CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Trump is doing a great job. The middle class is finally being recognised and will start getting more of our money back in Febuary. Oh, wait a minute, according to Fake News and Fake Democrats, only the Rich are getting tax cuts. FOOL LIARS!
The Democrat Party only recognises you if you are a part of their welfare, feminist, pro abortion, or LGBTQRSTUVWXVY groups.
You bring up a good point. The Political correct thought police has decided that stores must provide acres of handicapped parking spaces for that one disabled person tryng to shop.
Do you actually think these stores are so concerned over the small amount of disabled shoppers?
I think a family member can push that wheelchair through a parking lot, the same way they push them through the store.
Don't get me wrong. I'm ok with a couple handicap spots, but not an entire acre of them:)
Trump has been absolutely filthy stinking rich his entire life. He is as disconnected from the reality of the common working person as it is actually possible to be. If you think any of his plans are going to benefit everyday people then frankly you're an idiot.
Hey Stupid is Hillary , Bill ,Obama ,Nancy , Harry and all the other Democrats not filthy stinking rich ? You are disconnected from reality ! Democrats would never propose any legislation to benefit everyday people that is a talking point that you swallow hook line and sinker!
Trump is a billionaire because he is a successful businessman. He EARNED that money. He actually worked hard for what he has. So you are completely wrong.
He earned his "small loan of a million dollars" from his old pappy too didn't he? That's right, before he was even born he EARNED being born into a wealthy family, right?
Trump received more than one loan from his father. So what? When his father died, Trump did not owe his father any money. He paid it all back. I don't know why you people are making a big deal out these loans. After all, anyone can apply for a business loan. Is there a difference between the two? No. There is not. And Trump took loans of a few million dollars and turned them into billions of dollars. How did he do this? He did it with a lot of hard work. And then someone has the gall to claim Trump doesn't understand the working class. Hilarious.
If the Right to Vote could be abolished then you Snow Flakes could have your DickTator but you have one big problem the Right to Vote is a really confusing issue for you to confront !
On a night of Democratic victories, one of the most significant wins came in Virginia, where the party held onto the governor’s mansion. Democratic governor-elect Ralph Northam’s victory will enable him to expand voting rights to disenfranchised people and exert some control over the redistricting process.
You poor little Socialist did your Sleeping Beauty Hillary not have the ability to rally the Socialist ? Why is that ? Better yet are you opposed to the Right to Vote ?
The liberals couldn't make the move north because Canada's existing immigration laws are more or less what Donald Trump was proposing for the United States.
Have you ever noticed how life's losers feel it's justifiable to criticise those who have worked their way to wealth or were able to continue to build on their inheritance?
Have you ever witnessed successful wealthy people scoffing at the plight of life's non achieving poor.
In most free western countries, but particularly America, everyone has the opportunity to 'make good' and achieve their full potential, if they have the necessary drive, ability and stamina.
The losers will always try to attribute the success of the rich and powerful to their privileged background and blame their own self imposed predicament on others, anyone but themselves.
It's on sites like this that we can witness the resentment of the weak minded and lazy dropouts who are trying to gain some relief from their failed lives and lowly social status by attacking their superiors.
Why can't such failures just accept that they are inferior, and, LIVE AND LET LIVE?
Mexico is a classic example of the lower orders blaming their poverty on the ruling classes and never seemed to realize that the ousting of consecutive governments through countless revolutions changed nothing.
So, they all all stream across the border into the United States and take advantage of the relative political stability and a lucrative trading conditions.
Justin Beiber is superior to you because he's more wealthy.
Kim Kardashian is superior to you as well.
Jake Paul is pretty wealthy too, he's way superior to you, he's obviously one of the best rappers since he made so much money.
It's amazing how idiots like you can conflate wealth with superiority and not realize that in the process you are basically saying that every retarded mindless spoiled whore like Kim K and Miley Cyrus and every famous gangsta rapper and hip hop faggot is a smarter better person than you.
