Comments by "LancesArmorStriking" (@LancesArmorStriking) on "Big Think" channel.

Guess we're all McFucked then huh
29
The middle class has existed for far longer than World War II. What you're referring to is America's superpower status. Yes, the middle class exploded. So did wealth across the board— being the only industrial power (that didn't lose 30 million working men to the Nazis) will do that for you. You're right about the outsourcing of labor to other countries, and automation. But what did you expect? Americans don't produce things at a high enough quality to warrant protectionist policies. Japan and Germany's cars, for instance, are built with lower manufacturing tolerances than anything in the U.S.. Why do you think more used cars are Hondas, Hyundais, Toyotas and Volkswagons? Because they're the only ones that last that long. A Ford or Chrysler will crap out on you after 200K miles. Face it. America is declining, and the 'liberals' (people in the tertiary sector— think services rather than goods) will take over the economy. Every other country has done it. The only exceptions have been grandfathered in with time on their side, but I when I think of France electricians and plumbers don't exactly come to mind.
6
Air Em Out 1) Just because the Middle East stoops low (not even getting into the fact that America's fascination with its oil culture is the reason they even feel the need to), doesn't mean we need to stoop lower. I thought being American was about steadfast values? 2) Yes. Europe, get this, is also 2,000 years old. Of course it's going to cause more damage. I don't think it unreasonable to believe that, given enough power, any other country would do the same. I don't think I need to mention Japan's, Russia's, or China's war crimes to prove that to you. 3) You're deflecting. We can't go back and correct history, but we can learn from it. I can understand getting back at an oppressor, but copying the brutalities of the nations your founders swore off? Disgraceful.
4
@MizuSky This isn't really a thoughtful engagement with the problem at hand. Ultimately those exact same things you described, female predators ALSO do. But there isn't a social stigma around teaching for them, and people trust women not to have bad intentions. Despite this, there are countless articles (usually from Florida because of lax press laws) detailing how female teachers get close to a male student and abuse them. Some articles have the nerve to call it "having sex" instead of "sexual abuse". They usually get way lighter sentences, if at all (in some cases). I think it's worth asking why that is.
4
Proof?
4
complex2034 Update from the future: they're getting really brazen with the changes now. Instead of a smaller thumbnail with a title, YouTube on smartphones has changed the thumbnails to take up the screen. It's a minor change, but it mimics a slot machine so closely it's almost sad.
3
der Schäfer Out of (genuine, I swear) curiosity, which issues do leftists shout 'racism' at when that isn't the case? Or, which issues do leftists fear, while conservatives see clearly?
3
No, not completely. While most of the natives died out due to Spanish diseases, the US still put a depressingly large amount of effort into killing off the rest of the native population. The Trail of Tears comes to mind, but if you'd like more examples or a link, I'd be happy to follow up. Libertarianism is statistically improbable, to be extremely generous. The amount of people, say, using a road could never supply enough money to keep its entirety in proper shape, and the same goes for most public services. Of course, the higher the population, the more feasible that becomes, but portions of a good or service continually under partial construction or expansion become slow and self-depleting in the long-term. This becomes especially problematic in rural areas. By its very (individualist) nature, it is one of the least efficient forms of societal organization. Hence, it has never naturally come to fruition, and never will. Also, given the human tendency for self-interest, why would you entrust your roads, electricity, or anything else to a corporation? They're prone to monopolization, and unlike a politician, you can't vote them out of their job (and importantly, income). Where do you get such a strong trust for for-profit entities?
3
That's great, but where do you draw the line? Somebody with your attitude would have taken the same approach during the Great Depression- does that mean that it's the best path to take? Being aware of the factors outside of your control- and yeah, complaining about them- is the way societies move forward. Moral character and grit are very important, but a balance needs to be met. He who doesn't strive for more never gets more. There are plenty of people from your generation who feel miserable because they worked their ass off at a 9-to-5 for 40 years, never made waves, followed all the instructions and never once got promoted. Happens way too often in the Rust Belt. If something really is beyond your will to succeed, acknowledge that and work against it! I highly recommend you read the Powell Memo, authored by Lewis F. Powell Jr. in 1971. It's very enlightening, and may give you some insight into why people hold certain views and beliefs about the economy today. It should also make you notice little things that sneak past your attention every day.
