It’s a demographic problem. You could cite HBD.
Traceable by national IQ.
Being tied to economic prosperity. Civic participation. Prosociality.
On the abstract plane, it’s a social problem. Politicians give the proles what they want, disproportionate to their current contributions. They’re being treated as more important than they are, based on their historical value (prior to mechanization and the rise of IT).
The middle class are signalling to suppress the strivers from overtaking their own 1-2 kids.
The childless ones are signalling because a dumpy middle class blogger hashtagging about refugees like the modern fainting couch gets more social cred than a 12 hour a day factory worker. Which one gives back to the country?
The upper class abandoned noblesse oblige and the upper class by occupation prefer obscurity to the vagaries of fame. The lumpenprole expect gadgets made well and cheaply and will force the Government to regulate the manufacturers into oblivion in this quest.
A basic wage, guaranteed
bribe income would come in, if there existed the funds.
No, producers are taxed to the hilt, as is.
It comes down to a basic fact: people are not the same.
The high IQ deserve 100% of the fruit to their labour, as does the low IQ.
By comparison, one has more, but only because one provided more.
Inequality is a natural law.
Feel free to send in, we could use more common sense and redpill truth on the internet.
I decided to blank out the real names partially since the SJWs might monster them.
Fourth wife – so far. If after the first divorce you keep screwing up, it isn’t the women’s fault. You can’t take your marital vows, “until death do you part”, very seriously if you made them more than once. And children? Why would 21st century marriage be about children?
Some smart people are very lazy.
Bruce G. Charlton, Professor of Theoretical Medicine at the University of Buckingham and Editor in Chief of Medical Hypotheses, may have an explanation. In his editorial (link is external) in the December 2009 issue of Medical Hypotheses, Charlton suggests that liberals and other intelligent people may be “clever sillies,” who incorrectly apply abstract logical reasoning to social and interpersonal domains….
It’s nice to see his work mentioned mainstream.
I keep thinking he’s one of ours as if he isn’t known.
Social metaphor: Liberals see everything NOT/Them, logically (¬liberal) as a nail and their solution is the hammer. Hammer for more public money, for more tax, for banning things and bleeding hearts. It’s like they’re all tuned into the same radio. It’s a form of maladaptive problem solving pertaining to confirmation bias and circular reasoning.
I happen to know sampling bias and self-report bias are also HUGE issues on these matters (the N of self-identifying liberals far exceeds conservatives), rarely corrected for because they need that sweet p-value.