Important A place to argue about a college education.

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Lets not use phrases that carry heavy connotations of anti-Semitism.

I thought shekkles were a silver coin used in ancient times.

Average college debt is $26,000. That's a $300/month payment to pay back in ten years

depending on where you live and how much schooling you go through. I fully believe college would have wrung me out for a whole lot more.

The median American mortgage payment is $1500.

The reality is that a lot of American's money problems are due to living above their means and not using their money wisely; beyond that, the people legitimately struggling with student loan payments are a small minority.

except the standard of living has steadily gone down over the past 30 some odd years or so as the job market has dried up due to automation and inflation has skyrocketed constantly because our politicians seem to think that wealth comes from printing presses, I mean heck this is starting to affect even the wealthy upper class I mean look at the state of LA and San fransico. In the 80s these places were considered the jewel of America, now they look like a place you'd see in a devastated 3rd world country and the blight is starting to spread to other places.

Funny how we used to think that both globilization and Autmattion would lead to some kind of post-scarcity utopia and so far it seems to be leading towards somthing more akin to the hunger games.

Personally, I blame the idea that everyone needs to go to college. College should be for those who really need it, not for everyone.

my guess you can blame it on the unions who treat a degree as a kind of political status symbol rather than a certificate that you know how to do your job. Jobs that only took some trading courses or a basic associates now require a bachelors or even a masters, not because anything within the job needs it or, or that they pay even justifies it, but because the boards want to carry around this facade that everyone in their group is essentially the most highly elite and educated.

TL;DR the biggest problem plauging our society right now is the american dollar doesin't have near as much value as it used to.

 

[Aaron Fox]

Automation is overestimated as a job killer IMVHO.

It is increasingly is sadly enough.

Though, I'm not sure what sense it makes to say "Globalization and automation is killing the American middle class [a reasonable interpretation I think of what you said; correct me if I'm wrong], but Globalization isn't our enemy."

Think of it in the grand scale politics of things, if globalization -i.e. trade enforced by the US military at the end of a gun barrel- is to end today, we'll be waging wars for resources faster than you can say 'oh shit'. It'll be back to the 'bad old days' of empires and colonization, and that means we'll be having world wars regularly every decade or so at best... being a world of endless war at worst.

 

[DarthOne]

So basically, we need to burn the whole system to the ground and start over again.

 

[Aaron Fox]

So basically, we need to burn the whole system to the ground and start over again.

That isn't going to work, for it'll simply make things worse.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

So basically, we need to burn the whole system to the ground and start over again.

Then the top 1% become the next .01% and the whole cycle starts over again. Let's face it, unless your born into money, your stuck in the ratrace, chances are if you are part of that caste, you you wouldin't be here on some backwater forum on the internet.

 

[DarthOne]

Then the top 1% become the next .01% and the whole cycle starts over again. Let's face it, unless your born into money, your stuck in the ratrace, chances are if you are part of that caste, you you wouldin't be here on some backwater forum on the internet.

Damnit

 

[Aaron Fox]

Then the top 1% become the next .01% and the whole cycle starts over again. Let's face it, unless your born into money, your stuck in the ratrace, chances are if you are part of that caste, you you wouldin't be here on some backwater forum on the internet.

That is until you get hated enough, as Machiavelli said, you must avoid being hated at all costs. As jobs dry up, more people are around to stew and then you've got your pretext for revolution.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

That is until you get hated enough, as Machiavelli said, you must avoid being hated at all costs. As jobs dry up, more people are around to stew and then you've got your pretext for revolution.

but a revolution won't fix anything (At least not long term) again a new aristorcy will just hijack it and the cycle will start over again. External revolutins are a paradox, the only way they work is for human nature to change. If human nature changed, there would be no use for a revolutions.

 

[DarthOne]

but a revolution won't fix anything (At least not long term) again a new aristorcy will just hijack it and the cycle will start over again. External revolutins are a paradox, the only way they work is for human nature to change. If human nature changed, there would be no use for a revolutions.

And I don't trust anyone enough to let them try and change human nature. Both because they'd fuck it up and I do not trust them to not try and get ideological about it.

 

[Aaron Fox]

but a revolution won't fix anything (At least not long term) again a new aristorcy will just hijack it and the cycle will start over again. External revolutins are a paradox, the only way they work is for human nature to change. If human nature changed, there would be no use for a revolutions.

Here's the thing, it is either that or have their families die to starvation/disease/whatever. When faced with either having a chance to change that or die, they will take the chance to change it and die trying. People like Huey Long and UBI proponents know this, so to stop that possibility they tried to push UBIs to basically derail the process.

Problem is, a good majority of the rich have practically no enlightened self-interest these days and those that do don't have the levers of power.

That's how the Progressive movement in the late 19th/early 20th got so powerful; when the situation is basically 'three short hops to communist revolution' for the working class and the Progressives gave the enlightened self-interest rich people a way out that didn't involve revolution... they took it. That situation isn't there today.

 

[KilroywasNOTHere]

Here's the thing, it is either that or have their families die to starvation/disease/whatever. When faced with either having a chance to change that or die, they will take the chance to change it and die trying. People like Huey Long and UBI proponents know this, so to stop that possibility they tried to push UBIs to basically derail the process.