3
@chrisose Does a 5% holdout of the labor market 100 years from now really matter? Mexicans aren't the threat- robots are, and when companies decide they're better to invest than human workers, because they're infinitely cheaper, you'll be fucked.
3
This depends on what you consider Leftism. Socially and economically, Leftist values have made their way into nearly every country on Earth. Equal rights for human beings? Leftists fought for those. Healthcare and education as a human right, and not a product? Leftist idea in current-day America. Voting rights for black people? I think you know the answer. The problem is that, when these values become universalized, Rightists take them for granted and try to make their origin universal as well, when (Civil Rights for instance) they clearly weren't. Leftism does have an answer to Capitalism, it is being formulated every day, and opposed every step of the way.
2
You're not going to accomplish anything that way. Hedging your bets on the idea that the other side will realize how wrong they are compared to us, the good guys ...is a good way to destroy a society's fabric. Even neo-Nazis have feelings, and they're usually not rooted in actual hatred, but in traumatic experiences, or lessons passed down over hundreds of years, that fall apart under scrutiny. All or nothing, my ass. Swallow your pride.
2
@hermes0623 Fuck off. You wanna tell me that every single WWII veteran graduated with a degree that could afford him a house and a car? The government literally gave them handouts just because they served. Compare that to now, Vietnam and Afghan vets are in the streets with untreated mental problems from being shelled for years. The WWII vets had the same issues, but they could hide out in their free houses. Now that they're old and afraid of dying, all they do is criticize people whose youth they're jealous of and whose struggle they ironically dismiss while having gone through struggle themselves. Two-faced wrinkly pieces of shit.
2
@jaieet You wanna lift with your back and throw it out? Be my guest tough guy. Army vets couldn't handle Amazon's ridiculous schedule, so if you think destroying your body is something you can put on your resume, go out there and do it! Also, trade schools still cost money, and not everyone can weld. We need higher education. And "sucking it up" won't get you an engineering job that millions of other people are vying for. Again, if you think flipping burgers is a good alternative, then I would have to think you just don't want college to exist at all
2
@Morwenna1220 No, not really. At the time of NATO General Secretary de Hoop Schefer announced that both Georgia and Ukraine "would become a part of NATO", interest in Ukraine for membership was barely in double digits. If it were held to a vote, instead of the ruling party deciding the interests of the entire country, and the US taking advantage of that fact, then the vote would fail. So I'm not really sure what you mean by "would never have sought to join nato". That sounds like empty assurances to me. It is not the first time the West has done that, either. Most of their current international influence was rooted in them not being beneath lying, cheating, stealing, and colonizing. "As usual Russia creates its own problems" If Europe genuinely attempted to integrate Russia into Europe, instead of exploiting its economic and political weakness immediately after the fall of the USSR, it would not as paranoid ans hostile as it is today. Russia did not create this problem, the West did. Every Russian stateman's (Tsar, Emperor, or Premier's) worst fears were confirmed when Russia fell under Western influence- and the country was absolutely ruined for over a decade as a result. The economic policies and political reforms that the West instructed Russian leadership to do, seemingly were designed to keep it destitute. You could argue "well Russian leaders made that choice", but you would also need to concede that the West has never had Russia's best interests at heart, and that when the formalities fall away, they really deep down just wanted to plunder our natural resources and human talent, which they did. I have seen people unironically tell me that it was Russia's fault to be so naïve as to think the West would honor any agreements or good wishes between us. And you wonder why it is aggressive. The oldest Russian motto was re-affirmed in 1991: “I have no way to defend my borders but to extend them.” Security against whom? Well, now we have our answer.
