logic are that we need - collectively - to realise how unbelievably lucky we are. It's certainly put things in significantly more perspective for me today; I've had to call off playing cricket to go to work.

How lucky I am indeed, to live in the form I am, in the time that I am alive!
 

its free real estate

Premiership Player
Joined
Jul 30, 2018
Posts
3,440
Likes
4,247
AFL Club
Fremantle
In purely simple terms, the logic is as follows:

Premise 1: Any event which is considered statistically unlikely is defined as 'lucky'.
Premise 2: Being born to wealthy parents is statistically unlikely, given a) the fact that you need to be born, b) the fact that of all the things that have lived to this point, the variables that could've resulted in other outcomes.

Therefore: being born to wealthy parents is likely.

Is this logic wrong?
Being born human at all is statistically unlikely. It is no more or less likely to be born poor or wealthy. You are either born or not born.
 

Tayl0r

Moderator
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Posts
33,679
Likes
33,288
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Moderator #2,414
...

Why would anyone - other than the wealthy - agree to that definition?

Some people are better at their jobs but are poor at saying so; some people are ingratiating and terrific at pushing the work at other people. Bureaucracies live off the notion that money is a measure of work over time, directly related to how much your time and expertise are valued, and bureaucracies are the worst thing to happen to your business most of the time. They become self serving and self perpetuating, just good enough at performing - by the standard measures - to keep themselves in place, but not performing at peak levels.
We live in a distributed labour society, very simplistically one person grows the food, one guy sells the food, one guy is the police, one guy teaches the children etc.

The way that society assigns value to those contributions is to reward the work with a shared accepted currency, money. That money is traded for the labour of the others and the value society places on those roles determines how much money each gets.

There is an argument that a person might not perform a task that is valued enough to support themselves, that their human value deserves an allocation and that's reasonable.

The formula for everyone would be $ = contributionValue + intrinsicHumanValue.

But since everyone has that value it's not worth a thing, it has only created a new zero point.

The counter argument is that there are roles that are required in society that aren't rewarded well enough. I can't think of a vital role that isn't rewarded but I can think of many undesirable jobs paid poorly due to their low entrance level.
 

Gethelred

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
May 1, 2016
Posts
5,966
Likes
10,696
AFL Club
Carlton
Being born human at all is statistically unlikely. It is no more or less likely to be born poor or wealthy. You are either born or not born.
Are you, over the course of the history of life on this planet, statistically unlikely to have been born in the last 100 years (1919-2019)?

Are you more or less likely, on a statistical basis, to be born to parents (regardless of choice) in the top 45 percent of wage earners/wealth indexes?

If the answer is yes, both are unlikely, then both are fortunate outcomes, and yes you are lucky lucky.
 

Tayl0r

Moderator
Joined
Jul 16, 2009
Posts
33,679
Likes
33,288
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
Moderator #2,416
It could be that the implications of the logic are that we need - collectively - to realise how unbelievably lucky we are. It's certainly put things in significantly more perspective for me today; I've had to call off playing cricket to go to work.

How lucky I am indeed, to live in the form I am, in the time that I am alive!
It's very subtle but very significant, and not mutually exclusive, that one can look at their circumstance as lucky or they could appreciate what they have as being a result of choices made within a social framework that has facilitated it.
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Posts
13,660
Likes
15,626
Location
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
The pendulum swings very gently and very slightly in Australia, so Australians have a desperate need to pretend that light breeze is a gale in order to ensure their views mean something.
It would seem that way to you - if when it swung it either didnt affect you or you benefitted.

Of course if you are a returned soldier with mental issues living on the streets cut off from social security because you didnt apply for 20 jobs one fortnight you would be thinking about jamming that pendulum up some supercilious twats arse.
 

Carringbush2010

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 6, 2016
Posts
3,901
Likes
2,122
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Collingwood
Other Teams
Pines Football Club
These are exactly the same motivations for creating these two spaces.

If you want to use the emotive language, mens clubs shield fragile people from the things that scare or stress them.


People upset at other people for doing something everyone does.

In this instance: Create safe spaces for themselves.
Cmon Cheif you're clutching at straws, men's clubs by definition is are men's clubs. It's priority purpose is for the entertainment of men................... comparing that to safe spaces in uni's or colleges is drawing a very very long bow.

It's use as a safe space in the context you put it is very much exception to the rule and comes across as very one dimensional from an argumentative perspective and it seems you're deliberately ignoring the prior purpose of a men's club and defining it as a safe space for use in this discussion.

If you were to ask the person on the street the definition of both, these are likely the majority of answers you'd get.

  • Uni safe space = safe space
  • Men's club = entertainment venue
We could go round and round in circles debating the main purpose of men's clubs, but it would be futile in the discussion of the thread "hypocrisy of the left" so I'm going to leave the debate on the priority purpose of men's clubs here and won't delve into it any further.
 

_Wildcard_

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Posts
3,151
Likes
3,319
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
It would seem that way to you - if when it swung it either didnt affect you or you benefitted.

Of course if you are a returned soldier with mental issues living on the streets cut off from social security because you didnt apply for 20 jobs one fortnight you would be thinking about jamming that pendulum up some supercilious twats arse.
What the **** are you jabbering on about? What does a returned soldier have to do with the political spectrum in Australia?
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Posts
13,660
Likes
15,626
Location
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
What the **** are you jabbering on about? What does a returned soldier have to do with the political spectrum in Australia?

I would have thought it was obvious - the pendulum has swung to the right - the requirements to collect social security become more onerous - people - esp people with mental problems like returned soldiers slip through the cracks and end up on the streets.

I really didnt think there was any need to join the dots but hey i guess ivory towers really do have that insulating effect
 

_Wildcard_

Premiership Player
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Posts
3,151
Likes
3,319
Location
Perth
AFL Club
Fremantle
I would have thought it was obvious - the pendulum has swung to the right - the requirements to collect social security become more onerous - people - esp people with mental problems like returned soldiers slip through the cracks and end up on the streets.

I really didnt think there was any need to join the dots but hey i guess ivory towers really do have that insulating effect
Uh huh.
Go away.
 

kranky al

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Jun 30, 2009
Posts
13,660
Likes
15,626
Location
Greenough
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
east perth www.pixelpac.com.au
Scintillating rebuttal.

I like how you cleverly wove facts and figures into an.... actually no you didnt - because the facts and figures are against you.

The numbers of homeless people under the liberal government have risen by 14%.

So getting back to your “im alright jack so everyone else must be just dandy” bullshit trite pendulum analogy. It really is a case of where you sit as i said. If the pendulum swinging doesnt affect you, or you get a net benefit from it you can make pithy shallow observations like you did, pat yourself on the back and feel like you have contributed to the forum. Reality is that the pendulum swing seems negligible to someone sitting at the top and world ending to those on the bottom.
 

Mike Smyth

Brownlow Medallist
Joined
Oct 8, 2012
Posts
12,829
Likes
15,415
AFL Club
Adelaide
There's countless examples of leftists being slaughtered in shithole countries because they think all cultures are equal. It's not their fault that they're brainwashed to believe this, though.
I traveled through the middle east in the mid 90's. Young women, who traveled without a care through Europe the previous summer, soon learned that they were in a different part of the world. Places like Egypt could be extremely dangerous for them if they didn't take proper care. I hate to think what happened to those that didn't. Much to the lefts utter disbelieve the world isn't full of rainbows and unicorns.
 
Top Bottom