Rachel Nichols slams NBA players for not honoring Ruth Ginsberg

[STATUTORY]

https://sports.yahoo.com/esp-ns-rachel-nichols-slams-nba-for-lack-of-ruth-bader-ginsburg-tribute-022228006.html


Why wasn't Ruth Bader Ginsburg honored by the NBA this weekend? In a league that absolutely holds equality as a core value, the icons of that equality can’t only include those who helped the men we see on TV, but those who paved the way for the women who work right alongside them


what a faux-woke virtue-signaling circus the NBA and the NBA media has become :roll:

[MaxPlayer]

What the hell does Ruth Bader Ginsburg have to do with the NBA?

[bullettooth]

What the hell does Ruth Bader Ginsburg have to do with the NBA?

Nothing. She wasn't black.

[CelticBaller]

This is the problem with bringing politics to the NBA, everybody thinks they "deserve" to have thier voices heard for representation

[bullettooth]

This is the problem with bringing politics to the NBA, everybody thinks they "deserve" to have thier voices heard for representation

Wrong.

Anyone with a Facebook account deserves to have their voice heard. LOL

[SouBeachTalents]

After all, the NBA is significantly stronger because of all the women who work in and around it.”

What woman specifically has made the NBA significantly stronger?

[bullettooth]

What woman specifically has made the NBA significantly stronger?
Violet Palmer... Maybe?

[MaxPlayer]

What woman specifically has made the NBA significantly stronger?

V Stiviano?

[Akhenaten]

Ruth Bigot Ginsburg was party to the evisceration of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, repudiated Kapernick for taking a knee and was bosom buddies with one of the most virulent anti-black pieces of human refuse that ever lived in Antonine Scalia (Rest in PISS).

I know Rachel Nichols is just a blabbering pair of mammary glands so she doesn't know any better than to regurgitate stupid media platitudes about Bigot Ginsburg being a "champion" for women, but she needs to stay in her lane.

[insight]

Rachel Nichols is way off base. The NBA promotes and supports the a non-profitable business called the WNBA! The only reason why the NBA is mentioned because she knows the controversy will bring more attention to her hot take. Stephen A did the same thing with the Steve Nash hiring.

[RRR3]

Ruth Bigot Ginsburg was party to the evisceration of the Civil Rights Act of 1866, repudiated Kapernick for taking a knee and was bosom buddies with one of the most virulent anti-black pieces of human refuse that ever lived in Antonine Scalia (Rest in PISS).

I know Rachel Nichols is just a blabbering pair of mammary glands so she doesn't know any better than to regurgitate stupid media platitudes about Bigot Ginsburg being a "champion" for women, but she needs to stay in her lane.
Yeah RBG was no friend to Black people despite what the libs want us to believe.

[BigKobeFan]

Nba players dont know who rgb is

[Shogon]

............................................______ __
....................................,.-'"...................``~.,
.............................,.-"..................................."-.,
.........................,/...............................................":,
.....................,?........................... ...........................,
.................../.................................................. .........,}
................./.................................................. ....,:`^`..}
.............../.................................................. .,:"........./
..............?.....__............................ .............:`.........../
............./__.(....."~-,_..............................,:`........../
.........../(_...."~,_........"~,_....................,:`........_/
..........{.._$;_......"=,_......."-,_.......,.-~-,},.~";/....}
...........((.....*~_......."=-._......";,,./`..../"............../
...,,,___.`~,......"~.,....................`.....}............../
............(....`=-,,.......`........................(......;_,,-"
............/.`~,......`-...................................../
.............`~.*-,.....................................|,./.....,__
,,_..........}.>-._...................................|............ ..`=~-,
.....`=~-,__......`,.................................
...................`=~-,,.,...............................
................................`:,,.............. .............`..............__
.....................................`=-,...................,%`>--==``
........................................_......... .._,-%.......`
...................................,

[starface]

V Stiviano?


:roll:

[starface]

But seriously, the world is such a clown show.

[Shogon]

But seriously, the world is such a clown show.

Yeah, exactly.

What the **** does this have to do with the NBA?

The NBA shouldn't be involved in politics. Do you think a bunch of young black guys give a **** about a dead old white woman?

LOL.

She actually thought that the NBA was woke leftists because of their BLM support... no... they're mostly just a bunch of ignorant and manipulated young men that have been brought up to believe that they're victims. They aren't crazy leftist assholes like Rachel herself hence they don't give a flying **** about RBG. LOL.

[ralph_i_el]

RBG hired 1 black law clerk in 35 years, and supported Roe V. Wade because " “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

She also called Kaepernick's protest stupid.

**** her and **** bougie white women in general.

[ralph_i_el]

Also lol at the idea that RBG or Rachel N are "leftists". Yall need to learn the difference between a leftist and a liberal.

[Shogon]

Also lol at the idea that RBG or Rachel N are "leftists". Yall need to learn the difference between a leftist and a liberal.

At this point is there really any difference?

They do not denounce the crazy.

[CelticBaller]

Also lol at the idea that RBG or Rachel N are "leftists". Yall need to learn the difference between a leftist and a liberal.

Leftist are idiots while liberals are more sane

[Edgar Friendly]

RBG hired 1 black law clerk in 35 years, and supported Roe V. Wade because " “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

And she's right :confusedshrug:

Abortion was originally created for population control not women's rights. In fact it should be one of the leading, if not most important movements by people who are really serious about climate change, not just the ones who want social bonus points. Abortion and aggressive birth control availability will save the planet.

[MaxPlayer]

And she's right :confusedshrug:

Abortion was originally created for population control not women's rights. In fact it should be one of the leading, if not most important movements by people who are really serious about climate change, not just the ones who want social bonus points. Abortion and aggressive birth control availability will save the planet.

Should have started with Malthus and then you

[dreamshake]

What woman specifically has made the NBA significantly stronger?

Richael Nichols. Haven't you seen the way she touches LeBron?

[Bimbo Coles]

Rachel Nichols should be more concerned about that patch of hair above her lip.

[Edgar Friendly]

What woman specifically has made the NBA significantly stronger?

Lisa Boyer
Denise Long
Katelyn Faber
Violet Palmer
Susan O'Malley
Every wife and mother to an NBA player

[ralph_i_el]

At this point is there really any difference?

They do not denounce the crazy.

They are entirely different ideologies.

[bullettooth]

And she's right :confusedshrug:

Abortion was originally created for population control not women's rights. In fact it should be one of the leading, if not most important movements by people who are really serious about climate change, not just the ones who want social bonus points. Abortion and aggressive birth control availability will save the planet.

That should really only apply to China and India.

[ralph_i_el]

Leftist are idiots while liberals are more sane

The core belief of leftism is that there is a fundamental conflict between workers, and those that own the land/resources/tools/etc used to produce. I don't think anyone can really argue against this being the case.

American conservatives are some of the best Marxist thinkers around imo. They are aware of this conflict, but realize that they mostly benefit from it. That's why they aren't concerned with logical consistency in their political platform. They aren't concerned with an ideology, they are concerned with conserving the power of the capital owning class.

