University Students SUCK

[wolf]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Transfer to Antioch if you can, Brianna, you'll get a better education and be surrounded by people who have actually have two thoughts in their brains that they can rub together!

Isn't Antioch the school where you had to specifically ask "May I touch you on the shoulder?" "May I stroke your hair?" "May I fuck you like a dog in heat?"

I don't think that's a ringing endorsement of the school or it's administration.

The students in your class suck, Bri, because they lack experience of the world, and only know what their favorite bloggers tell them about it.

[Elspode]

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

In many ways we were better off without the “safety nets” because they have too many holes in them and too many people have come to expect too much from them.

I would agree that there is a certain segment of society that has figured out a way to do as little as possible and live off of the teat of social programs, and that's certainly their prerogative if they have no higher aspirations than that, and are able bodied and not mentally deficient. Our current social programs keep people from living as though the USA was a Third World Country, but not a lot more.

I have to do what I can to make sure he doesn’t drown.

And this fact alone makes you so much better than most people, Bruce. While I'm sure most of us give to some worthy cause, either a big one or a personal one, you embody what is best about human nature, and those who know you are fortunate to count you as friend. Mrs Elspode and I always make a point to share what we've got. Sometimes it is very, very little, and sometimes it is okay. Either way, as long as we've got a place to live indoors, no one we know will go homeless, and as long as we have food, no one who asks for a meal will go hungry. That being said, we couldn't begin to feed everyone in Grandview who might need a sandwich, and we can't provide support for all the people who want to work, but who are unable to do so effectively.

My son *wants* nothing more than to have a 8-5 job in a boring office somewhere...but his brain injury won't allow it. Therefore, he works as hard as he can in the only job he's been able to keep for more than a couple of months. That job isn't enough to keep him in a slum apartment by itself, and we aren't always going to be around to help him.

A civilized society supports its needy to a reasonable extent. When the historical pendulum swings to the Right, big business is given breaks and the needy are shoved aside to help give it to them, since those businesses are going to create more jobs and therefore more money for everyone (well, in India and China, anyway). When the pendulum swings to the Left, we tax the rich and feed the poor. Robin Hood would be proud. And it probably *is* highway robbery.

There's not a perfect answer, but I know that my son's standard of living got lowered by about 15% beginning September 1, and there's not a damn thing he can do about it. He simply isn't capable.

[wolf]

Originally Posted by Elspode

I would agree that there is a certain segment of society that has figured out a way to do as little as possible and live off of the teat of social programs, and that's certainly their prerogative if they have no higher aspirations than that, and are able bodied and not mentally deficient. Our current social programs keep people from living as though the USA was a Third World Country, but not a lot more.

I can only speak from my own experience of my patients and their families who are on public assistance. They all seem to have TVs and most of them have cable. There is usually at least one vehicle in the household. They have Section 8 housing, electricity, gas, running water, and no real incentive to get off public assistance. I honestly think that it would do these folks good to SEE the third world and find out what poverty actually is.

I'm not talking about the seriously mentally ill here ... "my patients" represent a very broad range of folks ... teens to seniors, some worried well, some just plain bad, some junkies, and some pretty much regular folks who have run into a bad patch.

[Trilby]

Poverty went up as a result of Reagan's supply-side economics. Investor's didn't invest in the US, they invested in Mexico, India, etc. The rich got richer and the poor got poorer and it's only getting worse. This country has lots of money--it's just all going to Cheney. I wonder--how much money does he need? All of it?

Then what?

[Rock Steady]

Actually, Brianna, transfer to anywhere to get away from Dr. LovesHimself. You are in a comprimised situation at school. You should transfer and get a clean slate; where the faculty don't know you from Adam or Eve. Out of Dayton is best.

[Radar]

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by Radar

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

They WERE Capitalism. Some of their names are still with us today. Carneige Hall, Carneige-Mellon University: Andrew and Andrew. They were not the worst, but they had a spotted record. The american industrial revolution did great things for this country, but it was not without it's otrocities.

Jay Gould was a real sleaze ball.

Legacy

In his lifetime and for a century after, Gould had a firm reputation as the most unethical of the 19th century American businessmen known as robber barons. He routinely tested the boundaries of the law, finding ways to turn a situation in his favor when other businessmen might have settled on breaking even. He pioneered the practice, now commonplace, of declaring bankruptcy as a strategic maneuver. He had no opposition to using stock manipulation and insider trading (which were then legal but frowned upon) to build capital and to execute or prevent hostile takeover attempts. As a result, many contemporary businessmen did not trust Gould and often expressed contempt for his approach to business. Even so, John D. Rockefeller named him as the most skilled businessman he ever encountered.


