View Single Post
  #5042  
Old 12-02-2017, 06:26 AM
SamuelA is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,369
Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfpup View Post
That was not addressed to me, but there are some remarkable things going on here, so I feel sort of inclined to jump in. It's kind of odd that you were suddenly motivated to respond to an eight-month old post. Late-night board trolling, or what? But let's focus on this marvelous quote from that little turd of yours that you yourself saw fit to exhume for public display:
But it's not inherently unjust, per say. One tenant of capitalism is that you get what you are able to pay for and what you (or your family) has earned.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/...1&postcount=95
"Not inherently unjust per say", you say? You don't say! Here's what I say: your marginal illiteracy would be embarrassing even for someone who wasn't a pretentious blowhard. And I'm bemused by your claim about what "one tenant of capitalism" is supposed to be. Capitalism is not an apartment building, and it doesn't have tenants. Per say.
I always smirk at bullshit posters who try to insult me because I made a minor typo. You can't argue with me on the points, so you hammer me because I missed a comma or in this case typed the wrong version of the word.

I'm using tenet correctly in context. So which is it : I'm so illiterate I don't know the difference between a dude who lives in a rental property and a belief or principle, or I accidentally typed it wrong and spellcheck didn't warn me?

Maybe you don't like me. Maybe you think self replicating machinery isn't ever going to exist and it doesn't solve any problems. But your hypothesis : "ah ha! I caught him misspelling a word, therefore he's an ignorant blowhard" is wrong. I have concluded that other posters are ignorant blowhards, but it took a prolonged exposure and many, many flawed statements in a row...not just one letter wrong.

You need to turn down the gain on your neural weight updates, buddy

I'm not really interested in arguing further whether or not black people do poorly on tests because as you will no doubt point out if the discussion dragged on long enough, "black" is just a visible color and it's entirely possible for someone to be a half black, half relative of Einstein and roll the dice a certain way and end up with that skin color and a genius IQ.

As for the overall point you dragged in, what I was trying to say was that it's a way to do it to take the most successful (as measured by how much money they make/pay back to the government) citizens of a nation and focus your resources there. Kind of like how if you want the best football team in high school, you find the kids who are the most promising in various metrics of athletic ability in junior high and focus most of your coaching effort on them.

This is a way to do it. And I was trying to say that it's been a significant national policy used by the richest country in the world for centuries.

I wasn't actually trying to say it was fair or necessarily efficient. For one thing, there's a principle of marginal diminishing returns. If you have X million dollars to spend hiring more police officers, you might get a greater reduction in crime if you send them to the high crime neighborhood, where they are more likely to find and apprehend a criminal for each shift they are deployed, than a low crime neighborhood.