Problem is, a good majority of the rich have practically no enlightened self-interest these days and those that do don't have the levers of power.

That's how the Progressive movement in the late 19th/early 20th got so powerful; when the situation is basically 'three short hops to communist revolution' for the working class and the Progressives gave the enlightened self-interest rich people a way out that didn't involve revolution... they took it. That situation isn't there today.

So what do you do when the path of change leads to hell?

 

[Zachowon]

Then the top 1% become the next .01% and the whole cycle starts over again. Let's face it, unless your born into money, your stuck in the ratrace, chances are if you are part of that caste, you you wouldin't be here on some backwater forum on the internet.

Depends where you are and how willing you are to try and change that.
For instance, if one is willing to try, one can pay thier way through college with out going into debt.
There are people I work with that have gotten themselves up to that level. They were not given it.

 

[Aaron Fox]

So what do you do when the path of change leads to hell?

The only other choice is death and sorrow, so that is the sad situation.

 

[Lanmandragon]

It is increasingly is sadly enough.

Think of it in the grand scale politics of things, if globalization -i.e. trade enforced by the US military at the end of a gun barrel- is to end today, we'll be waging wars for resources faster than you can say 'oh shit'. It'll be back to the 'bad old days' of empires and colonization, and that means we'll be having world wars regularly every decade or so at best... being a world of endless war at worst.

I doubt it the current peace is the result of a nuclear gun to everyone's head. Not economic interngration which existed pre WW1.

 

[Aaron Fox]

I doubt it the current peace is the result of a nuclear gun to everyone's head. Not economic interngration which existed pre WW1.

Here's the thing, the pre-WW1 world was economically integrated along colonial lines outside of a few vital materials like nitrates. WW2 came about because in part due to resource needs being behind colonial powers that weren't going to share without screwing you over. Leaders of the US saw this as part of the problem and basically instituted a 'trade, or else' geopolitical policy, using various economic, political, and military means to ensure that trade flows.

Remember, historically international trade is a finicky thing and really only works if the Great Powers agree on trade due to certain vital/immensely desired goods (the Bronze Age is the poster boy of the former, as literally everyone in that era traded for tin, which is absolutely vital for bronze production; silk is the poster boy for the latter... but more often than not you'll have the former arising than the latter) OR a hegemon forces everyone to/subsidizes trade (Rome is something of a poster boy for this during its most powerful).

Historically, if you can't easily trade for resources, the only way to get resources is through conquest...

 

[Lanmandragon]

Here's the thing, the pre-WW1 world was economically integrated along colonial lines outside of a few vital materials like nitrates. WW2 came about because in part due to resource needs being behind colonial powers that weren't going to share without screwing you over. Leaders of the US saw this as part of the problem and basically instituted a 'trade, or else' geopolitical policy, using various economic, political, and military means to ensure that trade flows.

Remember, historically international trade is a finicky thing and really only works if the Great Powers agree on trade due to certain vital/immensely desired goods (the Bronze Age is the poster boy of the former, as literally everyone in that era traded for tin, which is absolutely vital for bronze production; silk is the poster boy for the latter... but more often than not you'll have the former arising than the latter) OR a hegemon forces everyone to/subsidizes trade (Rome is something of a poster boy for this during its most powerful).

Historically, if you can't easily trade for resources, the only way to get resources is through conquest...

Uh huh I'm aware of those arguments I think they are a rationalization. What keeps peace is "I'll fucking end you forever" aka nukes. Not worth an argument.

 

[Zachowon]

Nukes are the reason, not trade.
You want to end trade with me? I will nuke you. You want to fight me? I will nuke you. ETC ECT ETC

 

[Lanmandragon]

Nukes are the reason, not trade.
You want to end trade with me? I will nuke you. You want to fight me? I will nuke you. ETC ECT ETC

Exactly fear of death is what ensures peace not "I can get rich". Problem is people like fox assume people are rational. When they actually aren't at all.

 

[Lanmandragon]

Here's the thing, the pre-WW1 world was economically integrated along colonial lines outside of a few vital materials like nitrates. WW2 came about because in part due to resource needs being behind colonial powers that weren't going to share without screwing you over. Leaders of the US saw this as part of the problem and basically instituted a 'trade, or else' geopolitical policy, using various economic, political, and military means to ensure that trade flows.

Remember, historically international trade is a finicky thing and really only works if the Great Powers agree on trade due to certain vital/immensely desired goods (the Bronze Age is the poster boy of the former, as literally everyone in that era traded for tin, which is absolutely vital for bronze production; silk is the poster boy for the latter... but more often than not you'll have the former arising than the latter) OR a hegemon forces everyone to/subsidizes trade (Rome is something of a poster boy for this during its most powerful).

Historically, if you can't easily trade for resources, the only way to get resources is through conquest...

Present you argument instead if just liking posts then dude. What your doing now is just straight cowardice. Be a man son

 

[Zachowon]

Exactly fear of death is what ensures peace not "I can get rich". Problem is people like fox assume people are rational. When they actually aren't at all.

Guess why there is not a current war in Korea after the destruction of the building in that one city? Guess why nK hasn't started a war at all?