[starface]

RBG hired 1 black law clerk in 35 years, and supported Roe V. Wade because " “Frankly I had thought that at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don’t want to have too many of.”

She also called Kaepernick's protest stupid.

**** her and **** bougie white women in general.


Hm.

On second thought, maybe she does deserve some honorary recognition.

:confusedshrug:

[highwhey]

nichols is a dumb bitch, shouldn't be in media, she probably sucked a lot of d1ck to get there bc i don't see any talent from her

[FKAri]

At this point is there really any difference?

They do not denounce the crazy.

Nobody denounces the crazies on their "side" because they either don't feel they are on the same side or know that doing so would be an acceptance of them being on the same side.

[ralph_i_el]

They are entirely different ideologies.


Much has been written defining these ideologies, but I think a simple way of looking at it would be to go back to the original of leftist and liberal thought. Liberal thought stems from the European Enlightenment, and gave rise to figures like the Founding Fathers, Simon Bolivar, and the moderate figures of the French revolution. These guys fought for an expansion of political rights, and individual liberties.

The first "leftists" were the extreme arm of the French Revolution, who correctly posited that the expansion of political rights and individual liberties didn't do much for impoverished workers. What is freedom of speech without education? What is the freedom to vote if all the candidates just represent the rich? I personally like Proudhon's theories from this period.

These original leftists (pre-Marx) sought to resolve the "social question" of the various evils and grievances of the working class. They advocated for land redistribution/reform, old age pensions, an end to child labor, minimum wages, maximum work hours or OT pay, the 5 day week (etc etc....). Liberals never support these things until they become overwhelmingly popular (universal health care is an example of this in the US).

If you like any of the bolded, thank a socialist. They fought for those things, and sometimes died for them. The pre-WW1 history of labor conflicts in the US is bloody.

[Edgar Friendly]

That should really only apply to China and India.

China has had a population control policy for decades now. India for sure. The middle east controls it's own massive birthrates by war and tragedy.

It should apply to any region who can't support it's population's quality of life, who are destroying the Earth's virgin habitat, destroying the Earth's forest's aka the world's CO2 filters, and contributing to massive climate change namely the US, all of equatorial South America and Africa, and India/Pakistan. China's population control measures will begin to bear fruit in 10 years and the population will nosedive by the end of the century.

[starface]

The core belief of leftism is that there is a fundamental conflict between workers, and those that own the land/resources/tools/etc used to produce. I don't think anyone can really argue against this being the case.

American conservatives are some of the best Marxist thinkers around imo. They are aware of this conflict, but realize that they mostly benefit from it. That's why they aren't concerned with logical consistency in their political platform. They aren't concerned with an ideology, they are concerned with conserving the power of the capital owning class.

The thing it’s hard for you to appreciate is humans are all genetically unique. Some have talents that others dont. The only fair system across the board is to allow each person the freedom to maximize whatever talent they have, while protecting everyones basic rights like not being murdered, not being mugged, not being assaulted etc.

Youre dreaming of a world where people dont have unique talents and therefore nobody is motivated by basic evolutionary factors to get the most out of their gifts and abilities. This is probably because you arent particularly talented in any way yourself. Preaching about the unfairness of success is the one avenue you DO have, to make your voice heard. You arent volunteering right now in Poorassdumpistan. Youre in America enjoying capitalism, while complaining about it online. You have that opportunity and luxury, and so youre maximizing it. You happen to be embarrassing yourself before other posters who are smarter than you, but still it is a freedom you enjoy.

This is all obviously well above your head, but nonetheless... rest assured you are a perfect example of everything you blame others for.

[dreamshake]

nichols is a dumb bitch, shouldn't be in media, she probably sucked a lot of d1ck to get there bc i don't see any talent from her

:lebronamazed:

[starface]

China has had a population control policy for decades now. India for sure. The middle east controls it's own massive birthrates by war and tragedy.

It should apply to any region who can't support it's population's quality of life, who are destroying the Earth's virgin habitat, destroying the Earth's forest's aka the world's CO2 filters, and contributing to massive climate change namely the US, all of equatorial South America and Africa, and India/Pakistan. China's population control measures will begin to bear fruit in 10 years and the population will nosedive by the end of the century.


:cheers:

[ralph_i_el]

Nobody denounces the crazies on their "side" because they either don't feel they are on the same side or know that doing so would be an acceptance of them being on the same side.

This a function of our crappy 2 party system. If we had a parliament, the Trump fascists could have their own party, the Mitt Romney/Jeb Bush Conservatives would be the right libs, the Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer Dems would be the corporate shitlib party, and the Bernie/AOC folks would have a socialist party.

The socialists and the fascists do agree some some economic stuff. He right and left libs agree on most economic stuff. This would lead to some interesting outcomes.

[ralph_i_el]

The thing it’s hard for you to appreciate is humans are all genetically unique. Some have talents that others dont. The only fair system across the board is to allow each person the freedom to maximize whatever talent they have, while protecting everyones basic rights like not being murdered, not being mugged, not being assaulted etc.

Youre dreaming of a world where people dont have unique talents and therefore nobody is motivated by basic evolutionary factors to get the most out of their gifts and abilities. This is probably because you arent particularly talented in any way yourself. Preaching about the unfairness of success is the one avenue you DO have, to make your voice heard. You arent volunteering right now in Poorassdumpistan. Youre in America enjoying capitalism, while complaining about it online. You have that opportunity and luxury, and so youre maximizing it. You happen to be embarrassing yourself before other posters who are smarter than you, but still it is a freedom you enjoy.

This is all obviously well above your head, but nonetheless... rest assured you are a perfect example of everything you blame others for.

Everytime I post some relatively uncontroversial academic stuff about the right/left dichotomy, I have people melting down and putting words in my mouth.

I'm wealthy, white, had the highest tested IQ at the investment bank branch I worked at, was a college athlete and in the Olympic development program for my sport. I quit my job at the bank to go work on behalf of people in Poorassdumptown, USA. Going for ad-hom attacks on someone you don't even know is a loser strategy.

I dream of a world where workers are in control, instead of owners. Why does that make you so mad?

[starface]

This a function of our crappy 2 party system. If we had a parliament, the Trump fascists could have their own party, the Mitt Romney/Jeb Bush Conservatives would be the right libs, the Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer Dems would be the corporate shitlib party, and the Bernie/AOC folks would have a socialist party.

The socialists and the fascists do agree some some economic stuff. He right and left libs agree on most economic stuff. This would lead to some interesting outcomes.


And what would this change in practice?

[dreamshake]

This wouldn't be the first time she slammed an NBA player :lol

[ralph_i_el]

And what would this change in practice?

As it currently stands, the corporate libs only have any voting base because the left has nowhere else to go. They would be equivalent to the Lib Dems in the UK, a smaller party that has to form alliances with other parties to get their policies. They ally with Labor (leftists) sometimes, or don't, and let the Tories (conservative libs) form a government. The Tories have to adjust their strategies depending on if they want to bring in far-right parties (like UKIP or w/e replaced them) or keep the Lib Dems from allying with Labor.

In the US, Bernie and Trump both responded to the same phenomenon, deindustrialization and the decimation of rural America. They took aim at different groups, but sought to fix some of the same problems. There are situations where in a parliment they would ally to outweigh the Liberals in the middle.

