Ineptocracy

[Phatscotty]

A system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society least likely to sustain themselves or succeed, are rewarded with goods and services paid for by the confiscated wealth of a diminishing number of producers.

[Haggis_McMutton]

Been reading Nietzsche?

[AndyDufresne]

Like Idiocracy? (Wikipedia Entry, Rotten Tomatoes Review)


--Andy

[Upgrayedd]

Idiocracy is where the dumb breed more than the smart, creating a dysgenic vortex of no escape.

[Phatscotty]

Idiocracy is where the dumb breed more than the smart, creating a dysgenic vortex of no escape.

I wish the movie would have delved into the reality that the dumb are subsidized at the expense of holding back the smart.

[Woodruff]

Idiocracy is where the dumb breed more than the smart, creating a dysgenic vortex of no escape.

I wish the movie would have delved into the reality that the dumb are subsidized at the expense of holding back the smart.

The dumb are holding back the smart. That is brilliant! BRILLIANT, I tell you!

[Phatscotty]

Idiocracy is where the dumb breed more than the smart, creating a dysgenic vortex of no escape.

I wish the movie would have delved into the reality that the dumb are subsidized at the expense of holding back the smart.

The dumb are holding back the smart. That is brilliant! BRILLIANT, I tell you!

http://www.conquerclub.com/forum/viewto ... 57&start=0

[Lootifer]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

[Phatscotty]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

[Lootifer]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

[Maugena]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

Well said.
INB4 Phatscotty, "Rags to riches blah blah blah" bullshit success story everyman.

[Phatscotty]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

what do you propose to do about this fairness?

[Phatscotty]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

Well said.
INB4 Phatscotty, "Rags to riches blah blah blah" bullshit success story everyman.

You have never played a game here. Why can you make posts, but a couple of my friends who are interested in this site cannot?

And no, they do not wish to become OFFICIAL trolls

[Upgrayedd]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

Welfare doesn't go to hard working people. It goes to unemployed people or people with lots of kids. Your scenario is an imaginary world that only exists in your head.

[john9blue]

Idiocracy is where the dumb breed more than the smart, creating a dysgenic vortex of no escape.

I wish the movie would have delved into the reality that the dumb are subsidized at the expense of holding back the smart.

The dumb are holding back the smart. That is brilliant! BRILLIANT, I tell you!

in a lot of ways, yeah.

sometimes dumb people are a good thing, though.

advertising, for instance- i wouldn't be able to read lots of things for free on the internet if everyone was smart enough to make conscious choices about the products they buy, rather than unconscious choices influenced by advertisements.

plus, it's easier to succeed in a world with lots of dumb people, for obvious reasons.

[Lootifer]

what do you propose to do about this fairness?

Nothing; its fine and dandy as it is. But it is the fundamental reason why I support some aspects of socialism/left wing politics such as government provisioning of healthcare, education, and some other things.

Welfare doesn't go to hard working people. It goes to unemployed people or people with lots of kids. Your scenario is an imaginary world that only exists in your head.

Because "welfare" instantly means lazy useless people mooching of the government; hoorey for cold cognitive bias.

Here ill help ya: Welfare: 2.Statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need.

i.e. More than just a paycheck for the lazy...

[Lootifer]

advertising, for instance- i wouldn't be able to read lots of things for free on the internet if everyone was smart enough to make conscious choices about the products they buy, rather than unconscious choices influenced by advertisements.

I wish the world could survive on pay-per-use revenue rather than advertising revenue

Marketing is one of the most exploitive industries in the world I reckon... Pity theres nothing really we can do about it now; so deeply ingrained in our culture.

[Phatscotty]

what do you propose to do about this fairness?

Nothing; its fine and dandy as it is. But it is the fundamental reason why I support some aspects of socialism/left wing politics such as government provisioning of healthcare, education, and some other things.

I too wish it were easier. The biggest problem is the amount of time and hard work it takes to become a Specialized Doctor, and then all the years after that you need to work to repay your student loans. The government shortchanges doctors with their reimbursement

You know my opinion is that the government provisioning is what is making healthcare less available, making education less about the children's learning skills and more about the teachers union benefits. We just tried to do it again with real estate, and the easy money blew the top off the market, and millions of people lost their homes and now are worse off because their credit is totes f'd, not to mention a broken spirit and of course the plan to make home ownership more available ended up making home ownership far less available than it was when we started the push for easy money.

The government provisioning always seems fine at first, but we always ignore the long term impact and even the expected consequences, not to mention unexpected. Our government ignores them SO badly, that it really does seem like they are intentionally trying to screw things up because they keep on resulting in the opposite of the intentions.

Remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions

[Upgrayedd]

what do you propose to do about this fairness?

Nothing; its fine and dandy as it is. But it is the fundamental reason why I support some aspects of socialism/left wing politics such as government provisioning of healthcare, education, and some other things.

Welfare doesn't go to hard working people. It goes to unemployed people or people with lots of kids. Your scenario is an imaginary world that only exists in your head.

Because "welfare" instantly means lazy useless people mooching of the government; hoorey for cold cognitive bias.

