It shouldn't be government's responsibility to provide these hypothetical boxes or crates. Maybe their job could be to remove the fence, but that's another subject
I'm a 6'10" dude. I had to spend extra to buy a big truck because I dont fit in cars which means I spend extra on gas I don't fit through a lot of doors tables and chairs are always too small shoes and clothes cost way more and don't have many options my metabolism is higher and being this tall I eat and drink more than average Society should pay me to offset these costs of me being born tall
@@GodisgudAQW I would never expect to actually be compensated in any way but my height literally effects everything I do everyday. Cups are really annoying. I'm like a 1600 British person sipping from a tiny tea cup even though I'm using a mug Want a new pair of shoes? Better order them online cause no where within 400 miles has size 15. Want to ride a bike for exercise? You can't only two wheeled thing you'll fit on is a 2000cc dirt bike with a lift kit.
Tom Sowell said that children that grow up in the same house with the same parents don't have the same outcomes as each other. Expecting equity in that situation is unreasonable.
I know and I look at my family - there is no way to make sure we all have the same outcomes and we are a very small group .. take hundreds or thousands of students - not possible without major fuckery
Thats why what we should strive for is equal oppertunity. Then the road to success is only influenced by INDIVIDUAL effort. Equity is madness as it suggests every lazy deadbeat get's the same reward as the guy putting in extra hours and effort. Systems like affirmative action for example are inequality because its cheated free passes, instead of lifting everyone on even grounds early on so they get the same oppertunities down the line. Then the one working hardest wins.
I am the first of 6 children raised all in the same house by the same parents, we all follow different paths, got different jobs, some of us had children, some of us didn't, some of us have our own house, some of us don't, we are all from the same family and we We help each other as we can, trying to make ourselves equal would only make us envious and petty, because we would be aware of what others have to take it away and in turn we would be aware of hiding what we have for fear that they would take it away from us.
Civilization is founded on equity. From the start Strong people protected the weak and farmers fed the elderly, the young, the artisans, etc, and everyone was equitably not dead of violence, starvation or exposure. When people aquired more knowledge and rid themselves of more superstitions and magical thinking, they pushed for EQUITY again. Nno longer willing to allow tyrannical kings and priests to dominate their lives and hoard all the wealth produced by the whole society, they otherthrew them. Often violently. Then they founded Democratic forms of government. Because we humans thought Equity would be a good thing. Society has grown more equitable over the centuries.
Yes, because your job has no social status. Why do you think people spend €5000 on a coat, is it because that coat is just that much better or may it be that they are trading less valuable money for higher valued social status?
That face when you realize at a subconscious level you're aware that your job either leads to a specific degree of power, recognition, and social status or lack thereof.
@Kaleb Swager BS. A 70% MARGINAL tax rate does nothing to discourage effort. It will encourage people to find loopholes and to cheat, but not to work less hard. The amount you earn being higher than your neighbor is the score card in the game of life many of the rich are most concerned about. Also the lifestyle of the super rich won't be affected as they have more money than they can spend anyway. On the flip side if the poor had more of the basics guaranteed by the state they could invest in their own future and the state could afford to help them. Also the poor demanding more products would create jobs taking more poor people out of poverty. Having power concentrated in a few families is also not very democratic.
daddyrichten Deregulations on environmental protection, science denial, systematic racism and tax breaks for the wealthy don't make you sick? You were republican all along, or just a lying douchebag. Actually, no difference between the two
Yo mad respect to Tim, I don’t agree with everything he has said but dam is he open to explaining his views, hearing others and is open to changing his mind.
I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS ...mate did you even read my comment I didn’t mention what his political stand point is who are you quoting? Also being open minded is something that can be and is practiced by both sides of the political spectrum, what makes someone an extremist is when they don’t listen to the other sides arguments (in my opinion at least) and just dismiss them, that applies to both sides. I think that is why (in my experience) most open minded people are more centrist, not blindly agreeing with one side or the other. Anyway that’s my two cents.
Surviving 7 this comment doesn’t get enough praise. This is how everyday life should work, you don’t have to agree with everyone but if everyone just listened to each others opinions and put the effort in trying to understand them, we’d be far better off as humans. Maybe there’s a place out there somewhere where this happens.
I would argue Shapiro does much better research. For example Tim Pool said poverty causes crime, actually differences in wealth cause the vast majority of crime. When Tim was arguing for progressive tax he made the assumption that reinvesting wealth exponential increases wealth, we see this with companies but not as much with individuals who will constantly drop in and out of those high tax brackets as investments succeed or fail and inflation devalues what they are investing. He certainly has a lot of experience to talk from but not the same level of statistical facts.
@@viperstriker4728 Yeah I like both of them honestly, but it does seem like Ben does a ridiculous amount of research and is ready to swing his katana of knowledge at you whenever he pleases lol...what a nightmare it would be to debate him
@@viperstriker4728 Ben is very deceptive with his arguments, on the surface, it's hard to disprove immediately but once you take a little time to look into his arguments, many of them fall apart. Plus at times he is so hypocritical. He has been hypocritical on so many occasions. On race and religion especially
@@Adays700 Well you have done a great job laying out your thesis but seem to have forgotten that there is a second part needed for a good argument...supporting facts. Usually I would give counter points to your sources/examples but since you didn't give any all I can say is I have looked into his arguments and they rarely fall apart. I have seen many claim he is hypocritical and so far they all come down to not taking the time to understand his point before making accusations, or using statements from 8 years ago that he no longer would say.
"Unwilling to work" barely changes whether you have social welfare or not. People who dont want to work turn to crime and cost society in indirect ways. Its not as clear cut as some people think.
Not exactly equivalent to a 0.1% billionaire giving a million dollars to invest in an impoverished community through taxes but I get what you're trying to communicate lol
I deal with my stressful job because I get paid well, not because of a social status. If I could make 100K+ a year cleaning toilets, I'd be the happiest janitor in the world.
No you wouldn't. I make nearly that, being a janitor and it's still awful. It means 70 hour work weeks and no days off, no sick days and no benifits unless I pay into them myself.
I went to Modesto Junior College. The janitor had a PhD. When he found out how much the janitor made, he quit his professor position. He also said that having keys to every office, and learning what went on after hours, he had unlimited job security.
"If there is not equality of outcomes among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, why should equality of outcomes be expected-or assumed-when conditions are not nearly so comparable?" Thomas Sowell
@@joshdorrance8821 I'm making my way through his books on economics. That's all I've had time for so far. Right now I'm reading Basic Economics. It is eye opening and completely relevant. And it will change your viewpoint on free market capitalism (even if, and perhaps especially if, you are already for it). In a good way. Happy reading!
As a conservative, I don't completely agree with everything Tim is saying here. But I very much appreciate him making such reasoned, unemotional arguments. If we were all able to talk (and LISTEN) to each other like this, the world would be a better place.
Nick Miller 👍 I agree, what makes Tim different is he is actually discussing POLICY, not identity. Which is the only thing most leftists can discuss nowadays.
@@YourfriendTruth The only thing I will say as a guy on the left is that both parties get stuck in traps where they talk about identity. I firmly believe in a mutual, calm debate about policy issues and the pros and cons, but what you will find is that both the republican and the democratic party are not always willing to listen. The republican party often generalizes all democrats as softies and socialists and the democratic party at extremes will act conceited and not listen to some genuine gripes about conduct from the republicans. I think the way to fix these issues is to come together as people and really take a more active part in government, research all candidates, and never vote down ballot for the sake of party loyalty. Policy over politics is what I preach and if there is a republican that clearly shows integrity and values that I can compromise with, I will vote for them.
@JamesMacPherson some people are conservative, some people are liberal, and some people are leftist. None of them are perfect but you can't force everyone to be a leftist.
Okay many issues are one sided. Republicans have to admit the immoral man that is Trump. Grab them by the pussy isn't something a president should say. Fighting a virus is more important than making money. Every social policy made to help people that are economically or medically stratified is not going to lead to communism. You guys have to be honest and want to solve problems and not just be in charge so you can be in charge. Conservative policy wrecked the economy in 2008. You want to talk policy why should we use less regulations which created a housing bubble and an investment market bubble that were both blown up by greed and popped resulted in average Americans losing housing, saving and jobs while the wealthy got a bail out and no jail time.
Joe Mama you haven't said why you think that. Calling someone braindead doesn't make you right... The reason people work is to get money. If the foundation of a system is good faith - it doesn't work. Especially when the motivator isn't there. It's not about self-respect, it's about people working their ass off for no fucking reason.
Phil Thicc sorry bro but money just represents resources. It’s not just “worthless paper” if it can reliably be traded for valuable resources. God damn troglodyte
@@rafaelandreaslisberg4308 Goodle says "the quality of being fair and impartial." But then you have to define fair. Fair is extremely subjective. The picture implies fair means equality of outcome. This is straight from socialist doctrine "to each according to their needs". We all know how well that works. *cough*Venezuela*cough*
There's more than enough boxes for everyone, at least in 1st world countries. Feeding and clothing everyone is seriously not something that's beyond our resources if that's what we wanted to do. It's funny how whenever the US needs to come up with extra military spending to enrich the defense contractors pockets, they can magically make hundreds of billions appear, but whenever it's a program that helps poor or middle-class they look dumbfounded and act like it's impossible to pay for it.
Alex alexander you know fucking nothing you child. Only a moron would think “oh yeah we should throw more money in welfare at poor people cuz it’s unfair” it’s not fucking unfair. People who earned money deserve to fucking have it. You don’t get to just have money handed to you just because you earn less or can’t fucking get a job. That is fucking communism and everyone who has tried that has failed. Grow up and quit smelling the roses moron!!! People ain’t nice!!!!
Ethical moral living. This is what our country needs. One person at a time... treat others as you would want to be treated. Encourage growth.. spiritual, mental growth in each other. Competition is good. Excellence is the result. Celebrate other people’s victories. Their victories are our victories because it’s exciting to see human potential expand. May God help us ALL!
It's rare to see a lefty who even understands the difference between equity and equality, but it's even more rare to see one who admits they do instead of lying and conflating them as a form of chicanery.
Pay equity would make the best and brightest leave the country since their talent would get them nowhere. That way innovation and progress would disappear. The standard of living would decrease. For instance, my mother saw a washing machine for the first in her life in 1992 when we emigrated to Germany. That’s ridiculous considering how people lived in Europe and America! Since people would be paid regardless of what they do, their work ethic would plummet. Overall, pay equity would reduce America to a developing country. It’s an unbelievably stupid idea. For centuries, people came to America in search for opportunities and some of your politicians try to put an end to it, it seems.
@@AnnetteWarren well a dishwasher maybe. Not a washing machine for sure. Everybody who lived in cities had a washing machines for clothing. Unlike in USA, where if you are renting, you cannot own one. Can't say washing machines were fancy though. Especially in 1992 such a bs Anete.
Elon Musk knows as well as I do. You're paid what your employer has decided will make you take the job and keep you relatively happy. That's why Tesla employees are $20 an hour despite not solving any problems. That's the amount to get them to take the job.
Just trie to stop the cleaner/bean man (?) working 15 days .... And now stop elon Musk working 15 days... You will see the diiference who is important.
So if I'm working for a roofing company everyday working in extreme heat or cold and coming home from head to toe drenched in sweat and tar. What is the incentive for me to continue working there if I could go make the same at Walmart being a cashier?
Not just being a cashier. Greeters get paid 15.00 an hour here in seattle. The real question is why dont you strive for something better. Gain an education in your trade and become a master.
False. It depends who you are and what you want in life. If you are a scientist, it will be much more important to you to reach scientific breakthroughs like those of other famous scientists such as Einstein, Bohr, Marie Curie etc. Plus, once you get a certain amount of money, diminishing returns start kicking in.
@@danavram8437 even if you only care about your scientific discoveries and measure your social status by the number of quotations you get or hitting the jackpot with the Nobel Prize, earning large amounts of money means you'll work independently from any institution. Meaning you'll be free from political pressure.
Most people feel that way about most jobs, but most people that start a business don't do it for the money, atleast not the first time. Doctors, lawyers, dentists, scientists and teachers mostly don't do it for the money either. The ones that does it for the money usually don't make it, of finds out you can earn the same in ways that doesn't force you to work 60 hours a week. having said that, i don't believe in the model as some jobs straight up always sucks, like being a CEO, who mostly gets paid for taking heat for shit people below him do. So for jobs like that you would have to use the Cuban model of drawing you profession from a hat which doesn't get the best people the job.
I don't think so. Not when you're already a millionair, going for your hundred million or 500 millions or going for your first billion. Then it's not about the money anymore, it's about the social status that the money brings.
Equality is an Olympic race where everyone starts on the same starting line. The winner is the one who reaches the finish line first, the loser is the one who reaches the finish line last, and then you have everyone in-between. Equity is an Olympic race where everyone starts on different starting lines so that we all reach the finish line at the same moment. Those who believe in Equity would say this makes everyone a winner. Of course, in reality, it makes everyone a loser - and it has the exact same effect on society as it does on an Olympic race.
Except with equality not everyone starts on that same line how are you going to say that someone who is rich and born into a rich family has the exact same chances and benefits as someone who is born into homelessness
@@toast4531 The homeless guy can work at McDonald's, go to trade school, start his own business. The rich guy can drop out of school, become a druggie, gamble away his inheritance. Now they've traded places...stop making excuses you parasite...
@@EroticOnion23 what? First of all it would be very hard for that homeless man to find a job because a lot of people aren't going to hire someone who smells bad because he can't exactly afford a shower and just because they can switch places still doesn't mean they started on the same line because that kid could succeed in life a lot more easily then that homeless person if they do it right and if they don't have a disability. which brings me to another point which is disabilities me and someone who has a disability don't necessarily start on the same line we can both succeed but for the person with the disability it can be alot harder because they face discrimination and certain jobs won't be an option due to that disability
Yeah, but there are better ways to fight corruption other than a policy that would also mean that if people find and elect someone that's actually competent then they can't stay in office. Limiting terms would only limit the amount of time each person has to be corrupt before someone else gets elected and could simply take over and be even more corrupt. Lobbyists are much more deserving of getting the boot, or at least reigning in.
I’m a right-leaning libertarian, and I happen to think that Tim Pool is a very sensible and reasonable individual. While I disagree with many of the points he brings up and his solutions, he seems genuine and not a partisan hack.
I love how every criticism of capitalism starts with "these rich people are lobbying/paying off the government". Thats the point THATS NOT CAPITALISM, if government had no power, then rich people couldnt pay off government to enforce/create their monopolies.
@@Qrzychu92 ah see, but all the funding they get outside of that isn't really "open" ...may i direct your attention to the Clinton Foundation: "oh look you arent really giving *me* money...just *my* foundation"
@@Ali-bd6kb Like most other first world countries. Anyone can give up to a certain amount, and they have laws to stop corporations from being able to give huge amounts to politicians. That just causes a lot of politicians to go corrupt on both sides of the aisle. It almost seems like the US is so politically divisive, some just support this out of spite. I'd hope all Americans would get pissed off, and start to hold ALL politicians who are for this accountable... Don't you want your politicians to represent the entire populous first and foremost?
@@justtrollinalong977 but what does that foundation do? Still, in US everybody knows and it is even said out loud on TV, that politicians are funded by X and Y
We've embraced victimhood. Its "empowering" to be a victim. Because when you are a victim, you don't have to hold YOURSELF accountable for your situation in life. You can blame your oppressor. Even if your oppressor is 100% imaginary.
Allen Hill "The Working Poor" by David Shipler is a good book that contrasts the American Myth (where anyone can make it if they work hard enough) vs the Anti-American myth (institutions limiting economic mobility). Generally it's a mix of both society creating a environment where it's a lot more difficult for some groups to move up when compared to better off groups, but the individual still can shape their own destiny with a combination of luck and hard work. But we still need better government programs to help the employed but still poor people. It's a very insightful read.
I work with thousands of coworkers....men and women....the women simply do not take the overtime (extra hours at 1.5x pay) nearly as much as men, it’s not even close...so many dudes working 12-16 hour double shifts, the women simply don’t do it!! NOT CLOSE AT ALL....we are all offered the same amount hours.
but it's not, lol that's what's broken about the meritocracy mindset, more often than not it's the guys that do less work because they spend more time kissing the ass and "befriending" the boss. Hard workers are NOT appreciated in our society, why do you think the richest Americans are dumbasses when you actually sit them down and talk to them about complex subjects? It's because they are, they're not geniuses and they sure as hell aren't hard working, not to the extent that they get paid. Elon Musk makes more money than you do in a year every night in his sleep, how is that appreciating hard work and dedication? The only hard work he did was suck up somebody else's success, then hire somebody to manage his money so he could awkwardly date girls that were only interested in his money while sleeping in a car factory so he could pretend he was working hard.
@@SherrifOfNottingham u don't understand how equity and money work that y u r giving this type of reasons. the rich understand wealth creation and it better if people learn and adopt and improvise.
@@samuelmarndi I understand wealth creation just fine, a huge part of it is pretending that it's not as easy as it actually is. Like the guy that was eating cat food to save money... when a can of meat made for humans was cheaper. But if you want to believe that hard work is actually valued, go for it, I just figured I'd stop and save you the trip. Hard workers are exploited and left behind since the person in charge of your promotion is more often than not the next step up in the ladder so they're incentivized to not promote hard workers, they need somebody that will stagnate in their position because they're lazy so your boss doesn't think they need a promotion before you move out of the way. I ain't gonna change your mind, and that's fine, but once you understand how the world actually works you'll realize that Warren Buffet paying a .1% tax rate while you're forking over 12-22% is not a good thing.