Part of the reason many poor people vote Republican is because they correctly assess that the Nancy Pelosi centrist shitlibs do not care about the economic condition of working people. They'll go after identity issues...because it doesn't cost their donors a buck.

[starface]

Everytime I post some relatively uncontroversial academic stuff about the right/left dichotomy, I have people melting down and putting words in my mouth.

I'm wealthy, white, had the highest tested IQ at the investment bank branch I worked at, was a college athlete and in the Olympic development program for my sport. I quit my job at the bank to go work on behalf of people in Poorassdumptown, USA. Going for ad-hom attacks on someone you don't even know is a loser strategy.

I dream of a world where workers are in control, instead of owners. Why does that make you so mad?

Because a free market system allows any worker or group of workers to leverage their strength for more control in their industry or start a new business where they are owners.

It rarely happens because most people are more comfortable holding a shovel than managing a balance sheet. This is a natural variance in genetic predisposition. If it WASNT, then collectivism would occur naturally. The government forcibly providing every Tom, Dick, and Harry with an equal share of administrative responsibility would be a functional disaster. It is unnatural and impossible. There is a reason why all mammal groups are hierarchical. It is a natural function of evolution.

There is a difference between not having rights and not taking advantage of them. You are attempting to paint a population unwilling and unable to take advantage of their rights as being devoid of them entirely. It is a nefarious falsehood, and a time honored power play by those wanting to simply replace the people and institutions currently held in esteem, with themselves. “Those who cant do, teach.”

You want to replace the doers with the talkers. Even tho nothing will change, except who holds the power.

It’s lame.

[Proctor]

nichols is a dumb bitch, shouldn't be in media, she probably sucked a lot of d1ck to get there bc i don't see any talent from her

I wouldn't let that Bart Simpson sound-alike anywhere near my d1ck. That voice is so fvcking annoying :banghead:

[HBK_Kliq_2]

She was just another lady that sucked off Bill Clinton in the white house. Give me a break...

[Rudeboy3]

No one gives a **** about that old witch

[Rudeboy3]

Also lol at the idea that RBG or Rachel N are "leftists". Yall need to learn the difference between a leftist and a liberal.

There's literally no difference, they both drink from the same cup. When one doesn't denounced the other for the bat shit insane things they do, you deserved to be tarred with the same brush

[ralph_i_el]

Because a free market system allows any worker or group of workers to leverage their strength for more control in their industry or start a new business where they are owners.

It rarely happens because most people are more comfortable holding a shovel than managing a balance sheet. This is a natural variance in genetic predisposition. If it WASNT, then collectivism would occur naturally. The government forcibly providing every Tom, Dick, and Harry with an equal share of administrative responsibility would be a functional disaster. It is unnatural and impossible. There is a reason why all mammal groups are hierarchical. It is a natural function of evolution.

There is a difference between not having rights and not taking advantage of them. You are attempting to paint a population unwilling and unable to take advantage of their rights as being devoid of them entirely. It is a nefarious falsehood, and a time honored power play by those wanting to simply replace the people and institutions currently held in esteem, with themselves. “Those who cant do, teach.”

You want to replace the doers with the talkers. Even tho nothing will change, except who holds the power.

It’s lame.

Workers "leveraging their strength for more control" is striking and collective bargaining. I would love that to happen. For most of US history, police and private paramilitaries broke up strikes. Any labor action powerful enough to effect real change will be violently repressed. They'll literally replace the workers with the military if the industry is important enough.


It rarely happens because most people are more comfortable holding a shovel than managing a balance sheet. This is a natural variance in genetic predisposition.

I would say that your material conditions are much more important to what job you end up in, compared to "genetic predisposition". Do you really think that the thing that separates owners from workers is genetics? That's pretty ****ed.

The guys holding the shovels need the guy managing the resources, and the guy managing the resources needs the men holding the shovel. We live in a society that elevates one of those groups over the other, when both are essential. Also, most of the people managing productive enterprises aren't the ones who own the factory/land/tools. I've been a manager before. Nobody is saying that every person should have an equal amount of "administrative responsibility". I have an equal vote to you, that doesn't mean we all run a federal agencies together.

Collectivism does occur naturally. Communal land ownership is typical of early human societies. The concept of individual land ownership is pretty young when you look at the history of civilization.

[Rudeboy3]

Everytime I post some relatively uncontroversial academic stuff about the right/left dichotomy, I have people melting down and putting words in my mouth.

I'm wealthy, white, had the highest tested IQ at the investment bank branch I worked at, was a college athlete and in the Olympic development program for my sport. I quit my job at the bank to go work on behalf of people in Poorassdumptown, USA. Going for ad-hom attacks on someone you don't even know is a loser strategy.

I dream of a world where workers are in control, instead of owners. Why does that make you so mad?

Providing that you're telling the truth, what you're saying is you quit your well paying cushy job to work with poor people that won't ever appreciate shit or have the motivation to be themselves? Yeah, you really are retarded and deserve all the insults coming your way

[Rudeboy3]

Everytime I post some relatively uncontroversial academic stuff about the right/left dichotomy, I have people melting down and putting words in my mouth.

I'm wealthy, white, had the highest tested IQ at the investment bank branch I worked at, was a college athlete and in the Olympic development program for my sport. I quit my job at the bank to go work on behalf of people in Poorassdumptown, USA. Going for ad-hom attacks on someone you don't even know is a loser strategy.

I dream of a world where workers are in control, instead of owners. Why does that make you so mad?

what kind of communist shit is this? The workers with low skills should be able to boss around the people (owner) who built the infrastructure and put up the money to create a business for them to become workers in the first place? Foh commie

[Rudeboy3]

Because a free market system allows any worker or group of workers to leverage their strength for more control in their industry or start a new business where they are owners.

It rarely happens because most people are more comfortable holding a shovel than managing a balance sheet. This is a natural variance in genetic predisposition. If it WASNT, then collectivism would occur naturally. The government forcibly providing every Tom, Dick, and Harry with an equal share of administrative responsibility would be a functional disaster. It is unnatural and impossible. There is a reason why all mammal groups are hierarchical. It is a natural function of evolution.

There is a difference between not having rights and not taking advantage of them. You are attempting to paint a population unwilling and unable to take advantage of their rights as being devoid of them entirely. It is a nefarious falsehood, and a time honored power play by those wanting to simply replace the people and institutions currently held in esteem, with themselves. “Those who cant do, teach.”

You want to replace the doers with the talkers. Even tho nothing will change, except who holds the power.

It’s lame.
You're schooling that boy with facts and logic mane, don't hurt 'em now
:bowdown:

[MaxPlayer]

Collectivism does occur naturally. Communal land ownership is typical of early human societies. The concept of individual land ownership is pretty young when you look at the history of civilization.

Communism can work fine on a small scale, but in an advanced industrial society the economy is sufficiently complex to render any system of central planning unfeasible.

[ralph_i_el]

what kind of communist shit is this? The workers with low skills should be able to boss around the people (owner) who built the infrastructure and put up the money to create a business for them to become workers in the first place? Foh commie

Lol workers built the infrastructure.

