Take Two "Normal" People, Add Money To Just One Of Them, And Watch What Happens Next
This is pretty interesting, and I'm not quite sure what to make of it. What do you guys think?
You type: | You see: |
---|---|
*italics* | italics |
**bold** | bold |
While we're very happy to have you in the Gulch and appreciate your wanting to fully engage, some things in the Gulch (e.g. voting, links in comments) are a privilege, not a right. To get you up to speed as quickly as possible, we've provided two options for earning these privileges.
Logic of the entire study is chock full of flaws.
Leasing a foreign car does NOT mean I have any wealth. That supposition is in error. Only that I budget poorly.
To jump to the conclusion that people who drive foreign cars are versed with the laws and/or wealthy is very poor study design.
I stopped watching at this point in the video because my time is worth much more than what was being offered.
Btw Hello
The average age of a person who drives a Porsche or a BMW is close to 40.
http://www.tescocompare.com/why/media-ce...
Since the invention of a crosswalk the rule of law has always been stop for those “in” the crosswalk, which has always meant in the past to stop if they are stepping off the curb. Every time i drive up to one of these pedestrian crosswalks, I drive through if you haven’t stepped off the curb. Personally, I think it’s in the interpretation of the law that is the problem. Common sense tells me if you step of a curb without looking both ways it’s your problem not mine. Anyway, I think that the real answer does not lie in people with nice cars and money feeling entitled to drive through, as much as it is more logical to presume older people with nice cars were taught to drive when laws made sense. Thanks for posting it, though> I was wondering why all these idiots were just stepping off the curb like they had some sense of entitlement for the last ten years.
Second, the candy-thief...lovely lady. I would have done the same thing. There was something about the spiel given to her that was irritating. You put me in a room with only a bowl of hard candies, stall courtesies, then before you exit the room you say something to me in a manner that gives me the feeling you think I’m going to eat all your candy--guess what is going to happen? When you close the door, I’m going to steal all your candy just on principle.
The study is really reaching.
-----
" Suppose two individuals, Tom and Dick, are given equal opportunity to develop their individual abilities. Tom winds up a millionaire, and dick winds up on a skimpy retirement pay. The objective evidence clearly shows that Tom and Dick did not have equal opportunities, doesn't it?
Yes, it does. Tom had superior opportunities, he had the gift of learning very rapidly, so that, exposed to the same information sources, and the same situations Dick was, Tom learned fifteen times as much. Tom, going to the same school Dick did, learned that Columbus discovered America... and that Leif Ericson probably landed in Labrador five or six centuries earlier. That various French and Spanish pioneers explored the area of the western United States, but the Lewis and Clarke expedition was more important.
And Dick, having answered the school examinations properly, knew that he had learned what the proper citizen was supposed to learn.
But Tom, having answered the school examinations the same way Dick did, learned something quite different. “It doesn't do much good to open a pathway if people don't want to go there. There's no point in discovering a continent until people need a new continent. There's no use exploring a new territory until people are present to move in, and want a new territory to move into.” That was a great help to Tom in later life, when he was organizing the companies and enterprises that made his millions."
----
http://humanachievementinitiative.wordpr...
----
"Take a man of good character. He finds himself in a position where he’s so broke he doesn’t even know where his next meal will come from. He finds a five dollar bill on the floor of his local 7/11. He takes it to the clerk and turns it in.
Take that same man. Make him the CEO of a major corporation. His CFO comes to him with a scheme to get the gov’t (aka taxpayers) to pay for the R&D of a project, keep the resultant product, and write off the gov’t investment. He fires the CFO.
Make him a Senator, Governor, President. Lobbyists assault him with offers; campaign funding, post-office employment, what have you. All he has to do is create and/or pass legislation favoring their cause, profitable to them. He won’t stay in office long, because he’ll tell them to go get stuffed.
Take a man of poor character. He finds the five dollar bill, and pockets it. His mind fills with rationalizations; no one will miss it; his need is acute; he’ll find the owner and pay it back when he’s rich.
Now take that same man, and make him the CEO of a major corporation. When the CFO comes, the CFO is rewarded. He finds a way to funnel some of the ill-gotten gains into his own pocket. And cries his innocence when he’s hopefully hauled off to jail.
Make the man of poor character a Senator, Governor, President, and you can guess the result. He’s the puppet of any lobbyist with an agenda and a dollar.
“Rich” and “poor” are not genetic types. A man is an individual, and he will behave according to his character, regardless of the monetary situation in which he finds himself."
---
Obviously genetics do not play a roll here, but the evidence does suggest that a man's character can indeed be influenced by his monetary situation. If you intend to refute that point, you must provide evidence, not merely hypothetical speculation.
We are all born innocent... It is the values we learn growing up in our social and cultural surrounding which have the most influence on a persons character. Yes we can all change and become different than we once were and money is one of those influences most capable of doing that.
If you say that you're opposed to starting players with an unequal distribution of wealth, and that such an act constitutes cheating, does that mean you're in favor of wealth redistribution?
A person's 'success' can't always be represented by how much money they have either. I consider success as being a principled person who doesn't cave to others...and that doesn't always pay so well. My idea of wealth is living within our means. No, I am not in favor of stealing one person's earnings and giving them to a moocher. I'm also not in favor of playing games with cheaters. Cheaters and moochers have very similar meanings in my book. What's your point?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QO5AALu0-...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YjPe_J9HU...
merry christmas
Although, the Gerard Depardieu version is great if you can get it with subtitles. He's the most natural and believable one.
nice and classic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GwUG12rDO...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQzXUYbPH...
My favorite scene has to be when Robert Duvall gives the knife fighting lessons to the young thugs.
Do you think someone else has a right to someone's money when they die...it's suddenly up for grabs? And what's the beef with people inheriting money?...it doesn't make it any less THEIRS just because it was left to them. That money WAS earned...it didn't grow on a tree and it wasn't taken from someone else against their will..(ha..their will.) "Distribution of wealth" is NOT a figure of speech...is it a leftist crafted, feel good, guilt inducing phrase to make it sound like less than theft and some how fair for all. barf.
Good to see you back, kw.
http://www.richdad.com/apps-games/cashfl...
Upvote for linking to Cashflow! :D
Why didn’t they speak about the guy who didn’t win the game? Would he state he was expected to lose thereby he had fulfilled his obligation or would he had spoken about all the obstacles in his way keeping him from winning, as if he was “entitled to have chance to win?” I wonder how many trials with the one given less money actually won and felt entitled to do so. We will never know because a true scientific experiment of this nature should have been done by mathematicians in a game theory study, not in a social studies department while trying to find ways to fit a squared-pegged social behavior into a round-hole class structure.
Merry Christmas, btw. Rum-de-la-la
It’s just natural behavior to view advantage as an entitlement. Otherwise early men would have been chasing down the eagles looking to return the field mice they may have dropped.
Also, I think Glenn Beck beat you to that book idea:
www.glennbeck.com/agenda21/
http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/26...
And you were the one who brought up Anthem. ;)
Should a murder have the same rights as the average individual? "everyone should have the same rights" that's what you just said.
I'm not going down Drury lane with you again.
no extra rights are essential.. it screws things up. The state and federal govt are up front about that. If you are the owner of a business and want a state or federal contract-you get preferential treatment if youre a minority owned company. If you are an african american applicant to college, you get preferential treatment on admission when admissions are limited. I have posted before about Asian american students who refuse to check the box that they are asian because it reduces their admittance chances. so THAT minority group is not given the same status as other minority groups. Pitting groups against one another and doling out favors to one group at the expense of another. evil, maph