Joe was right on the money at around 2:15. I am from Southern West Virginia which is a predominately white area and it is one of the poorest places in the country.
@Mookie Über Alles because most of them would rather work than get on welfare. They don't want handouts, just job opportunities. If anything, them being against government assistance should confirm that they don't have a double standard about it.
@Mookie Über Alles Of course there are more white people enrolled in welfare programs, white folks make up 67% of the entire population. The question ought not be who receives assistance but does assistance work to help that person become more stable and have less need for assistance and if not why.
@Mookie Über Alles Know your history or be doomed to repeat it, don't tell people to stop thinking about one of the most important aspects of pushing mankind forward, studying history.
@Mookie Über Alles First of all I wasn't even talking about the holocaust. And in my opinion Germany is one of the most likely to have another holocaust.
I respect Pool’s ability to explain his argument, and I respect him not being a radical leftist. These days, if you don’t bend the knee to the radical left, you are cancelled by MSM. That is because their policies are so outlandish that they can’t hold up in a debate, so they have to cancel anyone who would debate them. Pool is wrong about a few things though, especially how poverty leads to crime. Jordan Peterson has discussed how it’s relative poverty that leads to crime. He also goes into way more detail than Pool did on this issue.
how do you know he's not talking about that? Poverty encompasses could be referred to as general term poverty. I agree with Jordan Peterson but that doesn't mean that absolute poverty doesn't lead to some, somewhat minimal, level of crime.
@Xerxes Medes That was over 70 years ago, also you're ignoring that this was only something in some southern states, and completely absent in the north. also, if a black owned a business he could also legally demand whites to be seated in a different place / less desired place
you should focus on the equality of opportunity. Equality of outcome is not a guarantee and shouldn’t ever be guaranteed. you have to work for The outcome. It’s not free. Nothing is.
You are wrong. Plenty of things are/were free. How much free land was given to White American settlers? Ever heard of the “Sooners?” Imagine what the financial benefit of 24/7 “free.” labor through slavery. Imagine being free to pursue financial gain without fear of that being taken at anytime by racist mobs.
Yeah. This clip made it sound oddly represented... I feel like nobody holds the actual position he was attacking, even though he tried to make it seem so. My concern is that skilled jobs often have a high barrier to entry, so most people in those jobs had better opportunity. Personally this is one reason I think we need free college in this country.
@@libertyprime9307 Based of the limited sample size of my own observations, people work harder in collage when they pay for it because there is something to lose of they fail. Also college is ridiculously over priced compared to technical colleges that can do the same thing for the first 2 years of college, how is free college going to stop these prices from increasing even further, certainly hasn't cause grade schools to spend more efficiently. And if you look at fafsa and scholarships favoring economically disadvantaged I fail to see how free college would help. I only qualified for 3 scholarships from a list of over a hundred but still managed to get one, that with tax breaks for being a student made it pretty easy to pay for a 2 year degree myself and get a great job. I also have question, if college is free are we going to build more colleges so everyone can go? Or do you have some other system in mind to decide who gets the limited college space? I guarantee there will be a huge spike in the number of people attending college if it is free.
@@viperstriker4728 First of all I'm not really the guy to go to with these questions, I'm no expert on the education system. Just a person with an opinion, open to having my mind changed. Like any program, you're right that there would need to be incentive to make spending efficient. Someone would have to be accountable for it. I would probably look into how European countries are doing this if I were you. I hear it's normal to only have to pay less than $100 or so for a year, for books or something, don't really remember. Regarding your personal story, sorry but I don't really see why an anecdote illustrates that there's no problem with our current system. It sounds like it turned out well for you, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved. Would we build more colleges if it were free? I would hope so. But I also think we're entering an age where more and more of this can be done online, so physical classrooms, labs and such will in some cases be only temporarily needed for a particular student/class. A huge spike in the number of people attending college sounds like a major plus. If done well it could greatly increase supply of skilled jobs. Investing in the population is as good an investment as you can make. Same reason I'm for a single payer healthcare system.
Liberty Prime the problem is whose paying for that college? That leads to a socialist system where taxes are near 50% on your income. You can go to college for very little if you achieve good grades that’s the incentive. College is expensive but I’d rather that then pay half my check in the long run for it. Look at the UK for prime example.
If women want to be roughnecks, crab fisherwomen, fire fighters, roofers, steel workers, drywall installers, plumbers, electricians, mechanics, etc. And put in 20 hours of OT a week and make more then men... I say go for it!
And if they do all those things and still get paid less...then what? The only even playing field I've seen is in the military, where you get paid based on time in service and rank, not on gender. By the way...all the above professions are in the military...
I've never been a high earner, but paying over 50% in tax seems absurd to me. At that stage, it's more like the government is earning and you're getting paid tax
Exactly. And what's more is fed/state/SS/MC/etc taxes are all off the top. People say "pay tax" they think of just the "off the top" tax. But if you think about it, the car you buy with your post tax dollars costs more because of the tax that the seller has to pay so you're paying a higher price, then you pay property tax on that item every year, same with your house (or it's in your rent if you're a renter you just don't see it), and on and on. Everything you buy you pay tax for AND it's more expensive because the seller has to pay all these taxes too. And you've got to buy it with money you've already paid tax on. The amount of tax we pay is ridiculous. I wish there was a full breakdown of everything tax. Someone needs to do a youtube video of all the hidden taxes and breakdowns.
@@user-nh3gu1ge3d what you said is excatly why ultra wealthy pays less tax in proportaion to their income than you, they can afford to pay good accountant to claim all those extra taxes back through company expenses and yearly exemptions, you are not meant to get taxed twice on all the products and services you use, but since you are not an accountant and dont have your own company you dont know how to claim those back. thats part the reason why the ultra wealthy are legally paying less tax than you.
@@user-nh3gu1ge3d what you said is excatly why ultra wealthy pays less tax in proportaion to their income than you, they can afford to pay good accountant to claim all those extra taxes back through company expenses and yearly exemptions, you are not meant to get taxed twice on all the products and services you use, but since you are not an accountant and dont have your own company you dont know how to claim those back. thats part the reason why the ultra wealthy are legally paying less tax than you.
It may be, but if you make 10 million dollars a year, you will earn more in 6 months than what a person living on a comfortable 100k income will earn in the entire lives. At some point, it makes little sense for you to make more money. It's a difficult topic.
@@CoffeeD_1 Except some, definitely not all, people who make that amount make so much because they've earned it. They've put in the effort and make what they make because they deserve it. Someone earning 100k a year might have the opportunities to make more, but don't because they lack ambition, or might simply not be worried about making more. What I feel would be good, is if governments offered incentives for companies/individuals with large incomes to invest their money in programmes/public services. Say you dedicate some amount of your money every year into a specific service (healthcare, transport, defence etc) , the government could agree to subsidise some of the costs in certain areas that may be beneficial to that individual. I know what I'm describing is vague and, if done wrong, would be heavily exploitable, but it would potentially motivate some to give more money on top of tax in order to spend less on things they enjoy. Say if I was earning lots, and I dedicated 12% a year on top of tax to healthcare and energy, the government could then subsidise some of the cost for me to buy games, go to the gym, go to the cinema, have meals out etc. This would require a lot of infrastructure to support this, but a system that rewards those for helping the public would potentially motivate them to dedicate more income, whereas a simple progressive tax rate just feels like the government taking money and putting it to causes you may disagree with
The scenario missing in the "equality vs equity" is the fence would be raised so none can see over it, and only those deemed "worthy" are permitted inside
Stop blaming everyone for your lack of success in your life. It is a lazy excuse for not working hard and taking advantage of the opportunities available to those who work hard and those who do not get caught up in the belief that your future is predetermined by your social status, race, gender etc.
@@tpat9444 it could be determined by just outright luck I mean the sad reality is the lottery is legitimately more likely to elevate your lot in life than hard work.
Similar to the old adage "Saying you are interested in everyone is the same thing as saying you are interested in no one." If everyone suddenly had a million dollars, it'd be worth a lot less and the prices of goods would skyrocket -- basically negating the value, defeating the whole point. Economies can be a tricky nut to crack on a long term basis. I can see points on both sides of the debate.
@@ard1805 Explain how his views are radical? He didnt give any "opinions", all what he said was true. If every one had a million dollars then a million dollars wouldnt be as near as much as it is today, that is what we call inflation....
@@mahbuburrahman8053 have you read the communist manifesto? he's really not all that critical of capitalism. What he does is show that it's one of the natural steps. Russia and their implementation of communism is what causes the distrust for communism due to the fact that they weren't ready. Marx stated that the world would have to go through 5 stages capitalism being the 4th in order to revolutionise the industry to a point where production was so efficient that they could give everyone what they need. Russia never went through this and that is why it was disastrous. While I believe Marx's communist utopia isn't the way of the future, once we become efficient enough to the point where everyone can have a car, a house, food, and other such items, then communism would work, still it wouldn't be the best method of society. This I believe would be instead a mixed society. Lenin's Russia was an interpretation of Marx's theory that actually worked better than it probably should have done.
@@roonieramshaw929 Everyone having a car, house and food cannot be achieved with efficiency if we keep or traditional views of what these three concepts are. We should talk about transport, housing and ... well yeah food (just less wasteful and carnivorous). Individualizing every service I don't believe is possible with our population. Suburbs eat up our fertile agricultural lands, cars are space inefficient and right now very pollutant and food is, in are north american society at least, unhealthily prepared/produced. To summarize we need to stop believing a single family house with all its amenities adding a car for each member of the household can be achieved with innovation and efficiency.
@@karimsimard-amini7617 the problem with what you are saying is that people need privacy and personal space in order to flourish. The mouse utopia experiments demonstrated what happens when every need is meet other than space. Society devolves and the confined species goes extinct. Furthermore, even if everyone on earth had a townhouse with a yard, the entirety of the human race can fit into a landmass the size of Texas. The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,294,271,488,000 sq ft) ... Divide the number of feet by the population, 7.53 billion, and you get 995.26 sq ft, which is the size of a small townhouse -and that's if every man, woman and child and elderly person had their own townhouse with a yard. Besides space, I think people need to be given agency. Given agency, people will make better choices, as they can finally gain some measure of reward for their planning. Given personal planning, people will choose to increase living standards for their children and thus have less children, and thus the space available to each person increases even more. That's if everyone is forced to live on Texas, in their own townhouse. I would rather allow people a more comfortable bottom to rise from. Either negative tax or ubi could establish a decent bottom as they would theoretically allow unfortunate persons the chance to leave their unfortunate situation. If workers at the bottom were allowed to choose, that would be the beginning of a more equitable society. If people check out of society, that is fine. Some people will want to establish new townships (to escape corrupted ones). And people would still choose to better themselves, because that's human nature. Consider how well paid garbagemen are, and yet not everyone wants to be a garbageman. It's just that the people who do can hold their heads high with some measure of self respect for gaining a reasonable reward for doing a necessary job. It should be this way with all jobs. A society where everyone can behave harmoniously is a better society than one where we must force people into poverty. The concept of teamwork is better than any scourge. Consider religion. People actually have to pay to join in. If, as an employer, you can't afford to pay people enough to work with you, or if you have to bribe the govt to force the people to work for you at gunpoint, maybe you're doing something wrong.
This idea of equity is based on the assumption that if everyone started on a level playing field, then everyone would finish on the same level. As a result of this assumption, people on the left believe that because two people are finishing on different levels (say income for example) that this is an indication that the starting playing field was not leveled. This leaves no room to account for choice inequality and effort inequality etc, which makes it extremely difficult to visualise real obstacles to opportunity.
Lmao halfway through the video I was like 'That sounds like communism' when they were talking about paying everyone the same regardless of what job one does
I had the exact same thought run through my head, then again the only difference between socialism and communism is a crimson banner and a class purge.
Except I should state that Tim Pool is incorrect in how he frames equity and equality. Equity, according to California's government, for example is "equal pay for work of equal value" so it's about fairness rather than actually equaling the pay. In a perfect world (this is just a model, not actually real) [www.payequity.gov.on.ca/en/AboutUs/Pages/the_difference.asp ] where somebody's output is the same as the guy next to you doing the same job, then you two should be paid exactly the same. It's not the argument that the CEO of ExxonMobil gets paid the same as a store clerk. Nobody is arguing for that. Equality of outcome is what he's misinterpreting for equity which nobody is arguing for except if you're a full-on Socialist.
mad thank you for giving me a notification with zero substance and zero reason to be here. Please, kindly, shut the fuck up unless you can rebuke my argument.
I’m from WV too. I laugh when minorities say “all white people start from a place of privilege automatically” ... I welcome them to come to some of the rural areas in WV.
@SRT Roach Funny you should mention it. I can't afford the internet. I'm on my phone. But as far as wifi, that's for rich folk. Yeah I could sacrifice a bill and get a plane ticket and then what. I have no savings. I live paycheck to paycheck. You're living in a dream world.
I agree to a point with you but Make sure to think about it. Question it. Research it. The comment about socialism with OD’s, FD’ and such is borderline ludicrous. We pay for those services to provide for a society in which we choose to live. Same with libraries. Social security is claimed to be an entitlement yet we pay into during our years of working even though it was originally suppose to be temporary and non-taxed. Good stuff here though. I like Tim more and more. He’s a liberal you can discuss things with as is Joe most of the time.
Jim K people who work harder don’t earn as much as they deserve. In what world should a brain surgeon earn the same amount as a McDonald’s drive thu worker?
In 'real life', in person, nobody gets a chance to get even one clear opinion out without just being interrupted, or at least NOTHING like when you listen to a shithot podcast and each person gets to fully explain themselves and actually be listened to. It's why as I get older I get more introverted and don't participate even on social media. Podcasts are living the dream vicariously: watching/listening to two people actually give each other their complete attention and focus and not rush each other. In turn, each person can sharpen their ideas, feel comfortable enough to elaborate instead of talking in idiot sound-bytes in order to accommodate the short attention span of most humans in 2020. It's really nice. I don't mind Tim's rapid, nerdy, clearly enunciated speech, LOL, :) I bet that you, the person reading this, can be so funny, fascinating and insightful and hit many nails on the head-- if only you got more of a chance with people.
The developers just need to release the new game expansion already. The current end-game is just toxic and we all need a reset with new pvp tokens and raise the ceiling on level cap.
I saw a new one that had the same picture labeled "what equity is in reality" and two of the people's legs were chopped off so they equal the height of the short guy.
Or you could just watch her normally and know what she's saying instead of getting your information on a talk show where the host routinely makes a point that they aren't journaliats and rarely know anything about what they're talking about?
@@AeternalDesigns That's my point, Joe is not equipped enough to have any debates, he just nods along no matter how stupid or misinformed someone's ideas might be, my critique is aimed at joe not necessarily the guests he has on, or AOC.
perhaps. but it would CERTAINLY be a good idea to ban politicians, at least for like a decade, from becoming lobbyists in areas they once made laws to regulate, after leaving office. We gotta stop the revolving door of congress where people become politicians JUST to leave and get paid by a company to lobby against laws. I don't mind people becoming politicians and staying politicians because they want to serve their constituents. we need safeguards to prevent them from INSTEAD just serving corporate donors. for example, public funding of elections and Andrew Yang's democracy dollars idea, where we level the playing field against corporate money by giving every adult $100 per election to contribute where they want.
@@justsomeguy1136 that would be too much chaos. Just keeping people outs office for more than say 8 years would cause most of them to be out of office by thr end of their terms always
I'll use my experience to demonstrate an underlying flaw in the equity vs equality debate. I grew up poor. Trailer trash, alcoholic drug addict parents, periods of homelessness, etc.. I couldn't afford to go to university and ended up joining the military because I didn't have a car and all the jobs I could get required me to have reliable transport. However, I am naturally smart and it always came out. In the navy, I was able to coast through the ET schools, get my pick of deployments (Japan), and then stand out among my peers. It's not because I worked hard, I just naturally understand everything I have ever encountered. Later, I got a job as an English teacher (married an Asian lady and moved to her country). School realized I was smart and so they had me teach test prep, and then later graduate prep (econometrics, fluid dynamics, etc.). Without really putting in any effort, I excelled at the job and quickly built up a reputation. Soon, demand for my classes was higher than I could meet and my salary began to reflect it. Within 4 years, my salary increased 6 fold. When I was 34, one of my students recognized I was smart and she gave me $1,300,000 to start a gaming studio and later moved me into being the "CEO" of her eclectic businesses. I'm not rich, but I make a 6 figure salary with no effort on my part simply because I'm smart. So, my "advantage" isn't my race. It isn't my rich parents. Etc. Yet, in the visual representation, I would be one of the tall people. So, how should this be accounted for? How should my innate intelligence be be adjusted to make it more equitable? Now, I have a decent income, but far from rich. Yet, I live a fairly frugal life style. I don't like to drink. I'm not into cars or other expensive gadgets. I don't care about fashion. For myself, I mostly just like playing video games, reading books, watching shows, and spending time with my kids; none of these are expensive hobbies. Instead, I am spending most of my income preparing my children. I pay for them to go to exclusive private schools. I pay for them to have private tutors and to take courses. I spend time with them, teaching them philosophy, mathematics, science, and logic. So, let's say another person instead chooses to spend their money on traveling, partying, expensive cars, and luxurious houses. Their children are not afforded the same advantages my children are. However, to then "level the playing field" and effectively penalize my children is to penalize ME for choosing to provide for my children over other things. How is that remotely just? Why should I not be allowed to provide advantages to my children with my resources if that's what I wish to do with my resources?