Not everyone who is wealthy deserves it and there are plenty examples of inferior trash becoming wealthy, you need to realize that society actually bypasses natural selection and that wealth has nothing to do with superiority in many cases. Sure, a lot of people DO work hard and are smart and become successful because of it, but A VERY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF RICH PEOPLE ARE JUST STUPID SPOILED WITLESS TRASH WHO GOT LUCKY AND A LOT OF THEM ARE SOCIOPATHS THAT SOCIETY ENABLES.
Touching but I really don't care what "us" think, the majority of idiots is always wrong. And it's because of an appeal to what's popular that inferior mindless trash become rich and famous like Justin Beiber. That's one of the reasons why Antrim is so wrong and imbecilic, many of the people he calls superior literally attained their wealth by appealing to the preferences of the very ones he calls inferior. There is a chance you are just trying to push my buttons but if you are actually serious right now then you are just a brainless nincompoop, because obviously non of the people I mentioned have any wits or talent and don't deserve to be wealthy just because so many people are stupid and gay enough to like their music or care about their spoiled sheltered little lives of frivolity and waste.
I smell a spineless jelly fish that thinks it's acceptable for society to hold people in the highest esteem for repeating "baby baby baby oh" like a parrot.
Your post is no more than a meaningless rant of an aggrieved, small minded malcontent.
In the main those who have accomplished success have done so by working hard and taking risks to attain their full potential.
Of course there will be varying degrees of ability/achievement from the likes of Donald Trump, THE PRESIDENT of the UNITED STATES of AMERICA and a billionaire, to the low life losers who swig cheap wine, urinates and defecates on public thoroughfares.
As long as everyone can put their hands on their hearts and say that they have done their absolute best and can accept the station in life that they have reached without lambasting those who have surpassed them or ridiculing those who have remained on the lower rungs of the ladder,( I do so for the purpose of retaliation) the world would be a better, much happier place.
Unfortunately there will always be filth like you who enjoy wallowing in their quagmire of self pity and jealous resentment at those who have ''made it''.
Exceptional people such as entertainers and sportsmen who recognize their outstanding talents and work hard to hone their congenital skills will be very wealthy.
Although I was not all born with any specific talent I say good luck to those who were and have made vast fortunes by plying their flares to the maximum.
Antrim (to FactMachine): Your post is no more than a meaningless rant of an aggrieved, small minded malcontent.
In the main those who have accomplished success have done so by working hard and taking risks to attain their full potential.
It seems to me that you are operating on a fundamental assumption that the "free market" is inherently wise and just (and this is what FactMachine appears to be objecting to).
Now, you stated in your previous post:
"In most free western countries, but particularly America, everyone has the opportunity to 'make good' and achieve their full potential, if they have the necessary drive, ability and stamina"
This I agree with (and from what I gather, FM tends to agree with this as well--this is not what I think FM was taking issue with, at least it is not what I am taking issue with) because everyone has enough opportunity to find a way to attend a College for an Engineering, Statistics, Computer Science, Business, ect. degree that would potentially set them up for at least decent to good paying jobs and could continue their education, working up the ladder and ultimately earn a very comfortable living (if they are able to "play the game" well). Even a completely poor person has an opportunity for this since there are Government Stafford Loans that everyone qualifies for, regardless of credit history, no co-signer needed, and is enough to first attend a Community College plus apartment (if you work part-time also) and later to a State School program or even to a University of Florida type school (depending on the tuition of the big state school program in one's respective state). From there, PhD programs are free, in fact, they pay you a stipend to attend. This is enough to set someone up for life (if used wisely--and they can ultimately get into nearly any major Uni. by Grad School regardless of what they are confined to/able to attend for Undergraduate degree). This is just a long example to state that I agree with that statement you made.