You're out here acting like Teddy Roosevelt built the Panama Canal :roll:

[ralph_i_el]

Communism can work fine on a small scale, but in an advanced industrial society the economy is sufficiently complex to render any system of central planning unfeasible.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Cybersyn

The CIA literally had to coup a country to stop this high tech central planning from exposing this talking point as bullshit.

We already have central planning. It's called big banks.

[ralph_i_el]

Providing that you're telling the truth, what you're saying is you quit your well paying cushy job to work with poor people that won't ever appreciate shit or have the motivation to be themselves? Yeah, you really are retarded and deserve all the insults coming your way

You know who doesn't appreciate shit? 95% of the rich kids I grew up with.

I guess we're meeting different poor people. The ones I know work really hard to make a better life for their family.

What the **** is "have the motivation to be themselves"? That's some mush-mouth nonsense.

You know why I quit that job? Because the best way to make money was to **** over the people you represented, and even on a good day my job was entirely replaceable. I got the job because I went to the right school, shook the right hands, and wore a suit everyday. It made me ****ing sick. My hair was falling out and I hated myself. My co-workers we all UM fratboys who got their jobs the same way I did, and I hated them all. My bosses were teaching me how to break financial disclosure laws when I quit (mind you this is a 200 year old international investment bank doing this sleeze).

I have enough money. The things that make me happy are my family, friends, reading, writing, and exercise. How much money do I need to enjoy those things?

[starface]

Lol workers built the infrastructure.

Anyone can lay bricks. Anyone.

Not anyone can decipher the necessary trigonometry required to keep a building from collapsing and killing 80 people. If you want buildings that collapse, go ahead and pay workers to figure it out themselves, and then you can die. If you want a building that's safe, you gotta kick in a premium for the expertise of the architect. Otherwise what the **** does he owe you his time for? He can build his own shelter and tell you to **** off.

You get what you pay for, and you get PAID what you're good for. If 7 billion people can do what you do, then... it is what it is. The rest of society isn't gonna assign you "extra" value just because someone shit you out a poosy.



Also, a corrupt government sabotaging workers has nothing to do with the principles of a free market economy. Communism isn't the elixir for corruption :roll:

I mean you legit have the viewpoints of a college freshman. Someone who's just starting to 'care' about grown up stuff, but hasn't learned anything about how the world really works yet. So you're just spamming idealistic fairytale notions, instead of working within the frame work of the human condition.

[ralph_i_el]

Anyone can lay bricks. Anyone.

Not anyone can decipher the necessary trigonometry required to keep a building from collapsing and killing 80 people. If you want buildings that collapse, go ahead and pay workers to figure it out themselves, and then you can die. If you want a building that's safe, you gotta kick in a premium for the expertise of the architect. Otherwise what the **** does he owe you his time for? He can build his own shelter and tell you to **** off.

You get what you pay for, and you get PAID what you're good for. If 7 billion people can do what you do, then... it is what it is. The rest of society isn't gonna assign you "extra" value just because someone shit you out a poosy.



Also, a corrupt government sabotaging workers has nothing to do with the principles of a free market economy. Communism isn't the elixir for corruption :roll:

I mean you legit have the viewpoints of a college freshman. Someone who's just starting to 'care' about grown up stuff, but hasn't learned anything about how the world really works yet. So you're just spamming idealistic fairytale notions, instead of working within the frame work of the human condition.

Not everyone can lay bricks. It's a pretty skilled form of labor. Masons were one of the original unions.

The engineer who designs the building is also a worker. The conflict isn't between him and the bricklayers.

Do you think Trump did the calculations to keep Trump Tower standing? Lol come on. He couldn't lay the bricks or do the math.

Random coincidence, but I've been re-laying my brick patio, and that's some hard work!

[ralph_i_el]

I mean you legit have the viewpoints of a college freshman.

Better than having the viewpoints of a 16 year old libertarian who's parents didn't hug him :confusedshrug:

[starface]

Lol the engineer who designs the building is also a worker. The conflict isn't between him and the bricklayers.

Do you think Trump did the calculations to keep Trump Tower standing? Lol come on.

But he's not doing the same work. His work is worth whatever he says it is, and the brick layer's work is worth whatever the brick layer says it is. Both men set their own price. That's basic human freedom.

If you dont wanna pay for the engineer's knowledge... he can just go get a job laying bricks. Whereas the brick layer can't just go start drawing up blueprints. They may both be necessary, but they aren't available in equal supply. That's the whole point.

The engineer spent the time developing that knowledge to be able to barter it for whatever level of security he personally desires. Again, that's human freedom. As far as Trump? He is the one who paid the engineer for his knowledge. Not the workers, and not the people who moved their office into the building after it was finished. The guy who pays for it gets to put his name on it.



I'm all for labor workers having leverage. I don't want an infinite supply of laborers available in America. Which is why I SUPPORT the adoption of more stringent immigration policies. If you want workers to be consistently replaceable with 7 billion other people... then let's open the borders. I don't know which side of that issue you fall on, but I know a lot of communists believe in open borders and don't see the direct conflict with their own ideology.

IMO the most important thing you can do politically for American workers is support tighter borders. Period.

[Rudeboy3]

Lol workers built the infrastructure.

You're out here acting like Teddy Roosevelt built the Panama Canal :roll:

So the workers built the blueprint, but the money forward, worked out the resources, did the cost-benefit analysis, hired people, created the database for these people to get paid, set up a hierarchy structure for themselves, put their own money on the line, so if the business goes under they'll take the biggest financial hit and possibly go bankrupt? No, they didn't do all that at all, hence they did not build the infrastructure, the architect gets credited for the building, not the builders, foh. Any idiot can follow an already laid out plan but the real genius comes from the people who created the plan.

If you had the highest IQ of all the people at your old job you must have been working with retards

[Overdrive]

Not everyone can lay bricks. It's a pretty skilled form of labor. Masons were one of the original unions.

The engineer who designs the building is also a worker. The conflict isn't between him and the bricklayers.

Do you think Trump did the calculations to keep Trump Tower standing? Lol come on. He couldn't lay the bricks or do the math.

Random coincidence, but I've been re-laying my brick patio, and that's some hard work!

That's the core of those conservative libertarian problems. They're crying over the downfall of the middleclass saying the dems or whatever centric leftleaning( in their POV) party is responsible for it, while they vote for people who are further removed from the middleclass than the workers they look down upon.



I don't know which side of that issue you fall on, but I know a lot of communists believe in open borders and don't see the direct conflict with their own ideology.

IMO the most important thing you can do politically for American workers is support tighter borders. Period.

What you believe to be communists maybe, but communism is heavy on protectionism. It asks for a world wide revolution, but wants its communities' labour be protected. That's one of its core traits.

[ralph_i_el]

Nobody is born an engineer or a bricklayer. Your opportunities are determined by a variety of factors, and from my experience "genetic predisposition" is not a big factor. The society around you is a much bigger factor.