I agree with your argument but I'm sure the socialist response to that is if they tax you extra, the education system would be so good you wouldn't need to do it yourself. Not only that, but the next kid in your situation (poor background) will have a good education system to not be forced to join the army. The issue with that logic however is you can apply it to any social institution and it becomes a game of "How much is enough?". As in, how much tax is fair to fund this equity without penalising the average Joe who has tried hard to achieve the things he has. And the second argument, like what you said in your anecdotes, is how do we know what people spend their money on (educating their kids vs holidays) and how do we measure which is better. Should people with kids be taxed more than those without? Should we see what people spend their income on to determine how much they are taxed etc etc. Its just not quantifiable.
yup i agree with you. most of what i actually hear is people who are delusional and think that its actually possible to get rid of all suffering everywhere in the world by making some more people suffer and they say stuff like "jeff bezos has enough money to stop world hunger! eat the rich!" but they actually fail to realize sure lets say he can buy everyone a meal for one day(without too much logistical problems) and then have most of them die off the next because they would still be hungry the next day. so now all we have is one dead rich guy now what, and like what the ussr did is go onto the next successful guy like warren buffet or something along the lines and kill him and take all his money and repeat then now all we have is all the successful people dead. that wanna be robin hood side is a sick joke.
Except they give all the opportunities to the people who already have opportunities and the poor stay poor. Equal opportunity is give everyone equal education. guaranteed free quality education k-12 isnt a thing. The school systems suck generally but depending on what zip code you were born into your opportunities are far less. Schools suck even more, teachers and faculty dont have passion for their jobs. In america today atleast. Equal opportunity is an illusion because even if the government allots everybody a pot to piss in 50% are gonna be born a whole ass toilet and 10% are gonna be born with a golden toilet and the remaining 40% will still be pissing in a pot. The government can create a baseline for people’s welfare like everyone gets 1000 bucks a month or some shit. That is the “equal opportunity” the government gives people. Your born, you get human rights. Congratulations, depending on where and to who you are born some people will violate your human rights and rape and kill you, have fun, is the type shit we have going on right now
@@mastertrey4683 yeah. I THINK? the idea should be to create a minimum baseline of quality of life (education, safety, healthcare) because those things are what CREATES opportunity for individuals, and not having them FUCKS people from ever even having equal opportunity.
Even if the government created some type of system in which there was an established “baseline,” the wealthy will always have the upper hand because they will always be able to afford private everything. The baseline of opportunity would have to be so good that its quality would be on par with what the richest person could afford. Then perhaps we would have equality of opportunity.
@@ladyofthemoonflower I think that why equality of opportunity often works better by having state schools, universal health care, rent control, free (taxes) further education, possibly universal wage. And make the rich pay taxes to the countries they are often pilfering by paying slave wages. Democratically vote in some socialist frame work where the market cannot be trusted, as market is often corrupted towards profit over people and planet through con artistry over quality of product. Corrupt capitalism is what causes Post modern madness imho not people identifying as Marxists that love individualism, they are just short sightedly loving the 'my turn now' entitlement idea. They not true left they are true c**** imho.
Yeah I drive truck for the same reason. Money. My particular job in my particular area pays decent. Can't wait for the day I don't have to do it anymore.
Well that's the thing, if you inflate the lowest wages, the rest of them will follow. Which is why artificial wage control doesn't work. It just inflates currency.
The graphic shown in the thumbnail is the exact same one that has been used for years in equity trainings in most urban and suburban school districts across the nation. This concept is driven by Critical Race Theory. CRT is explicitly Marxist in its ideology and dogma. It still surprises me that anyone would support an ideology that resulted genocide that far surpassed the evils of Nazi Germany. But it is happening nonetheless. People need to better understand history.
I can use the same argument about quantifiable metrics against Tim. Who is to say that a CEO has a more important job than a clerk? If you’re at a store and you require the help of a clerk, that position becomes pretty important to you pretty fucking quickly. This is not nearly as cut and dry as they want to make it seem.
The CEO can do the clerks job, the clerk can not do the CEO's job. You are paid by how easy it is to replace you in any employment area. Welders are paid well because it is hard to find a great welder. Heavy machine operators make good coin because its essential to have a good heavy equipment operator. Its easy to give anyone a shovel and tell them to shovel dirt. It is very cut and dry. Its about resources, and the scarcity of resources that will determine your "worth" in the workforce.
Because in true capitalism strong corporations survive while all other competition is squashed. Capitalism in it's truest form destroys opportunity and options for everyone.
@@cooper5324 hahhaha that is some of most bull shit ive ever heard. 1. only government destroy opportunity and options with the regulations and laws which they force onto peoples lives and which destroy competition and innovation which creates monopolies, corporatism is government (socialism) placing loads and loads or regulations on a market making it hard for anyone to compete and takes away the incentive too. Now true capitalism, free markets, why its impossible for their to be a monopoly in a true free market is because the only regulation is the individual, the buyer they have all the power, not the government. Voluntarism is the key point here. in a free market an idea a business is always able to one up another idea or business making it near to impossible for one or a few business to be in power. True capitalism is freedom for innovation, competition and bringing back the incentive to bring value into a market and to individuals who get value from buying the service or product in which is being sold to them. Socialism is rape, capitalism is consensual sex!
@@youngxavibeats you literally just said that true capitalism is bad. So what did I say that was bullshit. Also corporations create in a free society can monitor and silence political opposition because it is their business, but I don't think that's healthy for a free united society.
@@cooper5324 wait where did i say that true capitalism is bad???? what are you on about Cooper my son ahhaha..... and can you show me evidence where in a free society a corporation is silencing people, only government does that. ONCE AGAIN, ill go back to the terminology of intercourse cause im cool --- Socialism (government) is rape as they use force against individuals. Capitalism is consensual sex as its all voluntary. its so hard to get this into peoples heads as they've been brought up thinking capitalism is evil and what we live in today is "capitalism" when it really isn't! theirs never been true capitalism, meaning theirs never been true freedom. you said "true capitalism strong corporations survive while all other competition is squashed" this is utter bullshit and you know it, also can you show me why and where this happened....???
@@youngxavibeats you said government policies destroy competition and create Monopolies, but when capitalism had no interference in the 1890's Monopolies dominated any other business, and controlled the whole supply change to products. This in turn caused a recession as Monopolies could artificially increase prices lowering the buying power of the country. This was all voluntary, but because of greed people screwed themselves over. Your argument is based on an either or fallacy were you think that the only solutions are true capitalism or true socialism yet you fail to see the problem that comes from either of them, but instead rely on rhetoric to make pointless claims.
@@rashadhussein8561 Going with the analogy of three boys of different heights are each given a box to stand on to watch an event. Everyone gets one box - that's the rule, regardless of the personal situations. That could be considered equality. If the tall one decides to give up his box to the smaller one to help him actually see over the fence because of the situational difference, then that could be considered equity. Equity on a personal level also has a built-in check-n-balance system. Not many people are willing to help out someone who is not willing to contribute and who is an asshole. This reinforces traits and behaviors in people that are desired by society at large and in their community. Once someone who is not involved in your life in any way starts telling you how to divide up your own resources, you will naturally feel resentment.
ArakanEli That equity example only really works if everyone is a rational actor and, more importantly, altruistic. In reality, we have plenty of tall people with a crate they don’t need (or even have a use for), but they still keep the crate anyways. Even worse, a lot of those tall people cant seem to comprehend that short people are short through no fault of their own, therefore they build an even greater level of resentment towards them. From a biological perspective, we have no reason to be altruistic towards others outside our immediate family anyways. So if we want to instill equity, I can’t imagine it being successful if left to the individual. Overall, there are good counterarguments in this video regarding the concept of equity. And some of the suggestions by the left on the issue are definitely a little too radical. However, I think a lot of the equity “haters” are way too quick to brush off the idea entirely. The guy in this video gives a quick mention of racial discrimination, and mentions that the resulting disadvantages aren’t quantifiable. Yet, there are literally hundreds of studies that do, in fact, quantify these disadvantages in some way. Are those studies gospel? No. But to dismiss a mountain of data is erroneous on his part, whether you think they should result in specific government policy or not.
Tim seems like a very intelligent individual. He seems to see honestly the flaws in our government on both sides. He sees the flaws of communism and socialism as well as our form of capitalism. We need more people who can see the bigger picture like this better.
@Rich Oliver I caught on this too - the Petroleum Engineer Example was fallacious in nature and I question his position as being "left". That was a stupid equivocacy equity in the SAME job...
@Rich Oliver exactly this ^^ equitably higher wages depending on skill - but again I know this can be unpacked however I really don't feel the need too go down that rabbit hole
Petroleum Engineer making the same as a store clerk is not equity, and is a horrible example. Equity as judged by courts is based on maxims, one of which is (Equity is equality). Equity will be closer to all patroleum engineers earning the same salary irrespective of seniority or which company they work for, or if senior engineers are paid more, then every senior engineer should be paid that same amount. But (equity will not assist a volunteer) and (Equity assists the vigilant) mean the engineers who work harder should be paid more than the ones who don’t work hard and barely get through the day. Equity if understood correctly is close to equality, but with principles.
This is like forcing NBA to hire untalented basketball players, because they sucked so bad they had been given 4 points for jump shots and 6 points for three point shots and 2 points for free throw so it is an equity for more talented NBA players.
Right, could you imagine if that was the case. Deep Equity is apart of our public school system now. We the People need to stand up against this very disturbing, and wrong ideal.
@Mike Rocker People don't choose to play the socialist game either, they're both just different economic models that is forced on the populace by the state. Even if socialism is enacted via democratic vote, it's still being forced on people who don't want it, by the state. It could be 51% of people voting that the state force the other 49% to participate. Like, a person who grew up in the Soviet Union was forced to participate in socialism just as much as someone who grows up in the US is forced to participate in capitalism. Now, if you wish to delve into theories of things like anarcho-communism or anarcho-capitalism that's a whole different ballgame.
@Mike Rocker Good lord almighty that's one super ideologically driven wall of text. By the 2nd paragraph I didn't need to read anymore because I already knew your shtick from the other countless numbers of socalist ideologues that I've heard give the same pitch, and it requires you to presuppose so many things to justify your agenda. But I read it all out of curiosity nonetheless. You're assuming moral absolutes about certain things and making arguments based on premises that are extremely contestable by anyone who isn't also a rabid ideologue. You're just as ideologically corrupt as the "Free Market Capitalism Fixes Everything" people. It would be impossible to talk to you seriously because you've swallowed all the propaganda hook, line, and sinker about the absolute and inherent virtues of your side and the absolute and inherent evils of the other. Your black and white and morally righteous worldview on the issue prevents us from having a reasonable discussion It would be as about as productive as me talking to a deluded, morally righteous Laissez-Faire Capitalist ideologue as well. You're 100% set in your ways, and you won't budge because you obviously presuppose your viewpoint as the true and morally righteous one. Also, I'm not an AnCap. My observation of state enforcement wasn't a disavowal of it. My opposition to Marxist-Leninist economic theories and the yellow/black pfp has nothing to do with the ideology of Anarcho-Capitalism, it's a Generation Identity Lambda. Also, it's cute that you leftist ideologues always try to deny the socialist nature of the Soviet Union. The "It wasn't real socialism/communism/Marxism" take always makes me giggle. I mean, at least some of the Capitalists I talk to have the balls to take full credit for their handiwork like Pinochet. I personally find the National Socialist take on economics the best starting point, and it's very different from both typical Marxian Socialism and Capitalism. Whereas both you and the Capitalists structure your economic views in a moralist and materialist underpinning, I do not. I also don't recognize equality as a valid or even moral concept. In my observation, reality is never equal and never will be. Nature cannot allow equality. Such a concept is an unobtainable human delusion. Not under Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, Anarchism, or any other -ism will equality ever exist. Nor do I think trying to make it so is a valid moral endeavor. I would also never claim a moral validation in my beliefs like you and the capitalists do. I take the stance of the Egoist types in that morality is a spook, and that all claimed moral endeavors are merely an act of self-interest. I'll stick to my third-position economic model that the socialists and the capitalists both deny the existence of. I'll also stick to my Egoist moral framework. You can keep your false dichotomies. You and the capitalists deserve each other.
Equity is when the short guy cuts off the legs of the tall guy and then tell him to watch his tall man privilege while he's bleeding out on the ground.
@Flat Earth... I was being sarcastic. The tall guy has "evolved" to be able to watch the game whereas the short guy has not. Instead of actually being the fittest, the short guy removes the competition and doesn't "evolve" at all. That's how our society works now. The group with the "tools" and the requisite lack of morality eliminates its competition so that being the fittest doesn't matter.
Because you want to create something? If I had the security of a stable income, I would start my own business. I can guarantee you this would not cause less stress/deadlines. But right now that's not a reasonable risk right now (you make barely anything while your business grows)
If you think being a store clerk isn't high stress then you are in for a rude awakening. A job with deadlines means you are actually producing something, maybe even something you can be proud of, instead of dealing with rude idiots all day with nothing to show for it besides a check, a headache, and sore feet.
@@Madman-jm3tl Sure, there are plenty of jobs that are more stressful. And there are plenty of jobs that are less stressful. Stress level has nothing to do with the income level.
Kaeda Tiger to a point it does, broadly. Business owners are gonna have a high stress job but depending on the business high pay. Lawyers, doctors and anyone else providing a private service will have generally higher pay AND higher stress vs retail and similar jobs
Wow Imagine if everyone thought this critically and reasonably, even if they didn’t come to the exact same conclusion, the world would be a better place
I was literally just thinking the same thing. I pretty much despise Bernie Sanders and everything he stands for, so I would have a hard time agreeing with this guy. That said, I can see myself having a very reasonable, fair discussion with him on the issues. It sounds to me like we would agree in large part on where we would want to get there, but we would have strong ideological differences on how we would get there. The biggest difference I have with this guy is that he seems to think that government power is the way to get to a rising tide lifting all boats whereas I absolutely believe that a hands off approach/decentralized/unregulated free market is the rising tide with no government interference. However we may disagree on this or that, I appreciate his ability to layout his argument and his ability to listen to dissent. It is hard to say that about either side in politics today.
Gino Benedetto I feel like that’s happening a lot lately with intelligent liberals that see the mask coming off the democrat party as they engage in total leftist ideology
I like Tim, he’s level headed old school liberal and that’s coming from a Republican. I agree with a lot of what he said. We really need term limits. The people in Congress are destroying this country.
I was born in a two room shack in WV and raised in Eastern Ky, the poorest region of America. I started working at 12 as a garbage boy on a commercial garbage route. When I started higj school I was 5' 7" tall and weighed 89 pounds. I know the sweet taste of hunger. But I got out of those hills. I moved around and worked my way up. Then I started mybown business. I elected not to have children. So, now I am getting ready to retire with townhome apartments, a big farm, nice home and a winter home in Naples, FL. Decisions and drive make the real difference. Be smart and you can make it. I am living proof.
This is a perfect example of some who is a liberal but knows how to use common sense on current affairs. Someone who leans left but is not a afraid to comprise with people on the right and will call bullshit on morons on the far left. Someone who puts logic, realism, and comprise over what party you belong to. Something you don’t see everyday. Good for you.
@@branflakee4257 Then here ya go moron...I am on the right, didn't vote for Trump and think he's a disgrace. You are truly fucking stupid if you think every conservative likes Trump.
Also, raise the voting age to 30. No one who has not paid student loans, ate shit from a boss, paid off a home, budgeted for bills, should have a right to vote. If you are younger then 30 then you haven't struggled enough. We need people voting who cant be tricked by these greasy politicians.
@@spartanrh83 I'm nearly 30 and haven't paid any student loans. Do I not deserve to vote just because I chose not to be subjected to predatory debt? Dumbass.
@@spartanrh83 That would get to the heart of it slightly better, for example putting caps on how much can be spent by a candidate or party in a given campaign. The UK has legislation like that. It doesn't prevent cronyism and corruption, but it does help to manage it up to a point.
I love when people refer to the wealthy as greedy like they'd be some kind of saint instead. Almost no one will give away their wealth. We can't even get people to stop talking a dump on the environment. Humans are flawed, you are flawed, stop seeing strangers as lesser humans. Most people aren't that different from you, they are just in different circumstances.
Jordan Peterson says exactly this so well. I'll summarize to avoide misquoting, but basically he says: The line between good and evil isn't found between two groups, its within yourself. You have the capacity for evil as much as anyone. And you have to sort yourself out before you can determine if others are wrong. I'm pretty sure I'm misquoting so it's best if you find the source material, I think it was on the first JRE / Peterson podcast.
@@aurelien5747 Charitable giving is not the same as a government taking all your money away so that they can then steal it like always happens in communism. Why is it that the most ignorant and wrong people are always trying to use the Bible against Christians? You've read the Bibe? Have you understood it by The Holy Spirit within you?
@@user-ee1sq7ly6y on the slide with the image it tried to distinguish a connection to social justice and environmental justice, I still don’t understand what was trying to be said in relation to science
equity doesn't mean equality, and it doesn't mean someone at forever 21 makes as much as a doctor. Tim pool is lying about shit because he has stopped trying to think for himself....