Now, FM (and I) are pointing to an entirely separate issue. Namely, society does not necessarily always value rational things, and others are able to profit tremendously off of the stupidity/ignorance/ect. of the masses that support it. Examples of this are Musicians, actors, athletes, ect. ect. that in a rational society, are definitely not necessarily more deserving than an Engineer for instance (as our modern world is based on Science and Tech, not Rap/Justin Beiber-type Pop music, Kim Kardashian's ass, ect. ect).
Do you see any problems with this, or do you believe that the Market is the best determining agent in matters such as this?
society does not necessarily always value rational things, and others are able to profit tremendously off of the stupidity/ignorance/ect. of the masses that support it. Examples of this are Musicians, actors, athletes, ect. ect. that in a rational society, are definitely not necessarily more deserving than an Engineer for instance
In my experience, these "types" are the superheroes of the left, and the dictators and authorities on their "cultural version of ethics".
Merril Streep was the formal spokesperson against Trumpism.
George Clooney was the formal spokesperson on taking in mass migrants.
SNL is antiTrumpism.
They are essentially doing what priests used to do.
I'll give you some history. When I was younger, you would never hear a liberal preaching "morality" or "ethics", but rather "I can say what I want, however I want".
Now, Trumpism says "I can say what I want, when I want" and the left is doing the preaching. It's a very strange phenomenon.
Merril Streep was the formal spokesperson against Trumpism.
George Clooney was the formal spokesperson on taking in mass migrants.
SNL is antiTrumpism.
They are essentially doing what priests used to do
Point taken. Furthermore, I agree. They are fundamentally hypocritical particularly in regards to the Class system that they claim to object to meanwhile they are the ones most benefiting off of it (and don't give up their wealth as their ideology would suggest is the proper course of action (i.e. it is a "do as I say, not as I do" culture)--e.g. Michael Moore, ect. ect.)
Do you see any problems with this, or do you believe that the Market is the best determining agent in matters such as this
Yes, it is. Is there some theoretically "better way"? Sure, but magic doesn't seem to be an option. Neither does tyranny. We're going to just take someone's inheritance or money away simply because we think they're an idiot? You could blindly use that excuse to then take anyone's money away.
Wealthy people have gone broke from economic stupidity. MC Hammer, Willie Nelson, Mike Tyson, etc. They also all learned a hard lesson and fought their way back into the game. Congrats to them.
"People are rich for many reasons, one being hard work. Taking away their wealth wouldn't change your life in any way for the good."
Now, there are a number of problems with this based on my argument. One, a huge portion of the nations wealth is being put into sectors of society that serve no real productive purpose/lack in value while areas of high value such as intellectual pursuits are dramatically underfunded and discouraged (in many respects). This is due to society at large sharing the same collective delusions and valuing trivial bullsh't over serious, productive endeavors. This will always incentivize and produce a non-rational society unless structures are fundamentally challenged/altered
Good. You should desire to slow down how fast they get to putting the bug in your brain to control you through electric shocks.
Jokes aside, the larger context of what you raised here is very valid and (importantly) will only be solved/reasoned through by an educated, informed public that has an understanding of the direction modern technology is headed (if it is not actively stopped). I think this is a very important societal issue you touched upon, and is further evidence why we need to promote a society that is incentivized to generally keep up with the knowledge base of modern Sci. and Tech. Otherwise, these crucially important decisions will be put in the hands of an extreme minority of people working in esoteric fields
I was raised poor, am a minority, and made good money in a poor state. It's all based on excuse centered culture on the left. Just get it done, or it won't get done. It's simple. If you want success, go get it. It won't hunt you down and find you, but rather, the opposite.
This seems to destroy Nomenclature's assumptions about you and the claim that you are a "white supremacist"/fascist neo-Nazi. Well, I guess it is hit and miss in the pointing fingers and name calling game Nom likes to play.. (LOL)
made good money in a poor state. It's all based on excuse centered culture on the left. Just get it done, or it won't get done. It's simple. If you want success, go get it. It won't hunt you down and find you, but rather, the opposite.