I have a great example for you:
"Cuba's doctor to patient ratio grew significantly in the latter half of the 20th century, from 9.2 doctors per 10,000 inhabitants in 1958, to 58.2 per 10,000 in 1999"

Did something happen in those 40 years to make Cubans more "genetically predisposed" to becoming doctors? NO. Society changed in a way that made the training and education more widely available for people.

"I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops."

-Evolutionary Biologist, Stephen Jay Gould

[starface]

That's the core of those conservative libertarian problems. They're crying over the downfall of the middleclass saying the dems or whatever centric leftleaning( in their POV) party is responsible for it, while they vote for people who are further removed from the middleclass than the workers they look down upon.

It doesn't matter what someone's background is, because conservative leaning people prefer a reliance on the Constitution, which is the only thing that can ensure fairness. As long as they're there to enforce the Constitution, it doesnt matter how close or how far they are to any given class.

Humans are bias and subjective and self interested. That's why a Constitution is preferred to a Dictator. Socialists and Communists etc. prefer dictators because when things naturally fall into disparity, which they always will, it takes a human effort to forcibly "correct" the issue.

The problem is, when you rely on a dictator, he will always forcibly "correct" the issue in his own favor. Whereas a Constitution at least gives everyone the theoretical legal impetus to correct their own grievances.

But I realize you dont understand any of this.

[Rudeboy3]

You know who doesn't appreciate shit? 95% of the rich kids I grew up with.

I guess we're meeting different poor people. The ones I know work really hard to make a better life for their family.

What the **** is "have the motivation to be themselves"? That's some mush-mouth nonsense.

You know why I quit that job? Because the best way to make money was to **** over the people you represented, and even on a good day my job was entirely replaceable. I got the job because I went to the right school, shook the right hands, and wore a suit everyday. It made me ****ing sick. My hair was falling out and I hated myself. My co-workers we all UM fratboys who got their jobs the same way I did, and I hated them all. My bosses were teaching me how to break financial disclosure laws when I quit (mind you this is a 200 year old international investment bank doing this sleeze).

I have enough money. The things that make me happy are my family, friends, reading, writing, and exercise. How much money do I need to enjoy those things?

i meant "have the motivation to BETTER themselves", ****ed up on that part. Spoilt rich kids have a right to be spoilt, their parents worked hard for their riches and it shall be passed on to their kids. Just because you seemingly only expose yourself to poor people who like to give you bs sob stories on how nothings their fault, the vast majority of them are poor because of their own doing. At the end of the day, except for some rare circumstances, success is determined by the individual.

[ralph_i_el]

It doesn't matter what someone's background is, because conservative leaning people prefer a reliance on the Constitution, which is the only thing that can ensure fairness. As long as they're there to enforce the Constitution, it doesnt matter how close or how far they are to any given class.

Humans are bias and subjective and self interested. That's why a Constitution is preferred to a Dictator. Socialists and Communists etc. prefer dictators because when things naturally fall into disparity, which they always will, it takes a human effort to forcibly "correct" the issue.

The problem is, when you rely on a dictator, he will always forcibly "correct" the issue in his own favor. Whereas a Constitution at least gives everyone the theoretical legal impetus to correct their own grievances.

But I realize you dont understand any of this.

What about a new Constitution? Our constitution is not the only route to constitutional government.

[Overdrive]

It doesn't matter what someone's background is, because conservative leaning people prefer a reliance on the Constitution, which is the only thing that can ensure fairness. As long as they're there to enforce the Constitution, it doesnt matter how close or how far they are to any given class.

Humans are bias and subjective and self interested. That's why a Constitution is preferred to a Dictator. Socialists and Communists etc. prefer dictators because when things naturally fall into disparity, which they always will, it takes a human effort to forcibly "correct" the issue.

The problem is, when you rely on a dictator, he will always forcibly "correct" the issue in his own favor. Whereas a Constitution at least gives everyone the theoretical legal impetus to correct their own grievances.

But I realize you dont understand any of this.

You're pitting conservatives against socialists. The other side of the spectrum are liberals who are mostly bourgeoise offspring or social democrats(you could lump them together as progessives if you like - still different ideologies). Neither long for a dictator.

Communism as a thought experiment wouldn't result in dictatorship either. In reality people need leadership of some sort that's why communism in reality always failed. Social influenced leadership could still result in fairness for the middle & workingclass without leading to socialism, which alot of americans don't see or deny. Some of you still live in the McCarthy era.

[Norcaliblunt]

What’s wrong with everyone just playing their part and not hating when one side or the other uses whatever leverage they have to get what they want?

[ralph_i_el]

i meant "have the motivation to BETTER themselves", ****ed up on that part. Spoilt rich kids have a right to be spoilt, their parents worked hard for their riches and it shall be passed on to their kids. Just because you seemingly only expose yourself to poor people who like to give you bs sob stories on how nothings their fault, the vast majority of them are poor because of their own doing. At the end of the day, except for some rare circumstances, success is determined by the individual.

Study after study says the opposite. The wealth of your parents is the #1 factor in your future success, statistically.

Here's just one example of a study on this topic, but you could go find a lot more.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/study-to-succeed-in-america-its-better-to-be-born-rich-than-smart.html

This is CNBC too, which is extremely pro-capitalism.

[starface]

Nobody is born an engineer or a bricklayer. Your opportunities are determined by a variety of factors, and from my experience "genetic predisposition" is not a big factor. The society around you is a much bigger factor.

I have a great example for you:
"Cuba's doctor to patient ratio grew significantly in the latter half of the 20th century, from 9.2 doctors per 10,000 inhabitants in 1958, to 58.2 per 10,000 in 1999"

Did something happen in those 40 years to make Cubans more "genetically predisposed" to becoming doctors? NO. Society changed in a way that made the training and education more widely available for people.

"I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops."

-Evolutionary Biologist, Stephen Jay Gould


So you posted "your experiences" and the unrelated, non-scientific political curiosity of a particular guy.

Then you said "More people became doctors in Cuba in 99 than in 58."

Yowza.

That is... some of the worst arguing I've ever heard.


If you're arguing that aptitude isn't heritable, you're arguing against basic science. Are you telling me NBA players from some of the most malnourished, least educated backgrounds grew to their height because of privilege?

"Oh, but, but, that's only physical stuff. Intelligence doesnt vary in humans."

Okay, but again you're denying basic evolutionary theory. Otherwise there is no way to explain humans evolving from simian primates, without intelligence being selected for in certain individuals as a trait leading to enhanced survival. If you dont believe humans are an evolved species, that's fine. You just can't play both sides of the fence.

[ralph_i_el]

What’s wrong with everyone just playing their part and not hating when one side or the other uses whatever leverage they have to get what they want?

Because sometimes the interests of the sides conflict. If workers leverage their power to try and get universal health insurance, then the wealthy and the private insurance industries will try and fight them. That's class conflict :confusedshrug:

[starface]

Study after study says the opposite. The wealth of your parents is the #1 factor in your future success, statistically.

Here's just one example of a study on this topic, but you could go find a lot more.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/05/29/study-to-succeed-in-america-its-better-to-be-born-rich-than-smart.html

This is CNBC too, which is extremely pro-capitalism.