2
GoatzAreEpic Maokai Hey. I know I'm a year late here, but I'm dealing with the same problem. I've been addicted (unable to cut back) on watching YouTube for about 8 years now. I've watched the site grow and change, from its earliest days. Tdlr is watch in moderation. Complex answer is this: Ever think back to the way YouTube was when your first used it? When I did, in 2008, there wasn't a Trending Tab. There were no ads and clickbait wasn't a thing (until the "RE:" video girls). Vevo wasn't a thing, and people weren't begging for likes and notification bells and Patreon. Most importantly, two things: People made things because they had a passion for it, and the sidebar wasn't broken. Currently, everything seems like it's for money. I can't go a day without seeing a sponsored video, or clickbait title for views. Back then, people spent months or years just making things because why the fuck not lol (Lazer collection, YouTube Poop videos, even FRED)? Even better, when you scrolled down, the other videos weren't just from the same channel, or popular youtubers, or TV shows. It was so much easier to find cool content then. That's what I think I miss the most. So I'd recommend you cut back— don't completely stop, because YouTube still has a lot of amazing new creators, but remember what YouTube has done to try and keep your attention— they're desperate for it. Don't give them the satisfaction, and take full advantage of what YouTube has to offer instead. Good luck!
1
The world is already overpopulated as it is, encouraging the process of more relationships could cause even more overpopulation, It won't help anyone.
1
@GreyWolfLeaderTW ..what?
1
This wasn't helpful at all. It's just another video that's got everyone itching to start a YouTube fight. Also, he never actually answered the question of, "How to squash a paranormal claim." He's just giving examples.
1
Funny that old people assume the area of study for all young people is something they completely don't understand. Not saying anyone should major in women's studies, but what percentage of people, statistically, do you think actually graduate with that major? And how many do you think are just engineers or business majors in a city with no opportunities or an oversaturated market? I hope you don't think we're all completely unaware- most of us know to apply for a degree that can, you know, allow us not to starve. What's wrong with us? Are we entitled?
1
truthseekr420 j We're not talking about a country in the sense of a nation state. England's Empire fell, does that mean that England no longer exists? No, it just plays a smaller role on the world stage. That is what will happen to America as well— in fact, it has been happening for a long time. I don't think anyone can argue that we have more power today than we did in the 1950's, as the world's only superpower (that wasn't destroyed by war). To that token, Russia kept most of its empire intact, even after the fall of the U.S.S.R.. It's still a massive country governed by a people living mostly in a small pocket of that territory. That's what this video refers to. Influence, not people.
1
The Noah's Ark thing was actually just meant to bring tourism... but it's America's fault that its citizens don't understand basic science, and that jihad as it's used today even exists. Sorry.
1
@Morwenna1220 "And that fear motivated them to conquer, to subjugate and generally to wage war when they had overwhelming numbers and power" How does this make them any different than the West? France still has a stranglehold on West Africa's economy, UK still has colonies and is trying to dissuade Scotland from leaving, US coups a democratic government for breakfast.... yet nobody tries to punish them. Nobody, including you, who claims to care really does, or I would see them in the comments calling Bush a "madman" or "bully" or whatever other silly armchair psychology they come up with. You seem to forget that Russia feels a need to expand... because they were, up until 1945, constantly being attacked! You act like they just decided to wage war for fun one day. Europe was playing the exact same game, don't pretend like Russia is any different. Repeatedly and with great urgency Again, no. Italy and Greece's elections were massively rigged to keep their Communist parties from genuinely participating. Ukraine, as I mentioned, had no interest in joining even in 2008. Only its temporary administration. "Also Russias economic weakness is their own fault" Sounds like you don't know much about the 1990s in Russia. It was not Russia's fault. Russians did not finance Yeltsin's campaign with a $10Billion loan from the IMF. Russians did not launder their own money to London and New York. Russians (even Russian government) did not all want to privatize everything and drain the government of any tax income. It wasn't Russians who rigged the elections in Chechnya. This was all done because of Bush and Clinton. He was elected, but once US presidents realized how much of a spineless drunk he was, they rigged Russia's elections in 1996 and pushed him to privatize everything. "they could have done what China did " They could have, there were many in Russian government who wanted to, but the US economists convinced Yeltsin otherwise. Besides, for that to happen, the USSR would need to still exist. Gorbachev should have started with economic reforms, then political reforms, slowly. "In stead of fooling yourself by thinking they were somehow forced by it" They aren't forced. But, like Ukraine, the US waits for an opportune moment when the government wants to join (regardless of what the people think) and then they legally tie them in.