To think taxation is theft and still want essentials governments provide (such as a standing military, infrastructure, police and fire protection, etc) would in effect be theft of the work and resources of others. I would also like to add. The Revolutionary War itself was in fact funded by taxes. So the freedoms we do enjoy in the United States, we would not have if it were not for taxes.
@@jonm7888 Not fair at all. Fairness is treating everyone the same. Discriminating against people based on anything is not fair. And who decides what is fair and what criteria you use.
depends what definition of socialism you use. American Conservatives believe that such things like government paid health care, education, or any government funded program is socialism. Thats not socialism, its social policy.
I worked in a school district where everyone was on a pay scale with the more experienced getting more money. It was not based on anything else. There was no incentive to work hard. Every year you got an automatic pay raise no matter what. Bad teachers stayed until they died. It was mind crushing for a person like me. I left teaching and became a school psychologist.
I hate that, im a farmer and my grandfather did a simular thing paying our farm hands. When i took over i calculated the average wage we were paying people and put everyone there, after the first month if you worked hard and got your shit done i gave raises and if you didnt you got a cut. I still actively adjust as i see fit.
Teachers start with the same base pay, but you can increase your own earning ceiling by working outside of school hours in many districts. Professional development trainings offered by districts, getting more college credits to increase your base salary. A teacher that works this kind of overtime can make almost 20 percent more than their colleagues in as little as two-three years who do not go the extra mile on their own.
@@poetsrear yes I am from Germany, at 57052 Euro annually you pay 42% income tax, you also pay 9,3 %pension insurance (9,3% will pay the employer, making it 18,6) of your gross salary meaning you earn 10k per month, almost 1k goes to pension insurance, but you don't fill up your own pension, you sustain the current old population.. Meaning you can't be sure that what you put in is the same amount you would get when you are old. You also pay 5,5% of you annual income tax as a solidarity tax if you live in the west for the east German states... You also will have to pay 250 to 800 per month in health insurance.. Basically 7,3% of your income.. If you belong to a church then you also have to pay church tax.. I did a calculation.. If you earn 100k per year, are 25 years old and single then you will end up with 52.166,49€ basically half of your shit is gone
@@Truhandle91I can verify this calculation is absolutely correct. However it's fair to say that the German tax payer is still in a better position than in the US. The cost of living is not even close to any mayor US city. Goods and rents are way cheaper, infrastructure works and health system is stable even in this days. I been living in UK US and Germany.
My dad worked literally his whole life only to be hit in a car accident and collect just $1050 a month. He started going on job sites with my grandpa when he was 5 and could hang cabinets and read a tape measure and started doing construction in his early teens and was legally paying taxes at 15 and worked his way up to foreman after being with the company a long time but it eventually went under. He was also a maintenance man for several apartment complexes and mobile home parks and drove heavy equipment dumping sand all day and also was a plumber and although not a journeyman he had his own company vehicle cell phone and assistant and did basically what the other certified people did. Also welded at the train station and several other fields. He could fix basically everything inside a house along with doing a lot of car work and was AC/Welding/Pool certified and played in a band on the weekends for about 25 years too. He was in so much pain his last years alive and body just torn up from the wreck and all the years of manual labor. I still have several of his blueprints from when he ran jobs and was in charge of sometimes over 100 people and speaking with the architect for multimillion dollar buildings.
When the first social security system was founded in Germany there were 52 active workers for every retired worker, taking 2% of their salary from active workers was more than enough to maintain the system, the problem is that from the beginning the system was a Ponzi scheme, it was expected that there would always be more active workers than retired, currently in Germany there are 15 active workers for every retired worker, the system is broken because not only are there fewer active workers, life expectancy and medical costs have increased over time, when the system was established life expectancy was about 35 years (no joke), currently life expectancy is 75 years. The United States system suffers from the same ills, the contribution of active workers does not cover the pensions of retired workers and the government has to take money out of the budget to try to reduce the deficit.
I have seen one where the tall guy is still taller than the other two even without a crate and his legs are cut shorter,, because,, fairness... You, know, the Maoist way
That sounds pretty much how far right-wing people think left-wing folks want the world to be. Scary part is, the regressive left _does_ think in such insane ways, and it's taking a long time for those on the left, as a whole, to realise this, and to realise it's tainting their whole side of politics in the process.
what are you gonna do with all that extra leg? if you can cut the legs and still move around, then so what if theyre cut? oh wait, but this isnt about legs and height- we're talking about Money. like the millions of dollars used by the ultra-wealthy to buy out politicians, and create policies that benefit those ultra-wealthy and fuck over the poor :D
I agree Jonathan Romero. That would be amazing. Thomas Sowell is one of our last few great minds we have left. It's a shame They re all getting so old. We need people like them to help the movement
Read the short story "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut. It's exactly about this kind of social engineering, trying to force everyone to be exactly equal - which of course means handicapping anyone who has more talents or abilities and others so that the disadvantaged don't feel bad.
@@jonm7888 of course even Vonnegut didn't think such a society was likely to occur... it was a hyperbole to illustrate the dangers of running a society with your main goal being trying to avoid offending or denigrating those who have less ability or capability.
@@prisonmike8214 wtf does that mean. Who is saying everyone should make the same amount? I've never heard Bernie Sanders say that, as this guy implied.
The worst part of "equity" is they want it to be the SOLE DECIDER. Giving a high performing poor person the same University opportunity as mediocre trust funders is one thing, but that is not their goal. They want to do away with meritocracy completely.
@Jose Smilez Cool bro you passed American History I. Now try to form an argument instead of this retarded "mic drop". I can do it too: Look up Dunning Kruger effect
Varghese Manakalathil In the US they also pay for a higher percentage in taxes, they help fund these “socialist” programs as well. “The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $538 billion, or 37.3 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $440 billion, or 30.5 percent of all income taxes.” taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/
High tax rates wouldn't take power away from the richest Americans. First, just assuming they stayed in the country, they'd still have the majority of the wealth. Secondly, they'd just reinvest their profits so their revenue doesn't get taxed. That means their net worth would just continue to grow. Thirdly, businesses would or could just raise the prices of their products and services.
Pay equity was the policy of China from 1949-1978, which is one of the key features of socialism. At least 2 generations suffered from this ideology. Thank god Mr. Deng made the transform in 1978, and we have been seeing over 40 years of economy boom. The leftism's idea is very very familiar with the past 3 generations of Chinese....
That's why the US will fail. All these other countries to choose from, as examples of multiple bad ideas the left has, already being and have been played out. But "we can do it right, this time!"... Would be funny if China in the future becomes known as a place of freedom and the US the opposite. Things change, given enough time.
@Black Stone the bar example is a weird one and it doesn't translate very well into the real world, but take healthcare in the UK. Everyone is covered under socialised healthcare, but if someone wants additional services (i.e. plastic surgery) they can go and find a private company to do that. The point of socialism is not to stop anyone from having extra if they want it, it's to ensure everyone has a bare minimum.
@@rogueraven1333 They want to shut down coal mines because coal is polluting the environment with CO2 and contributing to the raising of the average global temperature. Bernie literally said he would replace those coal jobs with green technology jobs as part of the Green New Deal. Why are you blaming the guy who's trying to solve problems and give people good, quality jobs?
Bruins Fan if we want to hep the environment, let’s focus on place like China and India which create something like 50% of the worlds pollution instead of coal mines which do very little in comparison
“If people are equal, they are not free. If they are free, they are not equal.” - Thomas Sowell
Brilliant way to sum it up. I'll be using that now.
You sure that Thomas Sowell said that?
Allen Allington it’s possible he was quoting someone else but I got it from a video of him, so yeah.
Sowell was quoting it. Russian philosopher Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn originally said it to detest communism I believe.
Jack Warman I’m going to look into this. Thank you. I need to read the Gulag Archipelago ASAP.
In both examples all three of them are watching the game without buying a ticket. Lol
It shouldn't be government's responsibility to provide these hypothetical boxes or crates. Maybe their job could be to remove the fence, but that's another subject
Build the wall, Build the wall
@@tokesalotta1521 Exactly. Seems like the hypothetical short guy didn't think ahead. That's on him.
@@tokesalotta1521 if you move the fence, then everyone watches for free and the ballpark goes out of business. Sounds familiar
Its privilege not a right
I'm a 6'10" dude.
I had to spend extra to buy a big truck because I dont fit in cars
which means I spend extra on gas
I don't fit through a lot of doors
tables and chairs are always too small
shoes and clothes cost way more and don't have many options
my metabolism is higher and being this tall I eat and drink more than average
Society should pay me to offset these costs of me being born tall
lol
Neffels Tech manlet...I’m 6’11
I can still dunk on both of y’all.
I know you were being sarcastic, but that actually makes sense
@@GodisgudAQW I would never expect to actually be compensated in any way but my height literally effects everything I do everyday. Cups are really annoying. I'm like a 1600 British person sipping from a tiny tea cup even though I'm using a mug
Want a new pair of shoes? Better order them online cause no where within 400 miles has size 15.
Want to ride a bike for exercise? You can't only two wheeled thing you'll fit on is a 2000cc dirt bike with a lift kit.
Tom Sowell said that children that grow up in the same house with the same parents don't have the same outcomes as each other. Expecting equity in that situation is unreasonable.
Not just unreasonable, it’s insane.
I know and I look at my family - there is no way to make sure we all have the same outcomes and we are a very small group .. take hundreds or thousands of students - not possible without major fuckery
Thats why what we should strive for is equal oppertunity.
Then the road to success is only influenced by INDIVIDUAL effort.
Equity is madness as it suggests every lazy deadbeat get's the same reward as the guy putting in extra hours and effort.
Systems like affirmative action for example are inequality because its cheated free passes, instead of lifting everyone on even grounds early on so they get the same oppertunities down the line.
Then the one working hardest wins.
I am the first of 6 children raised all in the same house by the same parents, we all follow different paths, got different jobs, some of us had children, some of us didn't, some of us have our own house, some of us don't, we are all from the same family and we We help each other as we can, trying to make ourselves equal would only make us envious and petty, because we would be aware of what others have to take it away and in turn we would be aware of hiding what we have for fear that they would take it away from us.
Civilization is founded on equity. From the start Strong people protected the weak and farmers fed the elderly, the young, the artisans, etc, and everyone was equitably not dead of violence, starvation or exposure. When people aquired more knowledge and rid themselves of more superstitions and magical thinking, they pushed for EQUITY again. Nno longer willing to allow tyrannical kings and priests to dominate their lives and hoard all the wealth produced by the whole society, they otherthrew them. Often violently. Then they founded Democratic forms of government. Because we humans thought Equity would be a good thing. Society has grown more equitable over the centuries.
This man speaks in Times New Roman.
🤣How do you do that?!
and you are a genius, edward lee
Edward Lee
I don’t think much people will get that!!
Nah he speaks in comic sans my guy
No he speaks in Shapiro 12 pt font APA format
Joe 0.75 Speed, Tim 1.25 Speed
Shapiro, 10x speed
@@andrewshiu5872, yes. This guy actually _reminded_ me of Ben Shapiro.
Laura Pace what the hell do you mean he’s got his fans fooled? He’s a brilliant political analyst!
I'm convinced that Tim puts the tiniest dash of cocaine in his coffee so that only his mouth experiences the high when he talks.
Ben Shapiro SKULLFUCKS liberal cucks at 10X SPEED with FACTS and LOGIC
I don't get up at 5AM and commute to work because I think it will give me power, recognition, and social status.
I wanna get paid, plain and simple.
Yes, because your job has no social status. Why do you think people spend €5000 on a coat, is it because that coat is just that much better or may it be that they are trading less valuable money for higher valued social status?
@@Hedning1390 less then 1% of the population will ever spend that much on a coat, I doubt this guy is one of them
@@joey9511 I never thought he was. Indeed I said quite the opposite.
That face when you realize at a subconscious level you're aware that your job either leads to a specific degree of power, recognition, and social status or lack thereof.
@Kaleb Swager BS. A 70% MARGINAL tax rate does nothing to discourage effort. It will encourage people to find loopholes and to cheat, but not to work less hard. The amount you earn being higher than your neighbor is the score card in the game of life many of the rich are most concerned about. Also the lifestyle of the super rich won't be affected as they have more money than they can spend anyway.
On the flip side if the poor had more of the basics guaranteed by the state they could invest in their own future and the state could afford to help them. Also the poor demanding more products would create jobs taking more poor people out of poverty.
Having power concentrated in a few families is also not very democratic.
As a West Virginian born and raised, I can surely confirm Joes statement. And after doing back breaking work for 45 years social security is a joke.
45 years? You look like you're in your late 20's/early 30's... atleast you have good genetics bud!
I’ve learned that social security is just a waste of money that I’ll never see, so I’m learning to put money into 401k
@@yusufthegreat1232 was thinking the same thing....he must have worked since the day he was born?
@@shawnhall2841 I think he meant 4 - 5 years
Correction: 0.45 years.
Any bills that mix topics should be shot down as a matter of principle. One topic one bill.
Try telling that to Justin Trudeau.
the Green New Deal isn't a bill, it's an outline.
@@augustuskelley4170 no it's part if a manifesto!
daddyrichten Deregulations on environmental protection, science denial, systematic racism and tax breaks for the wealthy don't make you sick? You were republican all along, or just a lying douchebag. Actually, no difference between the two
@@steverichardson8080 relax Francis! Easy does it. Don't jump all over the guy for a YT comment.
Yo mad respect to Tim, I don’t agree with everything he has said but dam is he open to explaining his views, hearing others and is open to changing his mind.
That's what you're supposed to do. These days people just argue to argue, instead of having a debate to learn or test your views you currently have
You won't see leftists do what tim does, for obvious reasons. "And no he's not a leftist"
I HAVE THE DOCUMENTS ...mate did you even read my comment I didn’t mention what his political stand point is who are you quoting? Also being open minded is something that can be and is practiced by both sides of the political spectrum, what makes someone an extremist is when they don’t listen to the other sides arguments (in my opinion at least) and just dismiss them, that applies to both sides. I think that is why (in my experience) most open minded people are more centrist, not blindly agreeing with one side or the other. Anyway that’s my two cents.
Surviving 7 this comment doesn’t get enough praise. This is how everyday life should work, you don’t have to agree with everyone but if everyone just listened to each others opinions and put the effort in trying to understand them, we’d be far better off as humans. Maybe there’s a place out there somewhere where this happens.
He is the kind of person feared most by the extremes of both sides.
This dude is the alternate-universe version of Ben Shapiro
This guy is a lot more moderate central
I would argue Shapiro does much better research. For example Tim Pool said poverty causes crime, actually differences in wealth cause the vast majority of crime. When Tim was arguing for progressive tax he made the assumption that reinvesting wealth exponential increases wealth, we see this with companies but not as much with individuals who will constantly drop in and out of those high tax brackets as investments succeed or fail and inflation devalues what they are investing.
He certainly has a lot of experience to talk from but not the same level of statistical facts.
@@viperstriker4728 Yeah I like both of them honestly, but it does seem like Ben does a ridiculous amount of research and is ready to swing his katana of knowledge at you whenever he pleases lol...what a nightmare it would be to debate him
@@viperstriker4728 Ben is very deceptive with his arguments, on the surface, it's hard to disprove immediately but once you take a little time to look into his arguments, many of them fall apart. Plus at times he is so hypocritical. He has been hypocritical on so many occasions. On race and religion especially
@@Adays700 Well you have done a great job laying out your thesis but seem to have forgotten that there is a second part needed for a good argument...supporting facts.
Usually I would give counter points to your sources/examples but since you didn't give any all I can say is I have looked into his arguments and they rarely fall apart.
I have seen many claim he is hypocritical and so far they all come down to not taking the time to understand his point before making accusations, or using statements from 8 years ago that he no longer would say.
"Unwilling to work" is grossly underestimated.
Or like someone pointed out, that photo they showed has people on both sides who didnt pay for tickets lol
"Unwilling to work" barely changes whether you have social welfare or not. People who dont want to work turn to crime and cost society in indirect ways. Its not as clear cut as some people think.
@@fozzledoff1 exactly:, disabled, mentally challenged, low iq, and plain lazy are very different.
Along with ignoring historical nepotism, access, golden parachute, and overall lack of experience regarding relative poverty.
@@fozzledoff1 I’m 28 and I’ve barely worked..I’ve never went to crime…
"Animal Farm", "some animals are more equal than others".
Not exactly equivalent to a 0.1% billionaire giving a million dollars to invest in an impoverished community through taxes but I get what you're trying to communicate lol
Yep the pigs, according to pigs.
You can't quote Orwell on a pro capitalist video because then you just don't understand his work
Lotus orwell should be a warning about communism/socialism not a manual to follow.
@@lotus9138 What I was told in my ELA class is that animal farm was a reference to communism in Russia, right?
I deal with my stressful job because I get paid well, not because of a social status. If I could make 100K+ a year cleaning toilets, I'd be the happiest janitor in the world.
No you wouldn't. I make nearly that, being a janitor and it's still awful. It means 70 hour work weeks and no days off, no sick days and no benifits unless I pay into them myself.
@@mosselliadelt. You know he means working 40 hour weeks.
Well, that's not how you make money running your own business.
I went to Modesto Junior College. The janitor had a PhD. When he found out how much the janitor made, he quit his professor position. He also said that having keys to every office, and learning what went on after hours, he had unlimited job security.