According to the study you cited, the analysis was done based on the standardized test scores of Kindergartners.

However:


Twin studies of adult individuals have found a heritability of IQ between 57% and 73% with the most recent studies showing heritability for IQ as high as 80%. IQ goes from being weakly correlated with genetics, for children, to being strongly correlated with genetics for late teens and adults. The heritability of IQ increases with age and reaches an asymptote at 18–20 years of age and continues at that level well into adulthood. This phenomenon is known as the Wilson Effect. However, poor prenatal environment, malnutrition and disease are known to have lifelong deleterious effects.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability_of_IQ

Children have lower variance in traits generally compared to adults. Just like pre-pubescent children have less discrepancy in height. Then at puberty, everyone gets a different degree of growth spurt.

Measuring kids at the Kindergarten level is less reliable than measuring them in adolescence. And it is absolutely true that you can never truly separate genetic and environmental factors. But you seem convinced "it's always about environment." This is as stubbornly boneheaded and unscientific as one can be.

[starface]

Because sometimes the interests of the sides conflict. If workers leverage their power to try and get universal health insurance, then the wealthy and the private insurance industries will try and fight them. That's class conflict :confusedshrug:


What if the insurance salesman wants a more affordable estimate on repairing the cracked foundation in the home he bought?

Which aspect of communism will get him the price he wants from the worker?

[Norcaliblunt]

Because sometimes the interests of the sides conflict. If workers leverage their power to try and get universal health insurance, then the wealthy and the private insurance industries will try and fight them. That's class conflict :confusedshrug:


I know. My point is you can not hate on the wealthy or private insurance companies because they are just playing the part they are supposed to. That’s the way the game is set up, those interests will always be there. And vice versa. When the middle and lower class workers use government or whatever mechanisms they can to get healthcare you can’t hate on that either. Both sides do what they have to do. We should embrace doing the dance with class conflict. It’s a win some lose some game.

[ralph_i_el]

So you posted "your experiences" and the unrelated, non-scientific political curiosity of a particular guy.

Then you said "More people became doctors in Cuba in 99 than in 58."

Yowza.

That is... some of the worst arguing I've ever heard.


If you're arguing that aptitude isn't heritable, you're arguing against basic science. Are you telling me NBA players from some of the most malnourished, least educated backgrounds grew to their height because of privilege?

"Oh, but, but, that's only physical stuff. Intelligence doesnt vary in humans."

Okay, but again you're denying basic evolutionary theory. Otherwise there is no way to explain humans evolving from simian primates, without intelligence being selected for in certain individuals as a trait leading to enhanced survival. If you dont believe humans are an evolved species, that's fine. You just can't play both sides of the fence.


Are you claiming that evolution accounts for an increase in the number of doctors in Cuba in a 40 year period?
Every post you make, you have to put words in my mouth. That's a cope.

You said "It rarely happens because most people are more comfortable holding a shovel than managing a balance sheet. This is a natural variance in genetic predisposition."

I disagreed, and said that societal factors are much more influential. I used Cuba as an example. A massive change in their society led to a huge increase in the number of people going in to jobs that you think people need a "genetic predisposition" for.


Intelligence isn't height. You're conflating two entirely different things. IQ isn't even particularly important, and the ways we measure it are largely bullshit. https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2011/04/what-does-iq-really-measure#:~:text=Kids%20who%20score%20higher%20on,e ven%20greater%20health%2C%20and%20longevity.

[ralph_i_el]

What if the insurance salesman wants a more affordable estimate on repairing the cracked foundation in the home he bought?

Which aspect of communism will get him the price he wants from the worker?


Why would you have an insurance salesman in a communist society? What would they be selling insurance for?

I was licensed to sell insurance in 3 states, because universal life insurance is a great way to get your hands on conservative investors money lol.

[ralph_i_el]

I know. My point is you can not hate on the wealthy or private insurance companies because they are just playing the part they are supposed to. That’s the way the game is set up, those interests will always be there. And vice versa. When the middle and lower class workers use government or whatever mechanisms they can to get healthcare you can’t hate on that either. Both sides do what they have to do. We should embrace doing the dance with class conflict. It’s a win some lose some game.

The parts aren't permanent. We aren't even to the third act of this play!

[Norcaliblunt]

The parts aren't permanent. We aren't even to the third act of this play!

Yeah I do hear ya there. Lol.

[ralph_i_el]

Not anyone can decipher the necessary trigonometry required to keep a building from collapsing and killing 80 people. If you want buildings that collapse, go ahead and pay workers to figure it out themselves, and then you can die. If you want a building that's safe, you gotta kick in a premium for the expertise of the architect. Otherwise what the **** does he owe you his time for? He can build his own shelter and tell you to **** off.


LOL no he can't. I know dozens of engineers, and even the ones who go into construction engineering haven't actually built anything significant with their hands in their entire lives. You ever been on site? It's hard, dangerous work.

[starface]

Are you claiming that evolution accounts for an increase in the number of doctors in Cuba in a 40 year period?
Every post you make, you have to put words in my mouth. That's a cope.


Bruh.

It's such a dumb assertion I couldn't imagine you genuinely expected an answer for it.

First of all, Cuba has experienced a significant, well documented "brain drain" since Castro came to power. This is virtually undisputed in any serious quarter of social-political discussion. https://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/news/why-cubas-brain-drain-looks-completely-different

And the reasons are obvious. People whose talents led them to be successful did not want to be strong armed by the whims of a communist dictator. Their economy has suffered greatly as a result. They may all be "closer together" in terms of equality, but they're huddled together at the bottom. Instead of some people moving up to the middle and other moving up even to the top. They're stuck together at the bottom.

That much can be said with unimpeachable academic certainty.


As for why the number of doctors increased? Presumably it has to do with technological advancements that allowed more people to study instead of work in a field. Advancements pioneered by a few gifted individuals, not an entire population magically coming up with the same formula simultaneously. Further, who knows how requirements to practice medicine in Cuba may have shifted in the 60s, 70s, 80s etc. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of Cuban medical practice, nor would I presume do you.

The technological innovations of a few people led to the masses having more options. Great. Where were those technologies developed? Probably in America. In a capitalist society. Which led to an advancement in Cuba. Which then flatlined due to the support for your boy Castro.

You just played yourself.

[starface]

Why would you have an insurance salesman in a communist society? What would they be selling insurance for?


Whatever someone wants it for...?

J. Lo has her ass insured.

You're telling me that if I live in a communist society where J Lo isn't allowed to have her ass insured, and then she accidentally sits on a piece of broken glass and can't wiggle her cheeks to make the kind of living she wants anymore, it is my responsibility to help pay the mortgage on her mansion?

Or are we not allowed to have entertainers in communism, because they make too much money?


Nothing you say makes sense. You're hella silly dude. A few sensible posters are kinda clowning on the shit you're saying, but I guarantee far more people are reading without responding who are just looking at what you say and massively facepalming.

Youre... embarrassing yourself my guy. That's not ad hominem. That's the hones truth I'm telling you in earnest.

I'm gonna leave it at that. This was fun for a minute but I can't spend all day on it.


Good DAY sir!

[ralph_i_el]

Bruh.

