R terms like "white guilt" & "self-loathing" empty rhetoric?

[Forty Two]

Not to trot out the "back in my day" stories, but I will anyway. 1 full time and 1 part time job, full credit load in engineering school, a wife and a kid, living in a trailer in Union Park Florida. I don't think many of the little snowflakes I've run into around here could handle that. $600 a year in Pell grants, and some student loans. It can be done, but you have to really, really want it. Took me 6 years to finish, and I paid off the student loans in under 2 years.

Was talking to a kid down at the park the other afternoon, student at New College. She was complaining about how hard it was to make ends meet on just financial aid and student loans. No mention of working even part time, but she'll have over $30,000 in student debt when she graduates with a degree in Sociology. Wow, now there's something worth going into debt for, eh? Soci-fucking-ology. We fucking LOVED courses like that, because you didn't have to do shit to pass them. Their heads would explode if they took thermodynamics or differentials.

There are still plenty of kids doing the hard slog, though, in engineering, comp sci, medicine, etc, so not all of them are Precious Snowflakes. It's just the PS Brigade makes the most noise, the others are too fucking busy studying to bitch about it. If you're going to ride on Mummy-N-Daddy's coattails for four years to get a degree in Sociology or Feminist Studies then you've got no one to blame but yourself when you end up a shift manager at Micky D's.

This is so true. Today, college kids are dropped off by mommy and daddy, who buy their groceries and wipe their asses for them. Back in the day, you went to college with what you had. For example, I had a beat up jalopy I bought for a few hundred bucks, stuffed it with some bags of clothes and sundries, and drove to school. I found a place to live. I hoofed it around town and found a part time job.

So, there I was, taking 18 credits of engineering courses, and working -- and still partying. I worked a gas station in the freezing winter, pumping gas, doing extra shifts over winter break. In the summer, I slogged it on roofs and construction sites, busting my hump to make tuition.

And, the jobs are still there -- you just have to want to do them.

you know what is the hardest part of finding someone to work in my office now -- getting someone who just works, figures shit out, and gets it done. Nowadays, people in their 20s are immediately with the time off -- They just get hired, and right away it's late on Tuesday, and I need next Thursday off. Time was that you knew you had to put in a few months of good work before you start asking for time off.

You see these dipshits out there on the internet whining about their student loan debt -- "went to Columbia for social work -- borrowed $200,000 for tuition, fees, books, room and board....now I can't pay" -- that's supposed to make someone feel sorry for them? That's some kind of systemic injustice? I mean -- I've seen bunches of those pics of jerk-offs holding their stupid hand-written signs with glum, somber mugs crying at the camera. All I can think is, "Jesus fucking Christ, kid - someone fucking loaned you $100,000 or $200,000, at low interest, no collateral, and you're bitching because you wasted it on a degree whose starting salary you knew going in and you have to pay it back now but don't have enough cash because the salary is what you knew it would be when you started?" LOL. Oh, the injustice.

[pErvinalia]

Blah blah blah. In the civilised world Baby Boomers had free education,

Where? Baby boomers were in college from about 1963 to 1983, at the very latest. Where is this "free education" you speak of (referring to college, not taxpayer funded primary education)?

Australia.

plentiful secure jobs,

Plentiful secure jobs in 1979 and 1980, when unemployment was in double-digits? When and where was this "Shangri-la" of which you speak. If anything, from 1965 to 1980, there were fewer legal protections than there are today. Every western democracy has dramatically expanded employee protections since baby boomers got out of school. It's not even close. I can't see how you make this argument with a straight face.

You live in a bubble, don't you? Compare UNDER-employment rates. Unemployment now isn't the same measure as unemployment then. Employment now, depending on jurisdiction, is considered as little as 1 hour a week of work. This has been a recent(ish) recalculation, for obvious reasons. And worker protections isn't what I am talking about. There simply wasn't the pressure back then for efficiency gains like now. There has been MASSIVE casualisation of the workforce now compared to then. Employment was simply more secure and more plentiful back then.

and affordable housing.