This I agree with (based on the America system--as well as the UK and some other places as well for that matter). Even though America certainly does not have any strict "Equality of Opportunity" it has enough opportunity to allow any person (regardless of starting position) to climb the ladder if they are willing and able to "play the game" wisely, persistently, ect. (Good for you btw)
Note, this is not what I was taking issue with in my post however. My criticism is more large-scale about what is being incentivized, valued, and the sort of society one can expect to be produced from that structure (which I think is deeply fundamentally flawed and unstable)
This seems to destroy Nomenclature's assumptions about you and the claim that you are a "white supremacist"/fascist neo-Nazi
Yes, he cannot imagine that a brown person (in this case Native American in a heavily conservative state) could be conservative or would be "nonwhite" and on a debate site. I mean obviously only white people debate...
I asked this question because I am attempting to get a better "feel" for you economic philosophy (due to the topic we are discussing here). Is there a person, party, movement, ect. that you tend to align with on economic issues?
Now, this I find to be far to broad to get a sense of your real position. That is, "Capitalism" as it is generally used, is consistent with both a "Free Market" system and various forms of "Constrained/Regulated Market" systems. I am arguing for a form of "Constrained Market" system (in the short term) as I think they still have usefulness and are feasible to implement in the current climate/Zeitgeist. However, it is important to note that the type of "Constrained Market" system I am proposing is very different than typically conceived of by people such as Sanders, Green Party, ect. ect. (I can elaborate on this if you like, I began to address it in my previous posts)
I am arguing for a form of "Constrained Market" system
We have a constrained market system. It's why we have monopoly laws. It's the same phenomenon that allows a company like Walmart to quit mass building stores and even closing some while Amazon spreads out despite Amazon being rather new and Walmart looking like King Kong through the 1990s up until recent times.
We have a constrained market system. It's why we have monopoly laws.
I know, and there are many different possible varities of such a system. The one I am arguing for is not at all the typical one promoted by people such as Sanders, Social Democrats, ect. (although I did not come up with this general framework myself, I do make some of my own modifications/alterations--the one I promote that is). See this thread where I begin to discuss it further (although I am still in the process of explaining it):
Society does not necessarily always value rational things, and others are able to profit tremendously off of the stupidity/ignorance/ect. of the masses that support it.
Survival of the fittest?
Examples of this are Musicians, actors, athletes, ect. ect. that in a rational society, are definitely not necessarily more deserving than an Engineer for instance
So if one wants massive wealth, don't go into a "noble profession". Go into a profession that creates wealth.
Do you see any problems with this
Yes. These people probably breed.
or do you believe that the Market is the best determining agent in matters such as this
Please explain what you mean by that in this context (before I answer, I want to make sure I am understanding you correctly)
So if one wants massive wealth, don't go into a "noble profession". Go into a profession that creates wealth.
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by this (what constitutes as a "noble profession"). Also, it depends what you mean by "creating wealth" because given the current system, destructive forces (intellectually, physically, for the planet, ect.) "create wealth" (i.e. monetary profits) but serve little to no useful purpose
Please explain what you mean by that in this context (before I answer, I want to make sure I am understanding you correctly
"The fittest" meaning people who educate themselves, strive for more/better, make wise decisions. If the "not fittest" wallow around in the abyss of mediocrity/failure, it's logical that the environment would appear as it does. In this case "the fittest" is those who can or do have monumental economic success. It doesn't necessarily follow that they are the "fittest" in areas such as morality, ethics, spirituality, empathy, sympathy, love, healthy relationships, etc. etc.
Again, I'm not sure what you mean by this (what constitutes as a "noble profession")
Whatever you subjectively decide it means. A teacher, doctor, preacher, the Peace Corpse, the military, fireman, policeman, soup kitchen employee. You might or might not make decent money, but will never obtain wealth without going after other financial endeavors. (The exception possibly being a doctor)
given the current system, destructive forces (intellectually, physically, for the planet, ect.) "create wealth" (i.e. monetary profits) but serve little to no useful purpose
It would be very, very subjective to say musicians, NFL players, NBA players, actors, etc are"physically destructive to the planet".