It's such a dumb assertion I couldn't imagine you genuinely expected an answer for it.

First of all, Cuba has experienced a significant, well documented "brain drain" since Castro came to power. This is virtually undisputed in any serious quarter of social-political discussion. https://www.rhsmith.umd.edu/news/why-cubas-brain-drain-looks-completely-different

And the reasons are obvious. People whose talents led them to be successful did not want to be strong armed by the whims of a communist dictator. Their economy has suffered greatly as a result. They may all be "closer together" in terms of equality, but they're huddled together at the bottom. Instead of some people moving up to the middle and other moving up even to the top. They're stuck together at the bottom.

That much can be said with unimpeachable academic certainty.


As for why the number of doctors increased? Presumably it has to do with technological advancements that allowed more people to study instead of work in a field. Advancements pioneered by a few gifted individuals, not an entire population magically coming up with the same formula simultaneously. Further, who knows how requirements to practice medicine in Cuba may have shifted in the 60s, 70s, 80s etc. I have no knowledge of the inner workings of Cuban medical practice, nor would I presume do you.

The technological innovations of a few people led to the masses having more options. Great. Where were those technologies developed? Probably in America. In a capitalist society. Which led to an advancement in Cuba. Which then flatlined due to the support for your boy Castro.

You just played yourself.


1. You didn't read that link you posted. That's an article from 2017, after the US opened up travel to Cuba. The article talks about skilled Cuban workers getting jobs in the tourism and hospitality sector, because of an influx of foreign money (after decades of embargos on Cuba). Trump cut off most of this travel, so I assume the trend has reversed. If anything, this is a credit to the idea that society at large as a huge impact on the jobs people go in to.

2.....I'm going to be honest. I typed out an essay on the history of Cuba, and I realized you probably wouldn't read it. From this post, it is clear you know next to nothing about their history, so what's the point of talking to you about it? I mean, you just claimed that American technological advancements led to a quintupling of the rate of doctors in Cuba.....during a period of time when America had an embargo on Cuba.

Here's actually why it happened: "Cuba's healthcare system persists, in part, due to its medical education system. In Cuba, the medical university is not a separate entity from health services, but it exists within the system. Medical and nursing students mentor and intern within the national system from the first years of their training, specifically within primary care facilities rather than hospitals. This creates a community-based teaching method rather than a typical hospital-based teaching method. Primary care, being the first level of contact to a patient, is closely located to the patient's home and work. Here, students are exposed to medicine and the social, economical, and political factors that influence health. At primary care facilities, ethics and values are a taught as a large part of the Cuban healthcare system alongside science and technology. Students graduate capable of resolving health issues and knowing when to report to a person higher in the healthcare pyramid. Students graduate with a commitment to providing and preserving quality and equity within healthcare for their communities. The largest medical university in the world exists in Cuba, the Latin American School of Medicine." And it's free

This leads to them spending a fraction of what we do on healthcare, for better infant mortality and equivalent life expectancy. Oh year, and they invented a vaccine for lung cancer, while we were making dick pills and fake tits. https://www.pri.org/stories/cuba-has-had-lung-cancer-vaccine-years



It's really funny to me how people can live in the US, where we start more wars than anyone else, have military bases all over the world, have an intelligence community that influences politics and is beyond the influence of our elected representatives.....and we're calling other countries "dictatorships"? We have democratic governments overthrown all over the world, and this is what you want to hang your hat on? That Castro was a big bad dictator? FoH with that.

[ralph_i_el]

Whatever someone wants it for...?

J. Lo has her ass insured.

You're telling me that if I live in a communist society where J Lo isn't allowed to have her ass insured, and then she accidentally sits on a piece of broken glass and can't wiggle her cheeks to make the kind of living she wants anymore, it is my responsibility to help pay the mortgage on her mansion?

Or are we not allowed to have entertainers in communism, because they make too much money?


Nothing you say makes sense. You're hella silly dude. A few sensible posters are kinda clowning on the shit you're saying, but I guarantee far more people are reading without responding who are just looking at what you say and massively facepalming.

Youre... embarrassing yourself my guy. That's not ad hominem. That's the hones truth I'm telling you in earnest.

I'm gonna leave it at that. This was fun for a minute but I can't spend all day on it.


Good DAY sir!

The only people "clowning" on me are you (a person acting like a dumbass) and rudeboy (a gay clown)

I don't think you understand what socialism is, or what communism is, or what private property is.

I want to leave off with a couple reading recommendation that are relevant to this.

"Origins of Political Order" by Fukuyama. He's a lib who got famous for "The End of History" where he posited that liberal democratic capitalism was the peak of human social development (he was wrong). This book was his attempt to explain where governments came from, and he has a part2 to explain how they deteriorate. The audiobook is free if you sign up for Audible. https://www.amazon.com/Origins-Political-Order-Prehuman-Revolution/dp/0374533229

"What is Property" by Proudhon. This is OG stuff, and it's free to read. https://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/economics/proudhon/property/

I don't care about winning online arguments. I would take a reading recommendation from you.

[CelticBaller]

1. You didn't read that link you posted. That's an article from 2017, after the US opened up travel to Cuba. The article talks about skilled Cuban workers getting jobs in the tourism and hospitality sector, because of an influx of foreign money (after decades of embargos on Cuba). Trump cut off most of this travel, so I assume the trend has reversed. If anything, this is a credit to the idea that society at large as a huge impact on the jobs people go in to.

2.....I'm going to be honest. I typed out an essay on the history of Cuba, and I realized you probably wouldn't read it. From this post, it is clear you know next to nothing about their history, so what's the point of talking to you about it? I mean, you just claimed that American technological advancements led to a quintupling of the rate of doctors in Cuba.....during a period of time when America had an embargo on Cuba.

Here's actually why it happened: "Cuba's healthcare system persists, in part, due to its medical education system. In Cuba, the medical university is not a separate entity from health services, but it exists within the system. Medical and nursing students mentor and intern within the national system from the first years of their training, specifically within primary care facilities rather than hospitals. This creates a community-based teaching method rather than a typical hospital-based teaching method. Primary care, being the first level of contact to a patient, is closely located to the patient's home and work. Here, students are exposed to medicine and the social, economical, and political factors that influence health. At primary care facilities, ethics and values are a taught as a large part of the Cuban healthcare system alongside science and technology. Students graduate capable of resolving health issues and knowing when to report to a person higher in the healthcare pyramid. Students graduate with a commitment to providing and preserving quality and equity within healthcare for their communities. The largest medical university in the world exists in Cuba, the Latin American School of Medicine." And it's free

This leads to them spending a fraction of what we do on healthcare, for better infant mortality and equivalent life expectancy. Oh year, and they invented a vaccine for lung cancer, while we were making dick pills and fake tits. https://www.pri.org/stories/cuba-has-had-lung-cancer-vaccine-years



It's really funny to me how people can live in the US, where we start more wars than anyone else, have military bases all over the world, have an intelligence community that influences politics and is beyond the influence of our elected representatives.....and we're calling other countries "dictatorships"? We have democratic governments overthrown all over the world, and this is what you want to hang your hat on? That Castro was a big bad dictator? FoH with that.