How in the world do you get this? Housing is way more affordable here now than it ever was. At least in a civilized country like the US. Here in the US, you can find a house or apartment in every price range. We recently, just a few years ago, had the largest percentage of Americans owning homes than ever in the history of the country. And, in the 60s and 70s, when boomers were buying their first houses, the price of homes was much harder to pay, because credit was much tighter, and you had to put far bigger down payments.

You must have missed the property bubble in the rest of the world. UK, Australia, NZ. Ratios of house cost : average wage has soared over the last 30 years of liberalisation. In those three countries it has gone from less than 5X to up to 15X on average, and up to 30X in places like Sydney and London. To give credit to the US, inexplicably they didn't adopt the insane negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts that other countries have with liberalisation. That has driven up property prices, as well as states and local council refusing to release land to ease demand, as they have had their funding pinched in the efficiency drive of 35 years of neoliberalism.

The current generation have none of that.

The current generation can walk into a bank with a $50,000 per year salary and get a $150,000 mortgage at 4% interest with $0 down or 5% down. In 1981, you would go into a bank and need 20% down, and pay 12 to 15% interest. It's not even close, rEv.

I agreed that credit is easier these days. That, of course, is one of the biggest problems in the neoliberal world today. It's what kicked off the GFC.

Youth under-employment is upwards of 50%.

You'll have to define "youth underemployment." All youth employment is part time in civilized countries like the US.

What in the fuck are you talking about? "Youth" usually refers to under 24.

Do you have a measure for when a youth is not working enough part-time hours? Or, when a kid earning minimum wage should be banking a couple bucks more?

You just have no concept of these issues, do you? The concern isn't with kids who live at home with their parents. It's young people who have left home and need to enter the workforce to make enough wages to survive. The jobs just aren't there due to mechanisation and off-shoring of lower skilled jobs.

Virtually everyone could get a job out of school or uni in the 60's.

They can now too. They just don't want to work hard.

FFS. Debating you is like explaining the world to a mushroom. In the US there are 2x job seekers to job vacancies. And that gets worse at the younger end of the scale (i.e. the people you are whinging about). In Australia it's 3x.

Wages have been stagnant more or less for decades now. You live in a fantasy world.

There were periods of time of stagnant wages in the past. Inflation and interest rates have been record lows for decades now too. Back in 1980, we had the Carter Stagflation days, where interest rates were up over 10%, inflation up over 10% AND unemployment up over 10%, and gasoline prices doubled in a couple of years. You don't know what you're talking about.

I do, actually. Real median wages are stagnant. They weren't stagnant for decades in the past.

And none of this addresses my questions about wtf "white guilt" and "self loathing" are supposed to be.

White guilt and self-loathing is what white males are supposed to feel because they are white.

"Supposed to"? Who says we are supposed to? And how does this gel with my post earlier about empathy. You haven't even bothered to address that. You are more interested in getting on your hobby horse and bashing young people and women.

It's a concept being sold by racist leftists applying class theory to identity politics.

Where's it being sold? Where is it suggested that people should feel guilty for being white?

[pErvinalia]

Not to trot out the "back in my day" stories, but I will anyway. 1 full time and 1 part time job, full credit load in engineering school, a wife and a kid, living in a trailer in Union Park Florida. I don't think many of the little snowflakes I've run into around here could handle that. $600 a year in Pell grants, and some student loans. It can be done, but you have to really, really want it. Took me 6 years to finish, and I paid off the student loans in under 2 years.

Was talking to a kid down at the park the other afternoon, student at New College. She was complaining about how hard it was to make ends meet on just financial aid and student loans. No mention of working even part time, but she'll have over $30,000 in student debt when she graduates with a degree in Sociology. Wow, now there's something worth going into debt for, eh? Soci-fucking-ology. We fucking LOVED courses like that, because you didn't have to do shit to pass them. Their heads would explode if they took thermodynamics or differentials.