You would then have to show that many other means of wealth are "physically destructive to the planet", or at least get more specific on what you mean.
Bill Gates and Mark Zuckerburg deal with computers and social media. Donald Trump made hotels, casinos, golf courses, starred on tv, etc .
Are these things "intellectualy destructive to the planet"? Perhaps, but it depends on who you ask. You might find some random study that shows that social media supports some brain function. I would most likely disagree with it, but I'm not the omnipotent guardian of what is intellectualy destructive to the planet, and no one else should be either, otherwise it could be appled to anything some random person or entity didn't like.
It would be very, very subjective to say musicians, NFL players, NBA players, actors, etc are"physically destructive to the planet".
That is not what I am saying. The current Market system often does not take into account "externalities" that are not relevant to business expenses, although it may be disastrous for the ecosystem, ect. (the athletes, actors, ect. was a separate point)
My point about athletes, actors, ect. is that they are not what allows society to continue to function. In fact, they are taking advantage of the "toys" provided by the very few Scientists and Engineers, held together by the necessary labor intensive workers, and are simultaneously sh'tting on these people (even if they are not aware of it). Furthermore, it is really inverting the pyramid of who works harder and allows society to function. Construction workers are so much more important than Baseball players even though our current system would lead an outside observer to conclude the opposite (based on factors such as wealth, status, resources, living comfort, ect.)
It's fine to want to protect the ecosystem, but it's more or less a power struggle that almost "must" ignore the ecosystem or hope for the best. Meaning? If we gave up industry to "protect the ecosystem", nationalist "illiberal" countries would continue their industrial rampage, ignore us and/or keep much of what they do hidden, reap the wealth, and have more of a monopoly of power in the world. For example, if we gave up oil production, they would handcuff us on oil prices and completely destroy our economy unless we created a mass transit system nationwide that would cost trillions and also demand we have other efficient ways put in place to give us energy or fuel. If you have a plan in hand, send it to the White House.
Construction workers are so much more important than Baseball players
I agree in principle, but the fact is, people keep watching the games, buying the jerseys, and buying the tickets.
My point about athletes, actors, ect. is that they are not what allows society to continue to function
One might could argue that sports builds self esteem, creates a sense of community, etc at the highschool and college level. If the NFL fell off the face of the Earth, I'd shed nerry a tear.
My point about athletes, actors, ect. is that they are not what allows society to continue to function
That isn't a point because if entertainment had no function then it would not exist, let alone be a billion dollar industry. Entertainment makes more money than engineering because there is more public demand for entertainment. It's as simple as that. You are essentially saying your point is that you have some kind of selection bias toward engineering, which you can't (or won't) quantify in real terms for anyone else.
Sniff sniff. I smell a rabid Capitalist response here.
Capitalism is the problem. Entertainment is the oxycontin. It doesn't cure you, but it does make the problem easier to deal with.
Let me restate that. Marx was an idiot.
Marx was demonstrably a genius, even if you reject all of his theories as completely wrong. You are the idiot and that, again, is the reality of the matter.
I agree in a way. He participated in no labor his entire life and convinced you and others that he was an expert on labor...
It's kind of like those people who sell "get rich fast" books, and then they get rich fast by... you buying their book...
even if you reject all of his theories as completely wrong
Aaah. With as obsessed as you are with Hitler, it's no surprise that you offered an argument that would defend his (Hitler's) positions as... "genius".
Is that right? Then why does Europe follow the greatest Capitalist nation on Earth's lead like a lost puppy dog? Why is America wealthy? Why does half the world beg to get into America, swimming rivers and digging under fences to get in? Do tell...
Capitalism is the problem. Entertainment is the oxycontin. It doesn't cure you, but it does make the problem easier to deal with.