@@KJKP yep, I work at some large corporate offices, I've walked in on the ceo having relations with a side chick, a few times.
I wanna see tim pool and ben shapiro go at it in a fast speech test lol
Ben got this in the bag hahaha
The only two people I watch at 1.0x speed.
Biggest beef with Ben Shillpiro is how he practices Judaism in a attempt to appear relatable
I feel like if Shapiro ever loses his job he could just drop a rap album remiscience of Eminem’s rap god
Ralph Great idea!
"If there is not equality of outcomes among people born to the same parents and raised under the same roof, why should equality of outcomes be expected-or assumed-when conditions are not nearly so comparable?" Thomas Sowell
I love that man. I'm a on a quest to read all of his books.
@@LongStoryShortTooLate me too, what's a good one that is the best/most relatable to today's issues? Looking to order some of his books.
@@joshdorrance8821 I'm making my way through his books on economics. That's all I've had time for so far. Right now I'm reading Basic Economics. It is eye opening and completely relevant. And it will change your viewpoint on free market capitalism (even if, and perhaps especially if, you are already for it). In a good way. Happy reading!
@@LongStoryShortTooLate thanks!
What do you think of equality of opportunity instead of outcome
As a conservative, I don't completely agree with everything Tim is saying here. But I very much appreciate him making such reasoned, unemotional arguments. If we were all able to talk (and LISTEN) to each other like this, the world would be a better place.
Nick Miller 👍 I agree, what makes Tim different is he is actually discussing POLICY, not identity. Which is the only thing most leftists can discuss nowadays.
@@YourfriendTruth The only thing I will say as a guy on the left is that both parties get stuck in traps where they talk about identity. I firmly believe in a mutual, calm debate about policy issues and the pros and cons, but what you will find is that both the republican and the democratic party are not always willing to listen. The republican party often generalizes all democrats as softies and socialists and the democratic party at extremes will act conceited and not listen to some genuine gripes about conduct from the republicans. I think the way to fix these issues is to come together as people and really take a more active part in government, research all candidates, and never vote down ballot for the sake of party loyalty. Policy over politics is what I preach and if there is a republican that clearly shows integrity and values that I can compromise with, I will vote for them.
@JamesMacPherson some people are conservative, some people are liberal, and some people are leftist. None of them are perfect but you can't force everyone to be a leftist.
Okay many issues are one sided. Republicans have to admit the immoral man that is Trump. Grab them by the pussy isn't something a president should say. Fighting a virus is more important than making money. Every social policy made to help people that are economically or medically stratified is not going to lead to communism. You guys have to be honest and want to solve problems and not just be in charge so you can be in charge.
Conservative policy wrecked the economy in 2008. You want to talk policy why should we use less regulations which created a housing bubble and an investment market bubble that were both blown up by greed and popped resulted in average Americans losing housing, saving and jobs while the wealthy got a bail out and no jail time.
preach bro. im in the same boat.
“Money isn’t a motivator” get the hell out of here 😂
Joe Mama you haven't said why you think that. Calling someone braindead doesn't make you right... The reason people work is to get money. If the foundation of a system is good faith - it doesn't work. Especially when the motivator isn't there. It's not about self-respect, it's about people working their ass off for no fucking reason.
Phil Thicc sorry bro but money just represents resources. It’s not just “worthless paper” if it can reliably be traded for valuable resources. God damn troglodyte
What's money for? To buy a big box called a house to breathe and poop in. I built my own poopy box for tree 99
You gotta be an idiot to miss his point on that one.
@@juju-vl7oj lol
The problem with equity is the one guy lying down needs 12 boxes to see over the fence. Then everyone lies down. Then you run out of boxes.
the problem is that you don't know what equity means (type "equity definition" in google for a start)
@@rafaelandreaslisberg4308 Goodle says "the quality of being fair and impartial." But then you have to define fair. Fair is extremely subjective.
The picture implies fair means equality of outcome. This is straight from socialist doctrine "to each according to their needs". We all know how well that works.
*cough*Venezuela*cough*
THIS!
There's more than enough boxes for everyone, at least in 1st world countries. Feeding and clothing everyone is seriously not something that's beyond our resources if that's what we wanted to do. It's funny how whenever the US needs to come up with extra military spending to enrich the defense contractors pockets, they can magically make hundreds of billions appear, but whenever it's a program that helps poor or middle-class they look dumbfounded and act like it's impossible to pay for it.
Alex alexander you know fucking nothing you child. Only a moron would think “oh yeah we should throw more money in welfare at poor people cuz it’s unfair” it’s not fucking unfair. People who earned money deserve to fucking have it. You don’t get to just have money handed to you just because you earn less or can’t fucking get a job. That is fucking communism and everyone who has tried that has failed. Grow up and quit smelling the roses moron!!! People ain’t nice!!!!
Ethical moral living. This is what our country needs. One person at a time... treat others as you would want to be treated. Encourage growth.. spiritual, mental growth in each other. Competition is good. Excellence is the result. Celebrate other people’s victories. Their victories are our victories because it’s exciting to see human potential expand. May God help us ALL!
This is the most right-wing left-winger I have ever seen
Hmm sounds like a centralist
jreg would like to know your location
Tim or Joe?
Yeager tim joe isn’t an ideologue
@exploshi Tim says he’s a moderate left libertarian. What did he say that makes you think he’s right wing?
As a Right winger, I love it when you have a Left winger who thinks logically, even if you disagree on principle. So Rare.
Tesseract most leftist are completely delusional and ignorant, its nice to see one with common sense
@Dam Ned I call them the NFL Left.
Not For Long Left
It's rare to see a lefty who even understands the difference between equity and equality, but it's even more rare to see one who admits they do instead of lying and conflating them as a form of chicanery.
Because they agree with your world view they think "logically" 😂😂😂 how funny
Right wing idiots today are not rare unfortunately :)
I was born in the Soviet Union. I can tell you exactly what will happen if there is pay equity. Spoiler alert: it’s not good.
Right! And when pay equity is determined by those in power who determine that equity doesn’t apply to themselves .
Can you be more specific
Tell us some of the horrors and bleakness please
Pay equity would make the best and brightest leave the country since their talent would get them nowhere. That way innovation and progress would disappear. The standard of living would decrease. For instance, my mother saw a washing machine for the first in her life in 1992 when we emigrated to Germany. That’s ridiculous considering how people lived in Europe and America! Since people would be paid regardless of what they do, their work ethic would plummet. Overall, pay equity would reduce America to a developing country. It’s an unbelievably stupid idea. For centuries, people came to America in search for opportunities and some of your politicians try to put an end to it, it seems.
@@AnnetteWarren well a dishwasher maybe. Not a washing machine for sure. Everybody who lived in cities had a washing machines for clothing. Unlike in USA, where if you are renting, you cannot own one. Can't say washing machines were fancy though. Especially in 1992 such a bs Anete.
Tim Pool: “I work every day”
Joe: Dang that’s crazy, I only work 4 days and make millions of dollars..😅
As if Joe started off that way.
"You are paid in direct proportion to the difficulty of problem you solve." -Elon Musk
Elon Musk knows as well as I do. You're paid what your employer has decided will make you take the job and keep you relatively happy. That's why Tesla employees are $20 an hour despite not solving any problems. That's the amount to get them to take the job.
@@jacobclaassen4709 which employees did you mean by "not solving any problems"? Technician, designer, marketing, manager or janitor?
Just trie to stop the cleaner/bean man (?) working 15 days ....
And now stop elon Musk working 15 days...
You will see the diiference who is important.
@@khalifalbilal3141 the ones building the cars. I did it for a few months. Labor intensive? Yes. Problem solving? No.
Elon musk is a deplorable
So if I'm working for a roofing company everyday working in extreme heat or cold and coming home from head to toe drenched in sweat and tar. What is the incentive for me to continue working there if I could go make the same at Walmart being a cashier?
Self respect.
Philip Yates you’re an idiot if you really think society works like that. Wake up man
Yeah, the people in charge have never had these crushing physical jobs, so they dont get it at all.
There is none.
Not just being a cashier. Greeters get paid 15.00 an hour here in seattle. The real question is why dont you strive for something better. Gain an education in your trade and become a master.
I’d say money is definitely a stronger incentive than social status
plus money increases your social status anyway, hence its the prime driver even if you valued social status as more important
False. It depends who you are and what you want in life. If you are a scientist, it will be much more important to you to reach scientific breakthroughs like those of other famous scientists such as Einstein, Bohr, Marie Curie etc.
Plus, once you get a certain amount of money, diminishing returns start kicking in.
@@danavram8437 even if you only care about your scientific discoveries and measure your social status by the number of quotations you get or hitting the jackpot with the Nobel Prize, earning large amounts of money means you'll work independently from any institution. Meaning you'll be free from political pressure.
Most people feel that way about most jobs, but most people that start a business don't do it for the money, atleast not the first time. Doctors, lawyers, dentists, scientists and teachers mostly don't do it for the money either. The ones that does it for the money usually don't make it, of finds out you can earn the same in ways that doesn't force you to work 60 hours a week.
having said that, i don't believe in the model as some jobs straight up always sucks, like being a CEO, who mostly gets paid for taking heat for shit people below him do. So for jobs like that you would have to use the Cuban model of drawing you profession from a hat which doesn't get the best people the job.
I don't think so. Not when you're already a millionair, going for your hundred million or 500 millions or going for your first billion. Then it's not about the money anymore, it's about the social status that the money brings.
Equality is an Olympic race where everyone starts on the same starting line. The winner is the one who reaches the finish line first, the loser is the one who reaches the finish line last, and then you have everyone in-between.
Equity is an Olympic race where everyone starts on different starting lines so that we all reach the finish line at the same moment. Those who believe in Equity would say this makes everyone a winner. Of course, in reality, it makes everyone a loser - and it has the exact same effect on society as it does on an Olympic race.
Except with equality not everyone starts on that same line how are you going to say that someone who is rich and born into a rich family has the exact same chances and benefits as someone who is born into homelessness
@@toast4531 The homeless guy can work at McDonald's, go to trade school, start his own business. The rich guy can drop out of school, become a druggie, gamble away his inheritance. Now they've traded places...stop making excuses you parasite...
@@EroticOnion23 what? First of all it would be very hard for that homeless man to find a job because a lot of people aren't going to hire someone who smells bad because he can't exactly afford a shower and just because they can switch places still doesn't mean they started on the same line because that kid could succeed in life a lot more easily then that homeless person if they do it right and if they don't have a disability. which brings me to another point which is disabilities me and someone who has a disability don't necessarily start on the same line we can both succeed but for the person with the disability it can be alot harder because they face discrimination and certain jobs won't be an option due to that disability
@@toast4531 nice feel-good virtue-signaling kid
@Zeb Nicklin thanks Zeb. I had to dig through the comments to find some nuance to the idea of equity.
Joe “21 forever” Rogan
??
@@rdog9297 5:36
Garrett Doucette joe “forever 21 “ rogan
Congressmen being limited to 2 4 year terms would tremendously help in ending corruption
If they had 4 year terms that would make sense.
Seriously though I agree
I first read this as 24 year terms, lol.
I could help a little, but not drastically by any means
Yeah, but there are better ways to fight corruption other than a policy that would also mean that if people find and elect someone that's actually competent then they can't stay in office. Limiting terms would only limit the amount of time each person has to be corrupt before someone else gets elected and could simply take over and be even more corrupt. Lobbyists are much more deserving of getting the boot, or at least reigning in.
I’m a right-leaning libertarian, and I happen to think that Tim Pool is a very sensible and reasonable individual. While I disagree with many of the points he brings up and his solutions, he seems genuine and not a partisan hack.
Bichi Ranga because the left assume that the right are all racist and bigoted. It’s both ways
Bichi Ranga I don’t watch Fox. It’s often the case that the loudest and most extreme voices have a tendency to be propagated more easily.
Bichi Ranga because it’s true most of the time, it’s a shock when one has a functioning brain still
@Bichi Ranga go watch some of Tim's recent podcasts, he is nowhere near a liberal or leftist now.
Tim is just another pseudo-intellectual grifter lol
I love how every criticism of capitalism starts with "these rich people are lobbying/paying off the government".
Thats the point THATS NOT CAPITALISM, if government had no power, then rich people couldnt pay off government to enforce/create their monopolies.
Thats also not an interest by those people to fix capitalism. They don't care about the poor... but they absolutely hate the rich.
You should say give me an example of the rich paying off the government. Never got that answer.
@@Marcusaurelius913 is that a joke?
@@phillipahn1655 he must not understand how lobbying works
Capitalism is crony in nature. Especially the free-market kind. Still better than communism tho.
why is it legal to openly fund politicians in the US is beyond me
Krzysztof Skowronek how else would they acquire funding
@@Ali-bd6kb in most countries you can only chip in for the election campaign, everything else is illegal.
@@Qrzychu92 ah see, but all the funding they get outside of that isn't really "open" ...may i direct your attention to the Clinton Foundation: "oh look you arent really giving *me* money...just *my* foundation"
@@Ali-bd6kb Like most other first world countries. Anyone can give up to a certain amount, and they have laws to stop corporations from being able to give huge amounts to politicians. That just causes a lot of politicians to go corrupt on both sides of the aisle. It almost seems like the US is so politically divisive, some just support this out of spite. I'd hope all Americans would get pissed off, and start to hold ALL politicians who are for this accountable...
Don't you want your politicians to represent the entire populous first and foremost?
@@justtrollinalong977 but what does that foundation do? Still, in US everybody knows and it is even said out loud on TV, that politicians are funded by X and Y
We've embraced victimhood. Its "empowering" to be a victim. Because when you are a victim, you don't have to hold YOURSELF accountable for your situation in life. You can blame your oppressor. Even if your oppressor is 100% imaginary.
Some times that is the case. Other times that is not.
A.J. Giglio. Hes right. So give an example of how it's not
Allen Hill "The Working Poor" by David Shipler is a good book that contrasts the American Myth (where anyone can make it if they work hard enough) vs the Anti-American myth (institutions limiting economic mobility). Generally it's a mix of both society creating a environment where it's a lot more difficult for some groups to move up when compared to better off groups, but the individual still can shape their own destiny with a combination of luck and hard work. But we still need better government programs to help the employed but still poor people. It's a very insightful read.
what a jew statement so when 3 guys kick the shit out of u u should waait say noithing and have no revenge? what a jew
@@c_tatsu5525 Please! STOP! That's what they called me all through high school!!!! **sobs violently**
Jordan Peterson has a lot of eye opening statistics on the pay gap.
Just because someone makes more money it does not mean you want to do their job.
Or can do their job.
I work with thousands of coworkers....men and women....the women simply do not take the overtime (extra hours at 1.5x pay) nearly as much as men, it’s not even close...so many dudes working 12-16 hour double shifts, the women simply don’t do it!! NOT CLOSE AT ALL....we are all offered the same amount hours.
@@OdintheGermanShepherd and it's statistically proven that people who work 10-20 percent more hours make about 40-50% more money.
@@robinthestate6548 Where did the value 40-50% come from? Got any sources for that?
@@pixelninja10 it's actually like 32% - 40% and it's on the bureau of labor statistics
Equity still can't give equal outcome in business. Hard work and dedication must & is always appreciated
but it's not, lol
that's what's broken about the meritocracy mindset, more often than not it's the guys that do less work because they spend more time kissing the ass and "befriending" the boss. Hard workers are NOT appreciated in our society, why do you think the richest Americans are dumbasses when you actually sit them down and talk to them about complex subjects? It's because they are, they're not geniuses and they sure as hell aren't hard working, not to the extent that they get paid.
Elon Musk makes more money than you do in a year every night in his sleep, how is that appreciating hard work and dedication? The only hard work he did was suck up somebody else's success, then hire somebody to manage his money so he could awkwardly date girls that were only interested in his money while sleeping in a car factory so he could pretend he was working hard.
@@SherrifOfNottingham u don't understand how equity and money work that y u r giving this type of reasons. the rich understand wealth creation and it better if people learn and adopt and improvise.
@@samuelmarndi I understand wealth creation just fine, a huge part of it is pretending that it's not as easy as it actually is. Like the guy that was eating cat food to save money... when a can of meat made for humans was cheaper.
But if you want to believe that hard work is actually valued, go for it, I just figured I'd stop and save you the trip. Hard workers are exploited and left behind since the person in charge of your promotion is more often than not the next step up in the ladder so they're incentivized to not promote hard workers, they need somebody that will stagnate in their position because they're lazy so your boss doesn't think they need a promotion before you move out of the way.
I ain't gonna change your mind, and that's fine, but once you understand how the world actually works you'll realize that Warren Buffet paying a .1% tax rate while you're forking over 12-22% is not a good thing.
If everyone is getting paid the same I'm quitting my job and finding the most slack ass easy job I can find 😂
Fucking selling lemonade in the streets
you got it right that happened in country where i live ( post communistic) if u help the ,,low class´´ for free everyone is now ,, lowclass´´
Exactly, if hard jobs don't pay more then why take a hard job?
Joe was right on the money at around 2:15. I am from Southern West Virginia which is a predominately white area and it is one of the poorest places in the country.
Dude, i worked for months near Nitro, (Taeys valley?), and Roanoke. They livin rough around there for sure
Yup and I bet the all swear by capatilsm
@Mookie Über Alles because most of them would rather work than get on welfare. They don't want handouts, just job opportunities. If anything, them being against government assistance should confirm that they don't have a double standard about it.
