Coronavirus COVID-19

  On 5/27/2020 at 3:57 AM, caze said:

You clearly didn't, you obviously have very poor reading comprehension. I was talking about the origin of the phrase and it's actual meaning, not what he said. Maybe if I shout you'll understand: I WAS NOT DEFENDING WHAT HE SAID, I WAS CALLING HIM DUMB. 

You also defended this type of terminology as not being rooted in slavery when dehumanizing language of this sort is very clearly rooted in slavery in all its various forms.

  On 5/27/2020 at 4:00 AM, Zeffolia said:

You also defended this type of terminology as not being rooted in slavery when dehumanizing language of this sort is very clearly rooted in slavery in all its various forms.

I didn't defend any 'type' of terminology at all, I pointed out the actual definition of this specific phrase, which has nothing at all to do with slavery. Adam Smith was an abolitionist ffs. There's nothing dehumanising about it in the slightest, it's a term of art referring to the value people and their skills contribute to businesses, and the related costs in maintaining and developing those skills (training, education, etc.). Such value and costs would exist no matter the political or economic system, it's a purely analytical framework that would apply under pretty much any circumstances.

edit: cum

  On 5/27/2020 at 3:13 AM, caze said:

The concept of human capital was defined by Adam Smith:

The stock of human capital is traits and abilities of people, not the individuals themselves, this is a well established concept in economics. Hassett obviously wasn't paying attention when they covered this in university. It's got literally nothing to do with slavery.

In the Chicago school of Econ (which is what most of the people currently advising the president use as basis for their policy), human capital is actually viewed more as means of production, to be invested in. There’s literally a book called Human Capital that is like a sacred tome in Chicago school. This is also somewhat in line with Smith’s thoughts, although he tied it more to productivity of labour based on specialization. He still viewed it as fixed capital, but he didn’t get into the investing in it in the sense the Chicago people do.   
 

It’s naught to do with slavery, but it’s a terrible choice of words. 
 

  On 5/27/2020 at 5:45 AM, chenGOD said:

In the Chicago school of Econ (which is what most of the people currently advising the president use as basis for their policy)

lol, how did you come to this conclusion? most of Trump's economic advisors are either wall street hacks or various forms of regular conservatives, any of them with any kind of ideology other than greed are pro-deficit, pro-tariff, anti-free trade weirdos, pretty much the exact opposite of the Chicago school. there's more to the Chicago school than 'taxes bad', an idea which was always popular with conservatives anyway.

  On 5/27/2020 at 5:45 AM, chenGOD said:

...human capital is actually viewed more as means of production, to be invested in.... This is also somewhat in line with Smith’s thoughts

I know, I mentioned this in my last reply to zeff above, and it's in the definition from Smith I quoted (if something has a cost associated with it - whether it's direct payments for training, or just increased wages for paying more experienced/better qualified ppl, then it can be seen as an investment).

I assume you are agreeing with AOC’s take on the term “human capital stock”:

  Quote

Let’s also not ignore the racial history of this terminology, which has roots in slavery.

Is there a citation somewhere that ties this term to “racial history” as she posits? I Googled the term, scanned a Harvard publication, checked a few articles etc but came up empty.

  On 5/27/2020 at 2:51 PM, hijexx said:

I assume you are agreeing with AOC’s take on the term “human capital stock”:

Is there a citation somewhere that ties this term to “racial history” as she posits? I Googled the term, scanned a Harvard publication, checked a few articles etc but came up empty.

 

As far as I can see, its just economics jargon, for example this from the UK Office for national statistics:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1057%2Felmr.2010.155.pdf

nothing to do with racism?

Third day in a row with zero new cases in Croatia!

  On 5/27/2020 at 10:52 AM, caze said:

 

lol, how did you come to this conclusion? most of Trump's economic advisors are either wall street hacks or various forms of regular conservatives, any of them with any kind of ideology other than greed are pro-deficit, pro-tariff, anti-free trade weirdos, pretty much the exact opposite of the Chicago school. there's more to the Chicago school than 'taxes bad', an idea which was always popular with conservatives anyway.

I know, I mentioned this in my last reply to zeff above, and it's in the definition from Smith I quoted (if something has a cost associated with it - whether it's direct payments for training, or just increased wages for paying more experienced/better qualified ppl, then it can be seen as an investment).

Expand  

Chicago school was probably the wrong term, most of them are market adherents in the extreme.

The difference being that in the definition that the Trump guy is going off, they use human capital as substitutable capital, not as fixed capital (which is how Smith uses it).

Anyway, we're in agreement that it's nothing to do with racism, but it was a terrible choice of words. The majority of people are not going to see that turn of phrase and say "oh he must be referring to the term coined by Adam Smith in the 18th century". Shame that AOC got on board the spin train.

caze is getting a real bad rap for trying to tell the truth here, calm down people. disagreeing with AOC is not a mortal sin.

i'd like to date AOC. after seeing her bf i know she goes for totally below average guys. i have a chance

  On 5/27/2020 at 8:03 PM, dr lopez said:

her bf

For those of you wondering, as usual, Marie Claire has the hard-hitting investigative journalism we have come to expect from them:

https://www.marieclaire.com/celebrity/a25844313/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-boyfriend-riley-roberts/

One shocking piece of information: their dog doesn't have its own instagram page. Clearly they are inhuman monsters.

Disgusting!

My dog had her own cast iron skillet, jet skis, drone, and Pinterest page which consisted of nothing but pictures of squirrels and rabbits. It’s 2020 now. 

  On 5/27/2020 at 8:03 PM, dr lopez said:

i'd like to date AOC. after seeing her bf i know she goes for totally below average guys. i have a chance

prolly smarter than you though. she likes brains on her average looking bf.

i love how he hung his head down in shame at the end. a classic example of when one is left with no option other than to "holding this L" 

Stay Strong in These Unusual Times 

  On 5/24/2020 at 6:13 PM, cwmbrancity said:

Fancy a Cummings?
He cums & he CUMS.

  On 5/27/2020 at 8:44 PM, goDel said:

prolly smarter than you though. she likes brains on her average looking bf.

i know for a fact i am both smarter and better looking than riley roberts. how dare you 

Are you willing to let that dog continue it's meaningless existence without a social media presence though.

id start a social media presence for her chest if i had the chance 

  On 5/27/2020 at 10:25 PM, Nebraska said:

i love how he hung his head down in shame at the end. a classic example of when one is left with no option other than to "holding this L" 

Expand  

seemed more in annoyance at the trolling and close proximity of the unmasked person, as confirmed by the reporter's turning away, hand gesture, and signalling the segment's end. it's a shoulder mounted camera, there's likely a rationale the cameraman had, like it fogs the viewfinder, or could cause a problem he could not resolve on live tv with his hands holding the camera. also i would expect the cameraman would be mindful of keeping 6 feet of distance from others, as recommended by medical professionals, unlike the crowds they were covering.