1
@robertmoore8821 In a few months, they will.
1
@robertmoore8821 I don't blame them, but again, if you look to Russia's biggest changes, that make it more aggressive/violent... it's almost always an outside power. Prior to the Mongol invasion, Rus wasn't expansionist, not anymore than other European powers. But after 300 years of occupation, the Russian psyche is permanently scarred. We simply don't trust outsiders anymore. So why the aggression towards Europe? Because they historically have tried to strangle Russia and diminish its power as a state, not considering that it has no access to the ocean, no way to trade. The Iron Curtain is ironic, since it was Germany who sent Lenin to Russia, specifically to destabilize and weaken Russia in WWI. The only power who ever really tried to work with Russia was France (long after the 1812 invasion), by letting it control Constantinople to trade with Europe and basically give it no further reason to expand. But then the Revolution happened
1
I think the guy means in general. So many people will have degree that getting one won't guarantee you shit (whereas it did for our parents and grandparents). How did you miss the whole damn point?
1
@SteashEdits It's not economically sustainable or viable at a large scale. Moving industry faster than people can adapt- or afford- will crash it. From a personal view, I'm sure work is nice, but you'll soon find that the abstract "pleasure" or your career gets slapped by economics. Someone will do your job for less, so you need to keep investing in college to earn better positions. See the conundrum?
1
@zekehatcher2196 Actually no, communism is the opposite. The apartments are depressing, but nobody is homeless. It's one of the few benefits, the ideological foundation of the Communist country obliges the leaders to treat such issues seriously or risk their position.
1
@npc29182 ?? Yes they are. Have you not read any article about a middle school teacher "making out with" their students? It sadly happens so often it's a trope at this point. We just don't care about it because "women smol bean"
1
True, myths aren't very good to teach. but your assumption that religion, the belief in a supernatural being, is a bad one to make. Whether or not you want to believe in God, Jesus historically existed, was documented by scholars living at the time, and did die on the cross. Now, when it comes to the belief in God, morals ARE very important. If God doesn't exist, what you see is what you get, there is nothing better then what you end up with. Is that something we should be teaching children?
1
Pollute what children are taught in the U.S.? Evolution is polluting children, not creationism. You see, according to an atheist, there is no God, and no consequences for actions, so there is no overall purpose to life other than to partake in activities we have created for ourselves while we are alive. Life is meaningless if you don't believe in an eternity of anything, (doesn't even have to be Heaven.)
1
Those membership fees you love to put in quotes so much, aren't motivated by greed, you know. Even if they do lead to "extortion" (which is more common in the private sector, by the way), taxes are a necessity of living in a country, because pay-to-play models simply aren't efficient enough for anything substantial to function. In addition, monopolization (which just so happens to coincide with a decline in service quality) is a pervasive problem among companies. American electricity companies and lightbulb manufacturers in particular (see: Phoebus Cartel) have bad reputations. While you can vote with your wallet with companies, it becomes useless when you need that service (hiked prices for Epipens, Martin Shkreli, government had to step in) or when no one can compete with you (Andrew Carnegie, JP Morgan). Politicians can be even more greedy and corrupt, but (reminder) they're lobbied by private interests, and at least Senators can be directly kicked out of office by their constituents. The State is a luxury whose services you're so used to, you don't even notice or appreciate them.
1
Sorry to butt in again, but that's ridiculous. It's an outright lie. You think that the natural state of humanity is the nuclear household? I guess that's expected from a Libertarian. Contrary to your outlandish beliefs, humans are pack animals (ever wonder why we're such social creatures?), and relied on groups to survive, prioritizing their collective survival over individual interests for thousands of years before they had the luxury of a state to allow them enough time to delude themselves and mythologize their own history. I'll also take a crack at your books, but they don't exactly look dry enough to be impartial, so I (and suggest you should) tread with caution.
1