@@ringofasho7721 so they are against welfare but are waiting for someone t make jobs for them? Sounds like a double standard
@Mookie Über Alles Of course there are more white people enrolled in welfare programs, white folks make up 67% of the entire population. The question ought not be who receives assistance but does assistance work to help that person become more stable and have less need for assistance and if not why.
I love Tim Pool, he's like an actual 60s liberal, he's very down to earth and smart, and not very emotionally driven in politics.
Mookie Über Alles like AOC future? Be specific
@Mookie Über Alles Know your history or be doomed to repeat it, don't tell people to stop thinking about one of the most important aspects of pushing mankind forward, studying history.
@Mookie Über Alles First of all I wasn't even talking about the holocaust. And in my opinion Germany is one of the most likely to have another holocaust.
@Mookie Über Alles yes that is what he believes.
@A Character you act like a holocaust against white people is impossible?
I respect Pool’s ability to explain his argument, and I respect him not being a radical leftist. These days, if you don’t bend the knee to the radical left, you are cancelled by MSM. That is because their policies are so outlandish that they can’t hold up in a debate, so they have to cancel anyone who would debate them.
Pool is wrong about a few things though, especially how poverty leads to crime. Jordan Peterson has discussed how it’s relative poverty that leads to crime. He also goes into way more detail than Pool did on this issue.
how do you know he's not talking about that? Poverty encompasses could be referred to as general term poverty. I agree with Jordan Peterson but that doesn't mean that absolute poverty doesn't lead to some, somewhat minimal, level of crime.
Very good comment!
"They keep pretending to pay us, and we keep pretending to work."-Soviet
McCarthy is that you?
The same in Cuba.
@Xerxes Medes it's not men it's MEN all caps. not slaves or women. They are included in amendments.
@Xerxes Medes remember that at the time those words were written slaves were considered 3/5 of a human being. We've come a long long way.
@Xerxes Medes
That was over 70 years ago, also you're ignoring that this was only something in some southern states, and completely absent in the north. also, if a black owned a business he could also legally demand whites to be seated in a different place / less desired place
you should focus on the equality of opportunity. Equality of outcome is not a guarantee and shouldn’t ever be guaranteed. you have to work for The outcome. It’s not free. Nothing is.
Even when you discuss equality of opportunity, you'll have folks lose their shit. They think poverty and bigotry is the fault of those born into it.
thanks pickle rick
Air is
You are wrong. Plenty of things are/were free. How much free land was given to White American settlers? Ever heard of the “Sooners?” Imagine what the financial benefit of 24/7 “free.” labor through slavery. Imagine being free to pursue financial gain without fear of that being taken at anytime by racist mobs.
@@menasouvlaki3595 unfortunately air isn't. Has a metabolic cost. Not all costs are economic. Oxidation/free radicals etc.
There is a thing called skilled workers. Doctors shouldn’t make the same as grocery store worker. Equity is not fundamentally sound and insane.
Yeah. This clip made it sound oddly represented... I feel like nobody holds the actual position he was attacking, even though he tried to make it seem so.
My concern is that skilled jobs often have a high barrier to entry, so most people in those jobs had better opportunity. Personally this is one reason I think we need free college in this country.
@@libertyprime9307 Based of the limited sample size of my own observations, people work harder in collage when they pay for it because there is something to lose of they fail. Also college is ridiculously over priced compared to technical colleges that can do the same thing for the first 2 years of college, how is free college going to stop these prices from increasing even further, certainly hasn't cause grade schools to spend more efficiently. And if you look at fafsa and scholarships favoring economically disadvantaged I fail to see how free college would help. I only qualified for 3 scholarships from a list of over a hundred but still managed to get one, that with tax breaks for being a student made it pretty easy to pay for a 2 year degree myself and get a great job.
I also have question, if college is free are we going to build more colleges so everyone can go? Or do you have some other system in mind to decide who gets the limited college space? I guarantee there will be a huge spike in the number of people attending college if it is free.
@@viperstriker4728 First of all I'm not really the guy to go to with these questions, I'm no expert on the education system. Just a person with an opinion, open to having my mind changed.
Like any program, you're right that there would need to be incentive to make spending efficient. Someone would have to be accountable for it. I would probably look into how European countries are doing this if I were you. I hear it's normal to only have to pay less than $100 or so for a year, for books or something, don't really remember.
Regarding your personal story, sorry but I don't really see why an anecdote illustrates that there's no problem with our current system. It sounds like it turned out well for you, but that doesn't mean it can't be improved.
Would we build more colleges if it were free? I would hope so. But I also think we're entering an age where more and more of this can be done online, so physical classrooms, labs and such will in some cases be only temporarily needed for a particular student/class.
A huge spike in the number of people attending college sounds like a major plus. If done well it could greatly increase supply of skilled jobs. Investing in the population is as good an investment as you can make. Same reason I'm for a single payer healthcare system.
No one actually thinks that. Pool erected a strawman, and Rogan went along with it. Disappointing and sad.
Liberty Prime the problem is whose paying for that college? That leads to a socialist system where taxes are near 50% on your income. You can go to college for very little if you achieve good grades that’s the incentive. College is expensive but I’d rather that then pay half my check in the long run for it. Look at the UK for prime example.
Equality=equal opportunity
Equity=equal outcome
It is impossible to achieve equal output . Human compete to win
@@dakshjhamb5514 Exactly, that’s why preaching equity is stupid
@@dakshjhamb5514this is why socialism always fails
If women want to be roughnecks, crab fisherwomen, fire fighters, roofers, steel workers, drywall installers, plumbers, electricians, mechanics, etc. And put in 20 hours of OT a week and make more then men... I say go for it!
Facts
Don't forget soldiers of war
Which we all know they dont
Women are much happier staying at home and working less. This whole movement of "women can be just like men" has just made women unhappy.
And if they do all those things and still get paid less...then what? The only even playing field I've seen is in the military, where you get paid based on time in service and rank, not on gender. By the way...all the above professions are in the military...
A system is only as good as the people that run it.
Exactly, and if no one runs it, it's not a system... unless it's Anarchic Capitalism, which leaves it all up to the flow of money.
You've got that completely backwards...
Well then no system is good since nobody is ultimately good.
@@Migger_29 I'm. Good
Ryan hello Good I’m Hugh Mungus; nice to meet you.
I've never been a high earner, but paying over 50% in tax seems absurd to me. At that stage, it's more like the government is earning and you're getting paid tax
Exactly. And what's more is fed/state/SS/MC/etc taxes are all off the top. People say "pay tax" they think of just the "off the top" tax. But if you think about it, the car you buy with your post tax dollars costs more because of the tax that the seller has to pay so you're paying a higher price, then you pay property tax on that item every year, same with your house (or it's in your rent if you're a renter you just don't see it), and on and on. Everything you buy you pay tax for AND it's more expensive because the seller has to pay all these taxes too. And you've got to buy it with money you've already paid tax on. The amount of tax we pay is ridiculous. I wish there was a full breakdown of everything tax. Someone needs to do a youtube video of all the hidden taxes and breakdowns.
@@user-nh3gu1ge3d what you said is excatly why ultra wealthy pays less tax in proportaion to their income than you, they can afford to pay good accountant to claim all those extra taxes back through company expenses and yearly exemptions, you are not meant to get taxed twice on all the products and services you use, but since you are not an accountant and dont have your own company you dont know how to claim those back. thats part the reason why the ultra wealthy are legally paying less tax than you.
@@user-nh3gu1ge3d what you said is excatly why ultra wealthy pays less tax in proportaion to their income than you, they can afford to pay good accountant to claim all those extra taxes back through company expenses and yearly exemptions, you are not meant to get taxed twice on all the products and services you use, but since you are not an accountant and dont have your own company you dont know how to claim those back. thats part the reason why the ultra wealthy are legally paying less tax than you.
It may be, but if you make 10 million dollars a year, you will earn more in 6 months than what a person living on a comfortable 100k income will earn in the entire lives. At some point, it makes little sense for you to make more money. It's a difficult topic.
@@CoffeeD_1 Except some, definitely not all, people who make that amount make so much because they've earned it. They've put in the effort and make what they make because they deserve it. Someone earning 100k a year might have the opportunities to make more, but don't because they lack ambition, or might simply not be worried about making more. What I feel would be good, is if governments offered incentives for companies/individuals with large incomes to invest their money in programmes/public services. Say you dedicate some amount of your money every year into a specific service (healthcare, transport, defence etc) , the government could agree to subsidise some of the costs in certain areas that may be beneficial to that individual. I know what I'm describing is vague and, if done wrong, would be heavily exploitable, but it would potentially motivate some to give more money on top of tax in order to spend less on things they enjoy. Say if I was earning lots, and I dedicated 12% a year on top of tax to healthcare and energy, the government could then subsidise some of the cost for me to buy games, go to the gym, go to the cinema, have meals out etc. This would require a lot of infrastructure to support this, but a system that rewards those for helping the public would potentially motivate them to dedicate more income, whereas a simple progressive tax rate just feels like the government taking money and putting it to causes you may disagree with
The scenario missing in the "equality vs equity" is the fence would be raised so none can see over it, and only those deemed "worthy" are permitted inside
What about paying for a ticket and sitting in the stands? Govt handout mentality
Stop blaming everyone for your lack of success in your life. It is a lazy excuse for not working hard and taking advantage of the opportunities available to those who work hard and those who do not get caught up in the belief that your future is predetermined by your social status, race, gender etc.
@@tpat9444 it could be determined by just outright luck
I mean the sad reality is the lottery is legitimately more likely to elevate your lot in life than hard work.
"If all are equal, none are strong." - Darth Bane
Similar to the old adage "Saying you are interested in everyone is the same thing as saying you are interested in no one." If everyone suddenly had a million dollars, it'd be worth a lot less and the prices of goods would skyrocket -- basically negating the value, defeating the whole point. Economies can be a tricky nut to crack on a long term basis. I can see points on both sides of the debate.
Only a Sith deals in absolutes
@@R4idenXS so you are sith? and the Yoda too-- this statemenet is absolute ;)
Deathbrewer extremist radical views like yours are why things will never work.
@@ard1805 Explain how his views are radical? He didnt give any "opinions", all what he said was true. If every one had a million dollars then a million dollars wouldnt be as near as much as it is today, that is what we call inflation....
Lmao “pay everyone same”
Karl Marx: “Am I a joke to you?”
Yes Karl. You are a joke.
Yes. Fuck karl marx.
@@mahbuburrahman8053 have you read the communist manifesto? he's really not all that critical of capitalism. What he does is show that it's one of the natural steps. Russia and their implementation of communism is what causes the distrust for communism due to the fact that they weren't ready. Marx stated that the world would have to go through 5 stages capitalism being the 4th in order to revolutionise the industry to a point where production was so efficient that they could give everyone what they need. Russia never went through this and that is why it was disastrous. While I believe Marx's communist utopia isn't the way of the future, once we become efficient enough to the point where everyone can have a car, a house, food, and other such items, then communism would work, still it wouldn't be the best method of society. This I believe would be instead a mixed society. Lenin's Russia was an interpretation of Marx's theory that actually worked better than it probably should have done.
@@roonieramshaw929 Everyone having a car, house and food cannot be achieved with efficiency if we keep or traditional views of what these three concepts are. We should talk about transport, housing and ... well yeah food (just less wasteful and carnivorous). Individualizing every service I don't believe is possible with our population. Suburbs eat up our fertile agricultural lands, cars are space inefficient and right now very pollutant and food is, in are north american society at least, unhealthily prepared/produced.
To summarize we need to stop believing a single family house with all its amenities adding a car for each member of the household can be achieved with innovation and efficiency.
@@karimsimard-amini7617 the problem with what you are saying is that people need privacy and personal space in order to flourish. The mouse utopia experiments demonstrated what happens when every need is meet other than space. Society devolves and the confined species goes extinct.
Furthermore, even if everyone on earth had a townhouse with a yard, the entirety of the human race can fit into a landmass the size of Texas.
The landmass of Texas is 268,820 sq mi (7,494,294,271,488,000 sq ft) ... Divide the number of feet by the population, 7.53 billion, and you get 995.26 sq ft, which is the size of a small townhouse -and that's if every man, woman and child and elderly person had their own townhouse with a yard.
Besides space, I think people need to be given agency. Given agency, people will make better choices, as they can finally gain some measure of reward for their planning. Given personal planning, people will choose to increase living standards for their children and thus have less children, and thus the space available to each person increases even more. That's if everyone is forced to live on Texas, in their own townhouse.
I would rather allow people a more comfortable bottom to rise from. Either negative tax or ubi could establish a decent bottom as they would theoretically allow unfortunate persons the chance to leave their unfortunate situation. If workers at the bottom were allowed to choose, that would be the beginning of a more equitable society. If people check out of society, that is fine. Some people will want to establish new townships (to escape corrupted ones). And people would still choose to better themselves, because that's human nature. Consider how well paid garbagemen are, and yet not everyone wants to be a garbageman. It's just that the people who do can hold their heads high with some measure of self respect for gaining a reasonable reward for doing a necessary job. It should be this way with all jobs.
A society where everyone can behave harmoniously is a better society than one where we must force people into poverty. The concept of teamwork is better than any scourge. Consider religion. People actually have to pay to join in. If, as an employer, you can't afford to pay people enough to work with you, or if you have to bribe the govt to force the people to work for you at gunpoint, maybe you're doing something wrong.
Hey I’m from West Virginia about time someone realized us
Do y'all still think coal is coming back? Or have y'all realized it's dead there.
The last time people remembered West Virginia was probably Fallout 76. My condolences.
Mississippi
Am I a joke to you?
Coastal Virginian here, sorry for your loss
I remember returning to WV from NC. The coal deposits used to look like a black wall. Nearly like a skyscraper
This idea of equity is based on the assumption that if everyone started on a level playing field, then everyone would finish on the same level. As a result of this assumption, people on the left believe that because two people are finishing on different levels (say income for example) that this is an indication that the starting playing field was not leveled. This leaves no room to account for choice inequality and effort inequality etc, which makes it extremely difficult to visualise real obstacles to opportunity.
Lmao halfway through the video I was like 'That sounds like communism' when they were talking about paying everyone the same regardless of what job one does
I had the exact same thought run through my head, then again the only difference between socialism and communism is a crimson banner and a class purge.
Except I should state that Tim Pool is incorrect in how he frames equity and equality. Equity, according to California's government, for example is "equal pay for work of equal value" so it's about fairness rather than actually equaling the pay. In a perfect world (this is just a model, not actually real) [www.payequity.gov.on.ca/en/AboutUs/Pages/the_difference.asp ] where somebody's output is the same as the guy next to you doing the same job, then you two should be paid exactly the same. It's not the argument that the CEO of ExxonMobil gets paid the same as a store clerk. Nobody is arguing for that. Equality of outcome is what he's misinterpreting for equity which nobody is arguing for except if you're a full-on Socialist.
mad thank you for giving me a notification with zero substance and zero reason to be here. Please, kindly, shut the fuck up unless you can rebuke my argument.
@Pat Mgroin I'm confused what you're arguing
Equity = Communism
Shout out to WV, Joe. I'm white and live in WV and I'm poor af.
Hope things get better financially
I’m from WV too. I laugh when minorities say “all white people start from a place of privilege automatically” ... I welcome them to come to some of the rural areas in WV.
@SRT Roach I can't move. I'm poor. It takes money to move.
@SRT Roach Funny you should mention it. I can't afford the internet. I'm on my phone. But as far as wifi, that's for rich folk. Yeah I could sacrifice a bill and get a plane ticket and then what. I have no savings. I live paycheck to paycheck. You're living in a dream world.
So poor but you have access to the internet? God bless America
No one wants to be stuck in a Quagmire.
Giggity.
Joe doesn’t need to worry, quagmire likes giraffes... wait
@@SourceCod33 giraffes aren't REAL!
Joe Dohn alriiiight....
Literally read this as soon as he said this...
It's examples like this why I love JRE. I learn so much about so many topics to which I wouldn't have otherwise been exposed.
I agree to a point with you but Make sure to think about it. Question it. Research it. The comment about socialism with OD’s, FD’ and such is borderline ludicrous. We pay for those services to provide for a society in which we choose to live. Same with libraries. Social security is claimed to be an entitlement yet we pay into during our years of working even though it was originally suppose to be temporary and non-taxed. Good stuff here though. I like Tim more and more. He’s a liberal you can discuss things with as is Joe most of the time.
"Pay Equity" is just another way of saying *"COMMUNISM."*
Michael DeSanta Sounds right
Racist communism.
Whats wrong with forms of communism? Do you even know what communism is?
@@jimk617 Communism is a lot like Shakespeare: Everybody dies at the end.
Jim K people who work harder don’t earn as much as they deserve. In what world should a brain surgeon earn the same amount as a McDonald’s drive thu worker?
This dude talks like someone is trying to interrupt him constantly
🤣
I bet he constantly does get interrupted
Johny Bauer but he never says ummm or ahhh or errrrr while he’s talking. That’s a tell tale sign of a person worried about being interrupted.