Are you suggesting that you are comfortable with a "Brave New World" scenario?
Edit: Furthermore, you are misunderstanding your own position. You have now stated:
A. You are an "Inverse Capitalist" (i.e. Social Democrat, like Bernie Sanders, Green Party, ect.--which you wrongly referred to as Democratic Socialism)
B. Against the Motion "Free Markets are Not Sensible" and went on to argue support for (what you perceived to be) a Free Market system
C. Capitalism is the problem, which is inherently a Market System (whether Constrained or Unfettered)
Which one is it? Based on reading your argument history, you fall in line with (A) and are confused about the terminology as well as applications in other areas (i.e. your knowledge of Economic systems is highly limited and causes you to make all sorts of errors that you are not consciously aware of)
"Orwell considered doublethink to be a feature of Soviet-style totalitarianism, as reflected in this statement from a speech by Joseph Stalin: We are for the withering away of the state, and at the same time we stand for the strengthening of the dictatorship of the proletariat, which represents the most powerful and mighty of all forms of the state which have existed up to the present day. The highest development of the power of the state, with the object of preparing the conditions of the withering away of the state: that is the Marxist formula. Is it "contradictory"? Yes, it is "contradictory." But this contradiction is a living thing and wholly reflects the Marxist dialectic."
One might could argue that sports builds self esteem, creates a sense of community, etc at the highschool and college level
I agree. In fact, I think the socialization factor found in sports is crucial to healthy development (within certain reasonable boundaries of play and competition). If you observe other mammals, "play fighting" is extremely important for proper individual and social development. Exhibit A: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL8x7LcA-Y4
That still in no way gets you to the modern absurdity that I am taking issue with/arguing against.
That still in no way gets you to the modern absurdity that I am taking issue with/arguing against.
I'm assuming you are referring to people being paid $40 million a year to play a sport, as some NBA players are. I don't disagree with this or think it's logical even in a Capitalism sense. They'd all play for way less, and cities/states shouldn't have to pay a dime to build them stadiums, but they do. But of course, it still falls back onto the fact that owners choose to pay players obscene amounts, and cities choose to pay to build their facilities.
I think they still have usefulness and are feasible to implement in the current climate/Zeitgeist
The current climate needs to think like Reagan instead of thinking it is progressing by thinking like Pee Wee Herman. The full blown far left version of Globalism is handing them the shock collars to put around our neck and then handing them the zapper remote. The 1% that far leftists hate so much will be replaced by an omnipotent .1% that rules all resources with no opposing force to make them give anyone an "equal share" or any share at all.
However, it is important to note that the type of "Constrained Market" system I am proposing is very different than typically conceived of by people such as Sanders, Green Party
Good. Them giving advice on economics to a billionaire is a laugh. Hell, them giving economic advice to a toddler is a laugh. Maybe they'll give the brain surgeon and rocket science community their bs opinions on those topics next...
Do you generally agree with Reason magazines economic positions?
I'm not certain what the magazine's positions are. I tend to agree with Forbes.
I'm open to other positions, but if someone waves the flag of Communism around pre position, I zone out or begin to think they are a gluttin for abuse.
People are rich for many reasons, one being hard work. Taking away their wealth wouldn't change your life in any way for the good. You'd wind up with 500 versions of the Clinton Foundation, and have replaced the 1% with Politicians who are now the 1%.
The main point is, if you fought your way to success, and someone demanded you give your money to someone without a job, or who had no ambition, you'd laugh at them, and should.
And if you feel like giving to people, that'd be your business. In Trump's case, he won the Ellis Island Award with Rosa Parks and Muhammed Ali for charity and helping the black community. Probably not going to hear that on CNN.
The down vote is a graphic illustration of the accuracy and clear vindication of my point.
The losers feel that by refusing to accept the truth they can change reality by trying to bury any statement which exposes their own shortcomings in a sea of denials.
You're obviously a low life, loser, who seethes and bubbles with resentment at those who have reached heights which you'll never achieve.