There are still plenty of kids doing the hard slog, though, in engineering, comp sci, medicine, etc, so not all of them are Precious Snowflakes. It's just the PS Brigade makes the most noise, the others are too fucking busy studying to bitch about it. If you're going to ride on Mummy-N-Daddy's coattails for four years to get a degree in Sociology or Feminist Studies then you've got no one to blame but yourself when you end up a shift manager at Micky D's.

This is so true. Today, college kids are dropped off by mommy and daddy, who buy their groceries and wipe their asses for them. Back in the day, you went to college with what you had. For example, I had a beat up jalopy I bought for a few hundred bucks, stuffed it with some bags of clothes and sundries, and drove to school. I found a place to live. I hoofed it around town and found a part time job.

So, there I was, taking 18 credits of engineering courses, and working -- and still partying. I worked a gas station in the freezing winter, pumping gas, doing extra shifts over winter break. In the summer, I slogged it on roofs and construction sites, busting my hump to make tuition.

And, the jobs are still there -- you just have to want to do them.

you know what is the hardest part of finding someone to work in my office now -- getting someone who just works, figures shit out, and gets it done. Nowadays, people in their 20s are immediately with the time off -- They just get hired, and right away it's late on Tuesday, and I need next Thursday off. Time was that you knew you had to put in a few months of good work before you start asking for time off.

You see these dipshits out there on the internet whining about their student loan debt -- "went to Columbia for social work -- borrowed $200,000 for tuition, fees, books, room and board....now I can't pay" -- that's supposed to make someone feel sorry for them? That's some kind of systemic injustice? I mean -- I've seen bunches of those pics of jerk-offs holding their stupid hand-written signs with glum, somber mugs crying at the camera. All I can think is, "Jesus fucking Christ, kid - someone fucking loaned you $100,000 or $200,000, at low interest, no collateral, and you're bitching because you wasted it on a degree whose starting salary you knew going in and you have to pay it back now but don't have enough cash because the salary is what you knew it would be when you started?" LOL. Oh, the injustice.

You really fit your avatar, you know? You come across as an old whiney crusty bastard who hates most things different to him. Seriously, do you just sit around all day whinging about the youth and women and liberals and feminists and immigrants and Obama and MSNBC and fuck knows what else?

[DaveDodo007]

Cough. White cuck taking notes on why he is a plague.



Carl the Cuck. Check him out.



Aids Skillex has got to be seen to be believed.



Sorry about it being the Alex Jones channel but I can't find the original.

They are Internet famous though.

[DaveDodo007]

Privileged university students chanting "we have nothing to lose but our chains" THey are not being taught social justice they are being brainwashed.



You might want to check out Intersectionality and even Intersectional Feminism. Don't bother looking for were you are (white males) in the oppression olympics as you're the oppressor. Anyone else can visit abuse or violence on you as it is called 'punching up' so therefore justice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersectionality

Intersectional Feminism.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens ... -care.html

[laklak]

The jobs simply aren't there, Lak.

I agree, those jobs aren't there. There's simply not enough demand for sociologists, feminist studies majors, medieval lute music historians and the like. There are a lot of jobs for engineers, programmers and other STEM fields. Then there are trades. Plumbers, electricians, and other skilled workers are in demand. If I had it to do over again I'd be a marine diesel mechanic. Guy who works on my boat just sold his two personal helicopters to buy a 75 acre resort and marina in Costa Rica.

Problem is STEM fields are damn hard graft, and the trades are considered low class. Far easier to do what my old man called 'air and sunshine' degrees and bitch about how you're underemployed.

I watched a news report about a woman who had taken out $300,000 in student loans to get a bachelors in photography at Ringling School of Art here in Sarasota, and now can't pay it back. Ringling costs over 40Gs a year in tuition alone. I'm not surprised she can't pay it back. You have to shoot one fuck of a lot of baby portraits to make 300Gs. Of course, she's all pissed off because the government won't write off those loans and it's just not FAIR!

You're a photographer rEv, does that sound like a rational decision to you?

[pErvinalia]

As I said, in the US you have twice as many jobseekers as there are jobs. And that gets worse at the younger end. And 'jobseekers' only includes those officially registered looking for jobs.