In 'real life', in person, nobody gets a chance to get even one clear opinion out without just being interrupted, or at least NOTHING like when you listen to a shithot podcast and each person gets to fully explain themselves and actually be listened to. It's why as I get older I get more introverted and don't participate even on social media. Podcasts are living the dream vicariously: watching/listening to two people actually give each other their complete attention and focus and not rush each other. In turn, each person can sharpen their ideas, feel comfortable enough to elaborate instead of talking in idiot sound-bytes in order to accommodate the short attention span of most humans in 2020. It's really nice. I don't mind Tim's rapid, nerdy, clearly enunciated speech, LOL, :) I bet that you, the person reading this, can be so funny, fascinating and insightful and hit many nails on the head-- if only you got more of a chance with people.
they are, Johny, they are
The developers just need to release the new game expansion already. The current end-game is just toxic and we all need a reset with new pvp tokens and raise the ceiling on level cap.
I'm waiting on that nuketow dlc
The skill floor in this meta is also very low but the learning curve is super steep.
Guys just respawn as cephalopods so we don’t have to deal with human mains ruining the meta.
I saw a new one that had the same picture labeled "what equity is in reality" and two of the people's legs were chopped off so they equal the height of the short guy.
Lollll
Joe Rogan should have AOC on his show and have her respond to some of this directly.
Joe would just nod along and agree with her on everything.
Or you could just watch her normally and know what she's saying instead of getting your information on a talk show where the host routinely makes a point that they aren't journaliats and rarely know anything about what they're talking about?
@@AeternalDesigns That's my point, Joe is not equipped enough to have any debates, he just nods along no matter how stupid or misinformed someone's ideas might be, my critique is aimed at joe not necessarily the guests he has on, or AOC.
@@AMS_machine_t-01 long form is still valuable
Joe would find a way to make her look good
I've got a grand idea. Destroy career politicians
perhaps. but it would CERTAINLY be a good idea to ban politicians, at least for like a decade, from becoming lobbyists in areas they once made laws to regulate, after leaving office. We gotta stop the revolving door of congress where people become politicians JUST to leave and get paid by a company to lobby against laws.
I don't mind people becoming politicians and staying politicians because they want to serve their constituents. we need safeguards to prevent them from INSTEAD just serving corporate donors. for example, public funding of elections and Andrew Yang's democracy dollars idea, where we level the playing field against corporate money by giving every adult $100 per election to contribute where they want.
Term limits are needed across the board.
Root out corruption and the place it is born is in tax code and contracts.
I'll raise an even better alternative, get rid of EVERYONE thats in a governmental seat of power 🤷♂️
@@justsomeguy1136 that would be too much chaos. Just keeping people outs office for more than say 8 years would cause most of them to be out of office by thr end of their terms always
I'll use my experience to demonstrate an underlying flaw in the equity vs equality debate.
I grew up poor. Trailer trash, alcoholic drug addict parents, periods of homelessness, etc.. I couldn't afford to go to university and ended up joining the military because I didn't have a car and all the jobs I could get required me to have reliable transport. However, I am naturally smart and it always came out. In the navy, I was able to coast through the ET schools, get my pick of deployments (Japan), and then stand out among my peers. It's not because I worked hard, I just naturally understand everything I have ever encountered.
Later, I got a job as an English teacher (married an Asian lady and moved to her country). School realized I was smart and so they had me teach test prep, and then later graduate prep (econometrics, fluid dynamics, etc.). Without really putting in any effort, I excelled at the job and quickly built up a reputation. Soon, demand for my classes was higher than I could meet and my salary began to reflect it. Within 4 years, my salary increased 6 fold.
When I was 34, one of my students recognized I was smart and she gave me $1,300,000 to start a gaming studio and later moved me into being the "CEO" of her eclectic businesses. I'm not rich, but I make a 6 figure salary with no effort on my part simply because I'm smart. So, my "advantage" isn't my race. It isn't my rich parents. Etc. Yet, in the visual representation, I would be one of the tall people. So, how should this be accounted for? How should my innate intelligence be be adjusted to make it more equitable?
Now, I have a decent income, but far from rich. Yet, I live a fairly frugal life style. I don't like to drink. I'm not into cars or other expensive gadgets. I don't care about fashion. For myself, I mostly just like playing video games, reading books, watching shows, and spending time with my kids; none of these are expensive hobbies. Instead, I am spending most of my income preparing my children. I pay for them to go to exclusive private schools. I pay for them to have private tutors and to take courses. I spend time with them, teaching them philosophy, mathematics, science, and logic.
So, let's say another person instead chooses to spend their money on traveling, partying, expensive cars, and luxurious houses. Their children are not afforded the same advantages my children are. However, to then "level the playing field" and effectively penalize my children is to penalize ME for choosing to provide for my children over other things. How is that remotely just? Why should I not be allowed to provide advantages to my children with my resources if that's what I wish to do with my resources?
I agree with your argument but I'm sure the socialist response to that is if they tax you extra, the education system would be so good you wouldn't need to do it yourself. Not only that, but the next kid in your situation (poor background) will have a good education system to not be forced to join the army.
The issue with that logic however is you can apply it to any social institution and it becomes a game of "How much is enough?". As in, how much tax is fair to fund this equity without penalising the average Joe who has tried hard to achieve the things he has. And the second argument, like what you said in your anecdotes, is how do we know what people spend their money on (educating their kids vs holidays) and how do we measure which is better. Should people with kids be taxed more than those without? Should we see what people spend their income on to determine how much they are taxed etc etc.
Its just not quantifiable.
yup i agree with you. most of what i actually hear is people who are delusional and think that its actually possible to get rid of all suffering everywhere in the world by making some more people suffer and they say stuff like "jeff bezos has enough money to stop world hunger! eat the rich!"
but they actually fail to realize sure lets say he can buy everyone a meal for one day(without too much logistical problems) and then have most of them die off the next because they would still be hungry the next day.
so now all we have is one dead rich guy now what, and like what the ussr did is go onto the next successful guy like warren buffet or something along the lines and kill him and take all his money and repeat then now all we have is all the successful people dead. that wanna be robin hood side is a sick joke.
You must be very smart since you managed to mention it 6 times
@@DaBroetchen Given it was central to the illustration of my point, yes, I mentioned it.
thomas anderson intelligence differences across races? Let me guess, your race is the most intelligent one?
$77k/ year in California is POVERTY
This is "equality of opportunity" vs "equality of outcome"
Or 'may the best win' vs 'why bother?'
Except they give all the opportunities to the people who already have opportunities and the poor stay poor. Equal opportunity is give everyone equal education. guaranteed free quality education k-12 isnt a thing. The school systems suck generally but depending on what zip code you were born into your opportunities are far less. Schools suck even more, teachers and faculty dont have passion for their jobs. In america today atleast. Equal opportunity is an illusion because even if the government allots everybody a pot to piss in 50% are gonna be born a whole ass toilet and 10% are gonna be born with a golden toilet and the remaining 40% will still be pissing in a pot. The government can create a baseline for people’s welfare like everyone gets 1000 bucks a month or some shit. That is the “equal opportunity” the government gives people. Your born, you get human rights. Congratulations, depending on where and to who you are born some people will violate your human rights and rape and kill you, have fun, is the type shit we have going on right now
@@mastertrey4683 yeah. I THINK? the idea should be to create a minimum baseline of quality of life (education, safety, healthcare) because those things are what CREATES opportunity for individuals, and not having them FUCKS people from ever even having equal opportunity.
Even if the government created some type of system in which there was an established “baseline,” the wealthy will always have the upper hand because they will always be able to afford private everything. The baseline of opportunity would have to be so good that its quality would be on par with what the richest person could afford. Then perhaps we would have equality of opportunity.
@@ladyofthemoonflower I think that why equality of opportunity often works better by having state schools, universal health care, rent control, free (taxes) further education, possibly universal wage.
And make the rich pay taxes to the countries they are often pilfering by paying slave wages.
Democratically vote in some socialist frame work where the market cannot be trusted, as market is often corrupted towards profit over people and planet through con artistry over quality of product.
Corrupt capitalism is what causes Post modern madness imho not people identifying as Marxists that love individualism, they are just short sightedly loving the 'my turn now' entitlement idea. They not true left they are true c**** imho.
I became a realtor for the money. That’s it, if I would be paid the same I would still work at lowes
Justin Waters that’s the most cliche shit i’ve ever herd bro shut the fuck up justin
Justin Waters ok bud see how that pays bills
Literally 0% of people in the world think all jobs should pay the same amount, dude
Yeah I drive truck for the same reason. Money. My particular job in my particular area pays decent.
Can't wait for the day I don't have to do it anymore.
Michael Lorish enjoy yo unfulfilled life nigga
Imagine some under water welder on the verge of death because his job is getting paid the same as a bakery clerk putting bread in a bag.
Well that's the thing, if you inflate the lowest wages, the rest of them will follow. Which is why artificial wage control doesn't work. It just inflates currency.
The graphic shown in the thumbnail is the exact same one that has been used for years in equity trainings in most urban and suburban school districts across the nation. This concept is driven by Critical Race Theory. CRT is explicitly Marxist in its ideology and dogma. It still surprises me that anyone would support an ideology that resulted genocide that far surpassed the evils of Nazi Germany. But it is happening nonetheless. People need to better understand history.
I was a commercial diver and almost died a few times and I would have quit my job much sooner.
@@quinnokeefe4684 ahh yes, the Marxists are evil
Quinn O'Keefe black people don’t listen to the white mans history
I can use the same argument about quantifiable metrics against Tim. Who is to say that a CEO has a more important job than a clerk? If you’re at a store and you require the help of a clerk, that position becomes pretty important to you pretty fucking quickly. This is not nearly as cut and dry as they want to make it seem.
The CEO can do the clerks job, the clerk can not do the CEO's job. You are paid by how easy it is to replace you in any employment area. Welders are paid well because it is hard to find a great welder. Heavy machine operators make good coin because its essential to have a good heavy equipment operator. Its easy to give anyone a shovel and tell them to shovel dirt. It is very cut and dry. Its about resources, and the scarcity of resources that will determine your "worth" in the workforce.
why do so many people mistake corporatism for capitalism
Because in true capitalism strong corporations survive while all other competition is squashed. Capitalism in it's truest form destroys opportunity and options for everyone.
@@cooper5324 hahhaha that is some of most bull shit ive ever heard. 1. only government destroy opportunity and options with the regulations and laws which they force onto peoples lives and which destroy competition and innovation which creates monopolies, corporatism is government (socialism) placing loads and loads or regulations on a market making it hard for anyone to compete and takes away the incentive too. Now true capitalism, free markets, why its impossible for their to be a monopoly in a true free market is because the only regulation is the individual, the buyer they have all the power, not the government. Voluntarism is the key point here. in a free market an idea a business is always able to one up another idea or business making it near to impossible for one or a few business to be in power. True capitalism is freedom for innovation, competition and bringing back the incentive to bring value into a market and to individuals who get value from buying the service or product in which is being sold to them. Socialism is rape, capitalism is consensual sex!
@@youngxavibeats you literally just said that true capitalism is bad. So what did I say that was bullshit. Also corporations create in a free society can monitor and silence political opposition because it is their business, but I don't think that's healthy for a free united society.
@@cooper5324 wait where did i say that true capitalism is bad???? what are you on about Cooper my son ahhaha..... and can you show me evidence where in a free society a corporation is silencing people, only government does that. ONCE AGAIN, ill go back to the terminology of intercourse cause im cool --- Socialism (government) is rape as they use force against individuals. Capitalism is consensual sex as its all voluntary. its so hard to get this into peoples heads as they've been brought up thinking capitalism is evil and what we live in today is "capitalism" when it really isn't! theirs never been true capitalism, meaning theirs never been true freedom. you said "true capitalism strong corporations survive while all other competition is squashed" this is utter bullshit and you know it, also can you show me why and where this happened....???
@@youngxavibeats you said government policies destroy competition and create Monopolies, but when capitalism had no interference in the 1890's Monopolies dominated any other business, and controlled the whole supply change to products. This in turn caused a recession as Monopolies could artificially increase prices lowering the buying power of the country. This was all voluntary, but because of greed people screwed themselves over. Your argument is based on an either or fallacy were you think that the only solutions are true capitalism or true socialism yet you fail to see the problem that comes from either of them, but instead rely on rhetoric to make pointless claims.
Equality should be maintained on a macro level; Equity should be handled on a personal level. When the two are switched up - problems will come.
Well said!
@@rashadhussein8561 Going with the analogy of three boys of different heights are each given a box to stand on to watch an event. Everyone gets one box - that's the rule, regardless of the personal situations. That could be considered equality. If the tall one decides to give up his box to the smaller one to help him actually see over the fence because of the situational difference, then that could be considered equity.
Equity on a personal level also has a built-in check-n-balance system. Not many people are willing to help out someone who is not willing to contribute and who is an asshole. This reinforces traits and behaviors in people that are desired by society at large and in their community. Once someone who is not involved in your life in any way starts telling you how to divide up your own resources, you will naturally feel resentment.
Good way to put it that I’m sure all sides can agree with. Nice one!
ArakanEli That equity example only really works if everyone is a rational actor and, more importantly, altruistic. In reality, we have plenty of tall people with a crate they don’t need (or even have a use for), but they still keep the crate anyways. Even worse, a lot of those tall people cant seem to comprehend that short people are short through no fault of their own, therefore they build an even greater level of resentment towards them. From a biological perspective, we have no reason to be altruistic towards others outside our immediate family anyways. So if we want to instill equity, I can’t imagine it being successful if left to the individual.
Overall, there are good counterarguments in this video regarding the concept of equity. And some of the suggestions by the left on the issue are definitely a little too radical. However, I think a lot of the equity “haters” are way too quick to brush off the idea entirely. The guy in this video gives a quick mention of racial discrimination, and mentions that the resulting disadvantages aren’t quantifiable. Yet, there are literally hundreds of studies that do, in fact, quantify these disadvantages in some way. Are those studies gospel? No. But to dismiss a mountain of data is erroneous on his part, whether you think they should result in specific government policy or not.
@@SkyKingAzure Excellent assessment!
Tim seems like a very intelligent individual. He seems to see honestly the flaws in our government on both sides. He sees the flaws of communism and socialism as well as our form of capitalism. We need more people who can see the bigger picture like this better.
@Rich Oliver explain what you're talking about
@Rich Oliver I caught on this too - the Petroleum Engineer Example was fallacious in nature and I question his position as being "left". That was a stupid equivocacy
equity in the SAME job...
@Rich Oliver exactly this ^^ equitably higher wages depending on skill - but again I know this can be unpacked however I really don't feel the need too go down that rabbit hole
Petroleum Engineer making the same as a store clerk is not equity, and is a horrible example. Equity as judged by courts is based on maxims, one of which is (Equity is equality). Equity will be closer to all patroleum engineers earning the same salary irrespective of seniority or which company they work for, or if senior engineers are paid more, then every senior engineer should be paid that same amount. But (equity will not assist a volunteer) and (Equity assists the vigilant) mean the engineers who work harder should be paid more than the ones who don’t work hard and barely get through the day. Equity if understood correctly is close to equality, but with principles.
Whenever someone says "equity", run away as fast as you can.
I have assumed for years that "laziness" will one day be considered a disability. Of course, it won't be labelled "laziness", but there you go.
You run from accountants?
My investment banker is about to lose my business. 😂
Then we need to run away from all of America's college and university systems (which I'm not against).
Shit, i was about to refinance my home but he mentioned how much equity i had in it and i ran out
This is like forcing NBA to hire untalented basketball players, because they sucked so bad they had been given 4 points for jump shots and 6 points for three point shots and 2 points for free throw so it is an equity for more talented NBA players.
Right, could you imagine if that was the case. Deep Equity is apart of our public school system now. We the People need to stand up against this very disturbing, and wrong ideal.
@@jasonpaden7315 found the Trump loving America hating traitor
His name is LeBron James and he's trying his hardest! OK! lol
@Mike Rocker People don't choose to play the socialist game either, they're both just different economic models that is forced on the populace by the state.
Even if socialism is enacted via democratic vote, it's still being forced on people who don't want it, by the state. It could be 51% of people voting that the state force the other 49% to participate.
Like, a person who grew up in the Soviet Union was forced to participate in socialism just as much as someone who grows up in the US is forced to participate in capitalism.
Now, if you wish to delve into theories of things like anarcho-communism or anarcho-capitalism that's a whole different ballgame.
@Mike Rocker Good lord almighty that's one super ideologically driven wall of text.
By the 2nd paragraph I didn't need to read anymore because I already knew your shtick from the other countless numbers of socalist ideologues that I've heard give the same pitch, and it requires you to presuppose so many things to justify your agenda.
But I read it all out of curiosity nonetheless.
You're assuming moral absolutes about certain things and making arguments based on premises that are extremely contestable by anyone who isn't also a rabid ideologue.
You're just as ideologically corrupt as the "Free Market Capitalism Fixes Everything" people.
It would be impossible to talk to you seriously because you've swallowed all the propaganda hook, line, and sinker about the absolute and inherent virtues of your side and the absolute and inherent evils of the other. Your black and white and morally righteous worldview on the issue prevents us from having a reasonable discussion
It would be as about as productive as me talking to a deluded, morally righteous Laissez-Faire Capitalist ideologue as well.
You're 100% set in your ways, and you won't budge because you obviously presuppose your viewpoint as the true and morally righteous one.
Also, I'm not an AnCap. My observation of state enforcement wasn't a disavowal of it. My opposition to Marxist-Leninist economic theories and the yellow/black pfp has nothing to do with the ideology of Anarcho-Capitalism, it's a Generation Identity Lambda.
Also, it's cute that you leftist ideologues always try to deny the socialist nature of the Soviet Union.
The "It wasn't real socialism/communism/Marxism" take always makes me giggle.