All that filth like you can do is peer enviously from afar at a lifestyle which they have no hope of ever experiencing and shout juvenile, embarrassing obscenities at ''THE ACHIEVERS'' in an effort to alleviate their feelings of inadequacy induced misery.
You never have an argument, you never can explain why you think the monetary system is the same as natural selection or how so many scumbags and lazy imbeciles become rich and famous yet it's still somehow directly correlated to superiority, you just psychologically masturbate yourself and call people low lifes if they don't think that capitalism is a pure expression of darwinian natural selection and that absolutely every cunt who happens to be wealthy is somehow superior.
Fartmachine? Wow, how superior of you, you are a worthless spoiled immature baby with a superiority complex, nothing more.
Your continual drivel only serves to underline your inability to understand the world in which you live.
Your assertion that people who have the intelligence to adapt to their environment and develop the necessary skills to succeed are all scoundrels is really too pathetic for words.
I repeat myself, remain a loser and simmer in the witch's brew of resentment and self pity.
You were born a loser and will die a sad, disillusioned lonely old fool who never understood nor enjoyed the high side of life.
You have accepted that sailing your yacht around the Mediterranean, sipping Dom Perignon in the American bar of the Hotel de Paris in Monte Carlo was for others but not for a shithead like you.
Well, that's fine, but don't knock those hard working superior people who succeeded where you failed.
Just accept that YOU'RE AN ENORMOUS FAILURE and you'll be more contented.
inability to understand the world in which you live.
You think the highest form of intelligence and superiority is to use a made up social construct to attain materialistic pleasure. You don't value the real people who understand the world like scientists as much as you value people who understand how to acquire a conceptual excuse to get your way that was made up in the minds of humans. Money is a social construct, as I already pointed out there are plenty of economists and business people who can't understand Einsteins equations, but who knows more about "reality" ? OBVIOUSLY Einstein does, yet who does society reward the most? The one who is an expert in SOCIAL CONSTRUCTS
Have you ever heard the tale of Thomas Edison and Nicola Tesla? Of course not, it's not a story the capitalists would tell you...
Your assertion that people who have the intelligence to adapt to their environment and develop the necessary skills to succeed are all scoundrels
I didn't say ALL, I said A LOT, there are plenty of people who actually have earned their wealth, and plenty of people who where just handed everything in life or attained wealth through devious means and use it for nefarious bullshit, an example of all three of those is George Soros.
I am a God compared to you, you are just a spoiled baby who thinks you are better than everyone because you where handed everything in life. One day people will be rewarded for actually being worth something and not just for singing some shitty generic pop song, being born in a rich family or money grubbing their way to wall street. Even within this fake system I will find my way to the top, and I will not just be sipping Dom Perignon and lazing around on my yacht, I will actually produce something of value in this world unlike the useless wastes of resources you call "superior"
You've too much time on your hands there shithead.
Spend more time away from your computer and try getting more free air.
No one, especially me, has the remotest interest in your feeble attempts to justify your failure by pretending to be some sort of academic philosopher.
I only read the first line or so of your cyber diarrhea then consign it to the sewer, but do continue to waste your time.
You are intellectually inferior to me, yet you think you can just dismiss my wisdom and insult me because of your own failure to comprehend it or even respect your betters enough to read their words? You have earned yourself the constant assault of my elite trolling forces.
I despise Trump because I believe he's a dangerous traitorous psychopath and nothing he's done so far has given me any reason to doubt my convictions.
Any sane person can see he's a nut job.
As for leaving for Canada, why would I do that? I love America and if and when Trump is convicted of treason and sentenced to stand before a firing squad I'll offer to pay for the honor of participating.
The rabid incessant whining and crying along with the claims for his mental state and vote manipulation and sexual misconduct and racism would be a classic case of projecting Hillary's faults onto Trump. Except you can't project Hillary's looong list of close associates meeting an untimely suspicious deaths.