List of businessmen who were called robber barons

* John Jacob Astor (real estate, fur)
* Andrew Carnegie (steel)
* Jay Cooke (finance)
* Daniel Drew (finance)
* James Fisk (finance)
* Henry Flagler (railroads)
* Henry Ford (automobile)
* Henry Clay Frick (steel)
* Jay Gould (finance, railroads)
* Edward Henry Harriman (railroads)
* Collis P. Huntington (railroads)
* James J. Hill (railroads)
* J. P. Morgan (banking)
* John D. Rockefeller (oil, the Standard Oil company)
* Leland Stanford (railroads)
* Cornelius Vanderbilt (railroads, shipping)

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Rock Steady

They WERE Capitalism. Some of their names are still with us today. Carneige Hall, Carneige-Mellon University: Andrew and Andrew. They were not the worst, but they had a spotted record. The american industrial revolution did great things for this country, but it was not without it's otrocities.

Jay Gould was a real sleaze ball.

Legacy

In his lifetime and for a century after, Gould had a firm reputation as the most unethical of the 19th century American businessmen known as robber barons. He routinely tested the boundaries of the law, finding ways to turn a situation in his favor when other businessmen might have settled on breaking even. He pioneered the practice, now commonplace, of declaring bankruptcy as a strategic maneuver. He had no opposition to using stock manipulation and insider trading (which were then legal but frowned upon) to build capital and to execute or prevent hostile takeover attempts. As a result, many contemporary businessmen did not trust Gould and often expressed contempt for his approach to business. Even so, John D. Rockefeller named him as the most skilled businessman he ever encountered.


List of businessmen who were called robber barons

* John Jacob Astor (real estate, fur)
* Andrew Carnegie (steel)
* Jay Cooke (finance)
* Daniel Drew (finance)
* James Fisk (finance)
* Henry Flagler (railroads)
* Henry Ford (automobile)
* Henry Clay Frick (steel)
* Jay Gould (finance, railroads)
* Edward Henry Harriman (railroads)
* Collis P. Huntington (railroads)
* James J. Hill (railroads)
* J. P. Morgan (banking)
* John D. Rockefeller (oil, the Standard Oil company)
* Leland Stanford (railroads)
* Cornelius Vanderbilt (railroads, shipping)

Your names and your claims are laughable. You clearly don't do too much reading, but if you can find someone to read something to you and then explain it to you, check out...

The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton W. Folsom

[Bullitt]

Originally Posted by Radar

Your names and your claims are laughable. You clearly don't do too much reading, but if you can find someone to read something to you and then explain it to you, check out...

The Myth of the Robber Barons by Burton W. Folsom

They were men who used the blood sweat and tears of immigrant workers to gain huge sums of money for themselves, and in the meantime thrust our country into widespread industrialization. But it was at the cost of many lives, and the suffering of many more. How many tons of steel, how many barrels of oil, how many miles of railroad track is one human worth? How about 10 people, 50, 100?


And Bri, if you have questions about transferring schools lemme know, I just went through that whole ordeal a couple weeks before classes began.

[russotto]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

How many tons of steel, how many barrels of oil, how many miles of railroad track is one human worth? How about 10 people, 50, 100?

I don't know. But I know the number must be finite. Or people would never get a damn thing done.

[Rock Steady]

Originally Posted by Radar

Robber barrons had nothing to do with capitalism. They were criminals, and the only difference that would happen with these criminals under socialism is that instead of being wealthy criminals, they'd be wealthy members of a totalitarian government.

The main problem with this country is the polarized arguments. Black and White. You're a capitalist or a socialist. You're left wing or right wing. You're religious or atheist.

That is bullshit. You're radar is broken because of passive aggressive listening. I've bought and sold companies, stock options, stock, real estate, Oil & Gas Partnerships, ...

Where in all that do you read socialist?

I really don't want my assets nationalized as they did to people in Hungary and other Soviet Sattelites.

????????

You make no sense.

[Rock Steady]

Note: I have role played Jay Gould at GameCons using feeder RRs and skilled insolvency to win games of 1830. "RS sells all shares of the New York Central and gives up presidency."

If people would play more RailRoad board games, they would learn some relevant 19th century history lessons.

[Clodfobble]

Originally Posted by marichiko

Transfer to Antioch if you can, Brianna, you'll get a better education and be surrounded by people who have actually have two thoughts in their brains that they can rub together!

Hey, one of my uncles went to Antioch! Let's see, last I checked he works as a... oh yes, a security guard. Real world-changer, that one. Pride of the family.

Originally Posted by Clodfobble

Hey, one of my uncles went to Antioch! Let's see, last I checked he works as a... oh yes, a security guard. Real world-changer, that one. Pride of the family.

George W. Bush graduated from Yale. The last I heard, Yale is still a good school, though.

[Trilby]

Antioch IS a serious place.