Cuba lies about their numbers bruh, every Caribbean person knows this

White people love to talk about other countries when they have no idea what is like.

[CelticBaller]

The core belief of leftism is that there is a fundamental conflict between workers, and those that own the land/resources/tools/etc used to produce. I don't think anyone can really argue against this being the case.

American conservatives are some of the best Marxist thinkers around imo. They are aware of this conflict, but realize that they mostly benefit from it. That's why they aren't concerned with logical consistency in their political platform. They aren't concerned with an ideology, they are concerned with conserving the power of the capital owning class.


Lol at core beliefs. Leftist who belief in Marxism are not for worker rights, they’re for state control of the labor and means. You guys fall for the same okie doke every leftist leader throws

That’s why socialism and communism fails, people eventually see it for what it is, a a means for the government to have more control over its people. At least in capitalism i have some control over my capita

[ralph_i_el]

Cuba lies about their numbers bruh, every Caribbean person knows this

White people love to talk about other countries when they have no idea what is like.

Good thing we mostly use the numbers the CIA gets for us on Cuba, and not ones that come directly from their government.

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/print_cu.html

These numbers come from one of the most biased anti-Cuban sources.

[ralph_i_el]

Lol at core beliefs. Leftist who belief in Marxism are not for worker rights, they’re for state control of the labor and means. You guys fall for the same okie doke every leftist leader throws

That’s why socialism and communism fails, people eventually see it for what it is, a a means for the government to have more control over its people. At least in capitalism i have some control over my capita

Where does the state come from?

[CelticBaller]

Where does the state come from?

Better question is who runs the state?

You think Stalin, Mao or even Lenin have a **** about the poor? Them dudes had firing squads and kidnappings ready for any dissident

Shit the Castro administration still does it to this day.

Stop falling for the dumb okie. Socialism doesn’t work

[MaxPlayer]

Where does the state come from?

Smart bandits who settled down among us because they realized they could make more money running a racket than looting.

[ralph_i_el]

Better question is who runs the state?

You think Stalin, Mao or even Lenin have a **** about the poor? Them dudes had firing squads and kidnappings ready for any dissident

Shit the Castro administration still does it to this day.

Stop falling for the dumb okie. Socialism doesn’t work

You can't answer "who runs the state" until you answer "where does that state come from", so I disagree. It is not the "better question"


Just as an aside, Cuba hasn't had the death penalty since 2003. In that period, America has executed CHILDREN. We have over 70 people sentenced as minors on death row right now. America executes traitors, yes? The Rosenberg's and such? You can't pay a bunch of people to try and overthrow or sabotage another country, then whine when some get executed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mongoose

The things that Stalin and Mao did, are you telling me that capitalism prevents authoritarian mass killings? Because I disagree, and have examples to back me up.

[CelticBaller]

You can't answer "who runs the state" until you answer "where does that state come from", so I disagree. It is not the "better question"


Just as an aside, Cuba hasn't had the death penalty since 2003. In that period, America has executed CHILDREN. We have over 70 people sentenced as minors on death row right now. America executes traitors, yes? The Rosenberg's and such? You can't pay a bunch of people to try and overthrow or sabotage another country, then whine when some get executed. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mongoose

The things that Stalin and Mao did, are you telling me that capitalism prevents authoritarian mass killings? Because I disagree, and have examples to back me up.

Did I say that? I implied that communism actually promotes authoritarianism, not that a capitalist country can’t be authoritarian

Again, socialism doesn’t work. Not even the Nordic countries who leftist love to think they’re socialist want that label to them. They follow a very liberal economic policy

[ralph_i_el]

Did I say that? I implied that communism actually promotes authoritarianism, not that a capitalist country can’t be authoritarian

Again, socialism doesn’t work. Not even the Nordic countries who leftist love to think they’re socialist want that label to them. They follow a very liberal economic policy

Now I have two questions for you!

Where does the state come from?
What comprises a "liberal economic policy"?

[RRR3]

Comrade Ralph schooling the right wing scumbags :bowdown:

[Im Still Ballin]

Comrade Ralph schooling the right wing scumbags :bowdown:

Dude -- I know we're bros, but you disappointed me yesterday.

Why the Rondo/Javale hate?

[999Guy]

I never saw any old Jewish ladies shooting hook shots in the 60’s. Then again I never saw Van Gundy play.

[Meticode]

I replied her with "Simply Rachel. It doesn't fit the narrative." She just has blinders on like most media personalities.

[greymatter]

That should really only apply to China and India.

It should only apply to retards like yourself, but unfortunately modern society and medicine has essentially removed natural selection as a means of ensuring that only the healthiest, smartest, strongest survive.

Anyone who isn't a complete moron is already aware that China's population was controlled by the CCP's 1-child policy for 40+ years and that they're the only superpower that has almost absolute control over its population. They've also been spending 100+ billion a year for the past several years on green energy because the #1 cause of death in China is respiratory illness. They're also building nuclear power plants as fast as they can to further reduce their reliance on fossil fuels.

The world's fastest growing countries in terms of population growth are all African.

[aj1987]

What's with all this commie BS ITT? :oldlol:

FOH, with all that nonsense. I love my material goods and I'm going to keep earning as much as possible to buy more shit. :confusedshrug:

[bullettooth]

It should only apply to retards like yourself, but unfortunately modern society and medicine has essentially removed natural selection as a means of ensuring that only the healthiest, smartest, strongest survive.

Anyone who isn't a complete moron is already aware that China's population was controlled by the CCP's 1-child policy for 40+ years and that they're the only superpower that has almost absolute control over its population. They've also been spending 100+ billion a year for the past several years on green energy because the #1 cause of death in China is respiratory illness. They're also building nuclear power plants as fast as they can to further reduce their reliance on fossil fuels.

The world's fastest growing countries in terms of population growth are all African.

Are you Chinese?

[Phoenix]

This is the consequence of politicizing the league, opening yourself up to whataboutisms.

[Keem]

The NBA needs to stick to being just about basketball and leave all the politics out of it

[HylianNightmare]

Maybe the WNBA honoree here but noone noticed cause we arent dyke lesbians

[SATAN]

You give all this kind of shit power with the attention you feed it. 7 pages on ish so far isn't surprising though.

[EllEffEll]

The NBA needs to stick to being just about basketball and leave all the politics out of it

Once that genie is out of the bottle, it's hard to stuff it back in. Sports used to be where people went to get some relief from that stuff, now they have put it front & center and have no one to blame but themselves as interest goes down the loo. Special interest groups will continue to pressure them to do so because that's what they do. I only see them doubling down on this regardless of how much it costs them because we all need to know how athletes feel about things not related to why they are famous.

==========================

As for Rachel Nichols, would she care about the NBA not honoring a recently deceased supreme court justice if RBG wasn't a woman? I could be wrong, but I don't think she would. So, why does she think the NBA and it's players would be about that? When they take this road, it is usually going to end up with them eating their own, and that is what we're seeing here. She might be signing her won termination papers here. It's not like she's indispensable.

[Lil-Shrimp]

Rachel Nichols needs to get smashed in bed