Here ill help ya: Welfare: 2.Statutory procedure or social effort designed to promote the basic physical and material well-being of people in need.

i.e. More than just a paycheck for the lazy...

In your scenario you described:

Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible

This type of person is not representative of people on welfare. That you try to insinuate he's one speaks either of your delusion or deceit. Which is it?

[Woodruff]

You know my opinion is that the government provisioning is what is making healthcare less available, making education less about the children's learning skills and more about the teachers union benefits.

As regards "education", this is ironically ignorant.

[Upgrayedd]

Teacher's get ridiculous benefits and practically all are incompetent. Not to mention that a higher percentage of teachers are pedophiles than even Catholic priests.

Oh yeah and education system is inefficient as hell. Students go through 12 years of grade school, yet most end up in no-skill jobs at Walmart. Think about it: 12 years of training kids to become burger flippers. It's just crazy, and all thanks to dumbing down for the sake of lowest common denominator.

[PLAYER57832]

Arguably the smart are pretty well subsidised too PS.

Joe senior analyst likely works just as hard as Joe after-hours cleaner in terms of energy expanded on their job.

Is that all that counts? how much energy you put in at work?

Ok to put it another way; Joe Cleaner is the best mother fucking cleaner in the world, he works hard, he cleans like a trooper, his dedication is infallible, etc etc. Same applies to Joe Senior Analyst.

However Joe Cleaner is not too good with numbers, and doesnt understand the subtlies of relationships; he wont make a good as manager or do any good in a different career. Effectively his genetics and upbringing (something he doesnt control) put him in his place in this world. A similar but different story can be told about the senior analyst - lets just assume he is at the peak of his ability as well.

The market rewards the senior analyst more than it rewards the cleaner. I have no problem with this; it undeniably provides the correct incentives for progression/growth. But it is also rewarding someone based on something out of their control - what makes the senior analyst any more worthy of reward than the cleaner in terms of things within their control?

Nothing, the market is just subsidising the senior analyst because he is smarter. Any welfare scheme is just a yin to this yang.

This is the fiction.

The truth is that while there are some housekeepers/janitors who fit that mold, there are quite a few who are perfectly good at numbers, writing, who may even have a degree, perhaps even in finance. If the person happens to be a woman, then chances are greater that this is the case. (yep, even today...).

One reason is the "mommy track". Women still either have kids or work at higher escehleon jobs... or at least managers want to see it that way, still. Some women are able to fight the system, but that is a very different kind of skill than those needed to actually do the job.

So, what you really wind up with is people who are connected, particularly male.. or not connected and almost certainly male (aside from a few token females to meet various requirements).

You also have a whole LOT of people who are not and likely never will be utilized to their full capacity. Maybe they did not have access to a decent education (it starts well before college), maybe they had to work too long of hours (even while in grade school, never mind high school, in many cases) to keep up with school.

In short, most of what you said is just fiction. You believe it because you wound up on the top side of it.

[PLAYER57832]

You know my opinion is that the government provisioning is what is making healthcare less available, making education less about the children's learning skills and more about the teachers union benefits.

And you will keep believing that, no matter how much evidence to the contrary you face.

[Lootifer]

This type of person is not representative of people on welfare. That you try to insinuate he's one speaks either of your delusion or deceit. Which is it?

Teacher's get ridiculous benefits and practically all are incompetent. Not to mention that a higher percentage of teachers are pedophiles than even Catholic priests.

Well played good sir, the bigger the bait the more fun when it gets nibbled?

Oh and in the rare case youre being serious, you've made the same error Player did, well done

[GBU56]

what do you propose to do about this fairness?

Nothing; its fine and dandy as it is. But it is the fundamental reason why I support some aspects of socialism/left wing politics such as government provisioning of healthcare, education, and some other things.

I too wish it were easier. The biggest problem is the amount of time and hard work it takes to become a Specialized Doctor, and then all the years after that you need to work to repay your student loans. The government shortchanges doctors with their reimbursement

You know my opinion is that the government provisioning is what is making healthcare less available, making education less about the children's learning skills and more about the teachers union benefits. We just tried to do it again with real estate, and the easy money blew the top off the market, and millions of people lost their homes and now are worse off because their credit is totes f'd, not to mention a broken spirit and of course the plan to make home ownership more available ended up making home ownership far less available than it was when we started the push for easy money.

The government provisioning always seems fine at first, but we always ignore the long term impact and even the expected consequences, not to mention unexpected. Our government ignores them SO badly, that it really does seem like they are intentionally trying to screw things up because they keep on resulting in the opposite of the intentions.

Remember, the road to hell is paved with good intentions

Let's remember this....your so-called smart people aka rich people and the so-called experts in the Wall Street Banking/Financial Institutions were the ones who destroyed the lives of millions of dumb people/lazy people aka ordinary people. All this due to a lack of proper government oversight aka socialism.

It was the greed of the smart people aka rich people who destroyed the economy of America and all the dumb countries who bought our securities from the so-called smart people.

I don't remember, but I'm sure you can tell us how it was the dumb/lazy/poor people, who actually ruined our present economy.