Referring to anecdote is all great, but it's nothing but anecdote. The jobs just aren't there. People need to start understanding this reality about the modern western world.

[pErvinalia]

Ironically, if people actually had a better understanding of the much maligned "sociology studies", they'd be able to identify all these systemic failings in our societies.

[Forty Two]

Blah blah blah. In the civilised world Baby Boomers had free education,

Where? Baby boomers were in college from about 1963 to 1983, at the very latest. Where is this "free education" you speak of (referring to college, not taxpayer funded primary education)?

Australia.

Since they started requiring repayment 33 years ago, I guess the few years of "free" college didn't work out so well, lol. Shangri-la.

plentiful secure jobs,

Plentiful secure jobs in 1979 and 1980, when unemployment was in double-digits? When and where was this "Shangri-la" of which you speak. If anything, from 1965 to 1980, there were fewer legal protections than there are today. Every western democracy has dramatically expanded employee protections since baby boomers got out of school. It's not even close. I can't see how you make this argument with a straight face.

You live in a bubble, don't you?

No, but naturally you can't avoid making douchey statements and just being an all-around unpleasant person.

Compare UNDER-employment rates. Unemployment now isn't the same measure as unemployment then.

In the US, the measure is basically the same. We have several different rates - coded "U-3," or "U-6", etc. So, it's easy to look up underemployment and unemployment.

Employment now, depending on jurisdiction, is considered as little as 1 hour a week of work.

full time vs part time are analyzed, in civilized countries like the US, by the Bureau of Labor Statistics in different scales (see U-3 vs. U-6) numbers, etc.

This has been a recent(ish) recalculation, for obvious reasons.

That damn Obama Administration, fudging the numbers, I guess....

And worker protections isn't what I am talking about. There simply wasn't the pressure back then for efficiency gains like now.

You can go ahead and provide some evidence anytime now....

There has been MASSIVE casualisation of the workforce now compared to then. Employment was simply more secure and more plentiful back then.

Less secure, because it's harder to fire someone now, and there are more safety net protections for workers, more assistance for retraining and finding new jobs, etc., than there ever was 40-50 years ago.

and affordable housing.

How in the world do you get this? Housing is way more affordable here now than it ever was. At least in a civilized country like the US. Here in the US, you can find a house or apartment in every price range. We recently, just a few years ago, had the largest percentage of Americans owning homes than ever in the history of the country. And, in the 60s and 70s, when boomers were buying their first houses, the price of homes was much harder to pay, because credit was much tighter, and you had to put far bigger down payments.

You must have missed the property bubble in the rest of the world. UK, Australia, NZ. Ratios of house cost : average wage has soared over the last 30 years of liberalisation. In those three countries it has gone from less than 5X to up to 15X on average, and up to 30X in places like Sydney and London. To give credit to the US, inexplicably they didn't adopt the insane negative gearing and capital gains tax discounts that other countries have with liberalisation. That has driven up property prices, as well as states and local council refusing to release land to ease demand, as they have had their funding pinched in the efficiency drive of 35 years of neoliberalism.

Well, here in the states the average income is about $55,000, and in most places around the country, you can get a lot of house for $165,000, to $200,000. Not in Manhattan or San Francisco, but then again the average income is much higher in those places too. But, throughout the US, you can buy a nice, new house for that. We do have capital gains tax discounts here - the capital gains rate is much lower than the ordinary income rate.

The current generation have none of that.

The current generation can walk into a bank with a $50,000 per year salary and get a $150,000 mortgage at 4% interest with $0 down or 5% down. In 1981, you would go into a bank and need 20% down, and pay 12 to 15% interest. It's not even close, rEv.

I agreed that credit is easier these days. That, of course, is one of the biggest problems in the neoliberal world today. It's what kicked off the GFC.[/quote]

Not exactly. What kicked off the GFC was the mortgage and finance industry creating junk securities. I.e., the banks were covering up bad/shaky lending practices by bundling up bad debts into derivative security instruments. They would then sell these instruments, which were rated AAA and such by the rating outfits, even though they had no idea what was in them. They would look good, because you'd have $150 million in "receivables." But it was a lot of shit debt.