I mean, at least some of the Capitalists I talk to have the balls to take full credit for their handiwork like Pinochet.
I personally find the National Socialist take on economics the best starting point, and it's very different from both typical Marxian Socialism and Capitalism.
Whereas both you and the Capitalists structure your economic views in a moralist and materialist underpinning, I do not.
I also don't recognize equality as a valid or even moral concept.
In my observation, reality is never equal and never will be. Nature cannot allow equality. Such a concept is an unobtainable human delusion. Not under Communism, Socialism, Capitalism, Anarchism, or any other -ism will equality ever exist. Nor do I think trying to make it so is a valid moral endeavor.
I would also never claim a moral validation in my beliefs like you and the capitalists do.
I take the stance of the Egoist types in that morality is a spook, and that all claimed moral endeavors are merely an act of self-interest.
I'll stick to my third-position economic model that the socialists and the capitalists both deny the existence of.
I'll also stick to my Egoist moral framework.
You can keep your false dichotomies.
You and the capitalists deserve each other.
Equity is when the short guy cuts off the legs of the tall guy and then tell him to watch his tall man privilege while he's bleeding out on the ground.
lmao, totaly agree
Sounds hilarious 😂
Survival of the fittest. Seems fair.
Agreed
@Flat Earth... I was being sarcastic. The tall guy has "evolved" to be able to watch the game whereas the short guy has not. Instead of actually being the fittest, the short guy removes the competition and doesn't "evolve" at all. That's how our society works now. The group with the "tools" and the requisite lack of morality eliminates its competition so that being the fittest doesn't matter.
"People want freedom FROM freedom" - Michael Tsarion
If I could get paid my salary to be a store clerk, why would I continue to deal with high stress and deadlines?
Because you want to create something?
If I had the security of a stable income, I would start my own business. I can guarantee you this would not cause less stress/deadlines.
But right now that's not a reasonable risk right now (you make barely anything while your business grows)
If you think being a store clerk isn't high stress then you are in for a rude awakening. A job with deadlines means you are actually producing something, maybe even something you can be proud of, instead of dealing with rude idiots all day with nothing to show for it besides a check, a headache, and sore feet.
Kaeda Tiger it is not high stress compared to many other jobs bud, it’s annoying,yes. Frustrating,yes. Every job has a certain degree of this though.
@@Madman-jm3tl Sure, there are plenty of jobs that are more stressful. And there are plenty of jobs that are less stressful. Stress level has nothing to do with the income level.
Kaeda Tiger to a point it does, broadly. Business owners are gonna have a high stress job but depending on the business high pay. Lawyers, doctors and anyone else providing a private service will have generally higher pay AND higher stress vs retail and similar jobs
Wow Imagine if everyone thought this critically and reasonably, even if they didn’t come to the exact same conclusion, the world would be a better place
I was literally just thinking the same thing. I pretty much despise Bernie Sanders and everything he stands for, so I would have a hard time agreeing with this guy. That said, I can see myself having a very reasonable, fair discussion with him on the issues. It sounds to me like we would agree in large part on where we would want to get there, but we would have strong ideological differences on how we would get there.
The biggest difference I have with this guy is that he seems to think that government power is the way to get to a rising tide lifting all boats whereas I absolutely believe that a hands off approach/decentralized/unregulated free market is the rising tide with no government interference. However we may disagree on this or that, I appreciate his ability to layout his argument and his ability to listen to dissent. It is hard to say that about either side in politics today.
@@Str8Raiser go check out his channel, his viewpoints have drastically changed pretty recently.
Gino Benedetto I feel like that’s happening a lot lately with intelligent liberals that see the mask coming off the democrat party as they engage in total leftist ideology
I like Tim, he’s level headed old school liberal and that’s coming from a Republican. I agree with a lot of what he said. We really need term limits. The people in Congress are destroying this country.
I was born in a two room shack in WV and raised in Eastern Ky, the poorest region of America. I started working at 12 as a garbage boy on a commercial garbage route. When I started higj school I was 5' 7" tall and weighed 89 pounds. I know the sweet taste of hunger.
But I got out of those hills. I moved around and worked my way up. Then I started mybown business. I elected not to have children. So, now I am getting ready to retire with townhome apartments, a big farm, nice home and a winter home in Naples, FL.
Decisions and drive make the real difference. Be smart and you can make it. I am living proof.
Amen... Life isn't fair however determination and working hard does increase your odds of success. Congratulations on your retirement Sir 👍
This is a perfect example of some who is a liberal but knows how to use common sense on current affairs. Someone who leans left but is not a afraid to comprise with people on the right and will call bullshit on morons on the far left. Someone who puts logic, realism, and comprise over what party you belong to. Something you don’t see everyday. Good for you.
It goes both ways with idealogy, regardless it is exceedingly rare on both sides.
I want to see a person on the right not bow down to trump but they really dont have balls
@@JM-ll6hd not really. The left just fucking yells. I haven't heard my ever seen Ben s scream
@@branflakee4257 check out Ben Shapiro. He calls balls and strikes on most things, Trump included.
@@branflakee4257 Then here ya go moron...I am on the right, didn't vote for Trump and think he's a disgrace. You are truly fucking stupid if you think every conservative likes Trump.
TERM LIMITS!!!!!! One of the biggest things that will help this country
I was gonna be creative and just post TERM LIMITS.. 🤣😂😂🤣 then I scrolled down. APPARENTLY we're on the same page bro 😂🤣😂🤣🤠
Also, raise the voting age to 30. No one who has not paid student loans, ate shit from a boss, paid off a home, budgeted for bills, should have a right to vote. If you are younger then 30 then you haven't struggled enough. We need people voting who cant be tricked by these greasy politicians.
@@spartanrh83 I'm nearly 30 and haven't paid any student loans. Do I not deserve to vote just because I chose not to be subjected to predatory debt? Dumbass.
@Jordan E then campaign finance reform, and stricter laws for political bribery
@@spartanrh83 That would get to the heart of it slightly better, for example putting caps on how much can be spent by a candidate or party in a given campaign. The UK has legislation like that. It doesn't prevent cronyism and corruption, but it does help to manage it up to a point.
I love when people refer to the wealthy as greedy like they'd be some kind of saint instead. Almost no one will give away their wealth. We can't even get people to stop talking a dump on the environment. Humans are flawed, you are flawed, stop seeing strangers as lesser humans. Most people aren't that different from you, they are just in different circumstances.
Jordan Peterson says exactly this so well. I'll summarize to avoide misquoting, but basically he says: The line between good and evil isn't found between two groups, its within yourself. You have the capacity for evil as much as anyone. And you have to sort yourself out before you can determine if others are wrong. I'm pretty sure I'm misquoting so it's best if you find the source material, I think it was on the first JRE / Peterson podcast.
I'm literally being taught this right now in my environmental science class. This EXACT cartoon was used in the lecture. I'm worried.....
They own the schools. They indoctrinate even the young now. This is what happens when God is taken out of school.
@@UmamiPapi have you read the Bible? there’s a lot of passages that praises equity and sharing the riches
@@aurelien5747 Charitable giving is not the same as a government taking all your money away so that they can then steal it like always happens in communism. Why is it that the most ignorant and wrong people are always trying to use the Bible against Christians? You've read the Bibe? Have you understood it by The Holy Spirit within you?
@@user-ee1sq7ly6y on the slide with the image it tried to distinguish a connection to social justice and environmental justice, I still don’t understand what was trying to be said in relation to science
Tim def railed like 4 addys before this😂😂
Nicholas Howe no doubt 😂
😂😂😂
The fuck
Really nice to see a civil conversation about this stuff
Yeah right? A civil conversation about American politics. You don't see that often
Pity it's between two people who don't know what they're talking about.
Money absolutely is a motivator, especially if you have a family to support.
Equity almost sounds like socialism economically speakin
Equity means fairness.
equity doesn't mean equality, and it doesn't mean someone at forever 21 makes as much as a doctor. Tim pool is lying about shit because he has stopped trying to think for himself....
To think taxation is theft and still want essentials governments provide (such as a standing military, infrastructure, police and fire protection, etc) would in effect be theft of the work and resources of others.
I would also like to add. The Revolutionary War itself was in fact funded by taxes. So the freedoms we do enjoy in the United States, we would not have if it were not for taxes.
@@jonm7888 Not fair at all. Fairness is treating everyone the same. Discriminating against people based on anything is not fair. And who decides what is fair and what criteria you use.
depends what definition of socialism you use. American Conservatives believe that such things like government paid health care, education, or any government funded program is socialism. Thats not socialism, its social policy.
I worked in a school district where everyone was on a pay scale with the more experienced getting more money. It was not based on anything else. There was no incentive to work hard. Every year you got an automatic pay raise no matter what. Bad teachers stayed until they died. It was mind crushing for a person like me. I left teaching and became a school psychologist.
I hate that, im a farmer and my grandfather did a simular thing paying our farm hands. When i took over i calculated the average wage we were paying people and put everyone there, after the first month if you worked hard and got your shit done i gave raises and if you didnt you got a cut. I still actively adjust as i see fit.
@@mp40submachinegun81 is it difficult doing that calculations while not using emotions?
Teachers start with the same base pay, but you can increase your own earning ceiling by working outside of school hours in many districts. Professional development trainings offered by districts, getting more college credits to increase your base salary. A teacher that works this kind of overtime can make almost 20 percent more than their colleagues in as little as two-three years who do not go the extra mile on their own.
7:30 that can't be Norway. The highest possible income tax in norway is 46.4%, and you definitely won't be paying that much tax at only 77k USD.
In Germany you pay maximum tax of almost 50% at 55k Euro
@@Truhandle91 Sounds illegitimate. You german?
@@poetsrear yes I am from Germany, at 57052 Euro annually you pay 42% income tax, you also pay 9,3 %pension insurance (9,3% will pay the employer, making it 18,6) of your gross salary meaning you earn 10k per month, almost 1k goes to pension insurance, but you don't fill up your own pension, you sustain the current old population.. Meaning you can't be sure that what you put in is the same amount you would get when you are old. You also pay 5,5% of you annual income tax as a solidarity tax if you live in the west for the east German states... You also will have to pay 250 to 800 per month in health insurance.. Basically 7,3% of your income.. If you belong to a church then you also have to pay church tax.. I did a calculation.. If you earn 100k per year, are 25 years old and single then you will end up with 52.166,49€ basically half of your shit is gone
@@samsu9622 Grüße zurück aus Bonn 😁✌🏽
@@Truhandle91I can verify this calculation is absolutely correct. However it's fair to say that the German tax payer is still in a better position than in the US. The cost of living is not even close to any mayor US city. Goods and rents are way cheaper, infrastructure works and health system is stable even in this days. I been living in UK US and Germany.
My dad worked literally his whole life only to be hit in a car accident and collect just $1050 a month. He started going on job sites with my grandpa when he was 5 and could hang cabinets and read a tape measure and started doing construction in his early teens and was legally paying taxes at 15 and worked his way up to foreman after being with the company a long time but it eventually went under. He was also a maintenance man for several apartment complexes and mobile home parks and drove heavy equipment dumping sand all day and also was a plumber and although not a journeyman he had his own company vehicle cell phone and assistant and did basically what the other certified people did. Also welded at the train station and several other fields. He could fix basically everything inside a house along with doing a lot of car work and was AC/Welding/Pool certified and played in a band on the weekends for about 25 years too. He was in so much pain his last years alive and body just torn up from the wreck and all the years of manual labor. I still have several of his blueprints from when he ran jobs and was in charge of sometimes over 100 people and speaking with the architect for multimillion dollar buildings.
When the first social security system was founded in Germany there were 52 active workers for every retired worker, taking 2% of their salary from active workers was more than enough to maintain the system, the problem is that from the beginning the system was a Ponzi scheme, it was expected that there would always be more active workers than retired, currently in Germany there are 15 active workers for every retired worker, the system is broken because not only are there fewer active workers, life expectancy and medical costs have increased over time, when the system was established life expectancy was about 35 years (no joke), currently life expectancy is 75 years. The United States system suffers from the same ills, the contribution of active workers does not cover the pensions of retired workers and the government has to take money out of the budget to try to reduce the deficit.
I have seen one where the tall guy is still taller than the other two even without a crate and his legs are cut shorter,, because,, fairness... You, know, the Maoist way
That sounds pretty much how far right-wing people think left-wing folks want the world to be. Scary part is, the regressive left _does_ think in such insane ways, and it's taking a long time for those on the left, as a whole, to realise this, and to realise it's tainting their whole side of politics in the process.
what are you gonna do with all that extra leg?
if you can cut the legs and still move around, then so what if theyre cut?
oh wait, but this isnt about legs and height-
we're talking about Money.
like the millions of dollars used by the ultra-wealthy to buy out politicians, and create policies that benefit those ultra-wealthy and fuck over the poor :D
Joe Rogan really needs to get Thomas Sowell on
jonathan romero yusssssss
I agree Jonathan Romero. That would be amazing. Thomas Sowell is one of our last few great minds we have left. It's a shame They re all getting so old. We need people like them to help the movement
At this rate I believe its coming Rogan is on a serious wave sith these guests.. Fucking loving it
jonathan romero that would be interesting. He should get a lot of the guests Dave Rubin has on
jonathan romero Thomas Sowell is like 90 years old bro
Read the short story "Harrison Bergeron" by Kurt Vonnegut. It's exactly about this kind of social engineering, trying to force everyone to be exactly equal - which of course means handicapping anyone who has more talents or abilities and others so that the disadvantaged don't feel bad.
Nobody says everyone will have the exact same amount. Even Marx said that was impossible. This is a strawman argument.
@@jonm7888 of course even Vonnegut didn't think such a society was likely to occur... it was a hyperbole to illustrate the dangers of running a society with your main goal being trying to avoid offending or denigrating those who have less ability or capability.
Jon M no you just have a strawman perceptive.
@@prisonmike8214 wtf does that mean. Who is saying everyone should make the same amount? I've never heard Bernie Sanders say that, as this guy implied.
My favorite short story
The worst part of "equity" is they want it to be the SOLE DECIDER. Giving a high performing poor person the same University opportunity as mediocre trust funders is one thing, but that is not their goal. They want to do away with meritocracy completely.
Who are "they" tho?
Serious question.
The Queensland government (Australia) just moved away from positions based on merit and based on gender and racial equity.
@@hadenanderson563see my comment below for real world example.
What made Europeans want to move from fairly rich European countries to the US in the 1800s was opportunities, not government.
@Jose Smilez Cool bro you passed American History I. Now try to form an argument instead of this retarded "mic drop". I can do it too: Look up Dunning Kruger effect
We aren't gonna have opoortunity once we have a Oligopoly of a few corporations ruling over us. We need Government.
They were being oppressed by taxes and food pricing thats why many left.
Varghese Manakalathil
In the US they also pay for a higher percentage in taxes, they help fund these “socialist” programs as well.
“The top 1 percent of taxpayers paid roughly $538 billion, or 37.3 percent of all income taxes, while the bottom 90 percent paid about $440 billion, or 30.5 percent of all income taxes.”
taxfoundation.org/summary-latest-federal-income-tax-data-2018-update/
@Greg Fakerson hahaha no
High tax rates wouldn't take power away from the richest Americans. First, just assuming they stayed in the country, they'd still have the majority of the wealth. Secondly, they'd just reinvest their profits so their revenue doesn't get taxed. That means their net worth would just continue to grow. Thirdly, businesses would or could just raise the prices of their products and services.
Pay equity was the policy of China from 1949-1978, which is one of the key features of socialism. At least 2 generations suffered from this ideology. Thank god Mr. Deng made the transform in 1978, and we have been seeing over 40 years of economy boom. The leftism's idea is very very familiar with the past 3 generations of Chinese....
That's why the US will fail. All these other countries to choose from, as examples of multiple bad ideas the left has, already being and have been played out. But "we can do it right, this time!"... Would be funny if China in the future becomes known as a place of freedom and the US the opposite. Things change, given enough time.
A socialist walks into a bar: "Drinks for everyone ! Who's paying?"
The reply would be "Everyone." Not that hard to understand.
I walked into a bar and said the same thing and came out making a profit.
You voted... I'm sure.
@Black Stone It's almost like you don't know what restrictions/regulations are. A guy wouldn't be allowed to stock up on all the beer he wanted
@Black Stone the bar example is a weird one and it doesn't translate very well into the real world, but take healthcare in the UK.
Everyone is covered under socialised healthcare, but if someone wants additional services (i.e. plastic surgery) they can go and find a private company to do that.
The point of socialism is not to stop anyone from having extra if they want it, it's to ensure everyone has a bare minimum.
Joe, one clarification for you, coal miners actually make GREAT money, easily over $100K, which in West Virginia is a LOT of money.
scorpiomaj27 but, there are several health risks that associate with the job
Ya that's why Hillary Bernie AOC and the other communists want to shut down all the coal mines
@@rogueraven1333
Coal mines in the US are insolvent. They are basically being subsidized by the government just to stay open.
@@rogueraven1333 They want to shut down coal mines because coal is polluting the environment with CO2 and contributing to the raising of the average global temperature. Bernie literally said he would replace those coal jobs with green technology jobs as part of the Green New Deal. Why are you blaming the guy who's trying to solve problems and give people good, quality jobs?
Bruins Fan if we want to hep the environment, let’s focus on place like China and India which create something like 50% of the worlds pollution instead of coal mines which do very little in comparison