Add to that the fractional reserve system gone wild, where banks and other lending institutions were (and are again) lending out many times more "money" than they actually have. And, unsustainable debt.

So, I agree, credit is too easy. But, then that's something the governments are encouraging. Here in the US, they don't want to tighten credit. They are afraid that a rise in interest rates will trigger another recession. The regulators feel their hands are tied, and that will guarantee another 2008.

Youth under-employment is upwards of 50%.

You'll have to define "youth underemployment." All youth employment is part time in civilized countries like the US.

What in the fuck are you talking about? "Youth" usually refers to under 24.

By that measure, in a civilized country like the US, the "youth unemployment rate" is about 12% give or take.

Do you have a measure for when a youth is not working enough part-time hours? Or, when a kid earning minimum wage should be banking a couple bucks more?

You just have no concept of these issues, do you?

Far better than you, but you can't help but make these silly, douchey comments. I will chalk it up to you not being very bright.

The concern isn't with kids who live at home with their parents. It's young people who have left home and need to enter the workforce to make enough wages to survive. The jobs just aren't there due to mechanisation and off-shoring of lower skilled jobs.

Plenty of jobs in a civilized country, like the US. Unfortunately, as has always been the case, teenagers who are on their own and just starting out in life have to bust their ass. There is no way to pay a 17 or 18 year old with at most a high school diploma $40,000 a year or more. They don't know how to do anything. If they obtained a trade skill, they can get more money.

Virtually everyone could get a job out of school or uni in the 60's.

They can now too. They just don't want to work hard.

FFS. Debating you is like explaining the world to a mushroom. In the US there are 2x job seekers to job vacancies. And that gets worse at the younger end of the scale (i.e. the people you are whinging about). In Australia it's 3x.

CNN -- The problem is that Americans don't have the skills for the jobs that are available. -- http://money.cnn.com/2015/09/09/news/ec ... -openings/

experts agree: At the core of the job skills problem is a lack of technical skills. Some Americans choose to go to a 4-year college when they might be better suited for a career as an electrician or plumber, experts say.
It's these 'middle skills' jobs -- ones that don't require a college degree but do require more than a high school diploma -- that aren't being filled, Fuller says.

New York Times - In Iowa, Jobs are plentiful, workers not so much - http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/29/busin ... e-not.html

NY Post - Plenty of jobs -- http://nypost.com/2015/08/29/dont-worry ... out-there/

CNN -Near record jobs available - http://money.cnn.com/2016/02/09/news/ec ... -openings/

Plenty of jobs, Stossel -- http://www.marketplace.org/2012/07/27/e ... -want-them

Bloomberg - Plenty of Jobs - https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles ... ugh-skills

New York Times - Brisk hiring in Feb. 2016 http://www.nytimes.com/2016/03/05/busin ... .html?_r=0

CBS - plenty of jobs, if you have the right skills - http://www.cbsnews.com/news/plenty-of-j ... ht-skills/

Wages have been stagnant more or less for decades now. You live in a fantasy world.

There were periods of time of stagnant wages in the past. Inflation and interest rates have been record lows for decades now too. Back in 1980, we had the Carter Stagflation days, where interest rates were up over 10%, inflation up over 10% AND unemployment up over 10%, and gasoline prices doubled in a couple of years. You don't know what you're talking about.

I do, actually. Real median wages are stagnant. They weren't stagnant for decades in the past.

Again, you are dead wrong, at least in civilized countries. Wages have grown over the past few years at rates similar to historical trends. The frequently repeated claim that wages are “stagnant” is at odds with six measures of wages and compensation, which indicate that hourly and weekly real wages (wages adjusted for price inflation) have grown between 1 percent and 2 percent per year since the beginning of 2013. Further, when you are talking about "real wages", you're talking about comparisons based on inflation and other factors. For real wages to remain about the same, it means that buying power and such of a person's wages remain about the same.

And none of this addresses my questions about wtf "white guilt" and "self loathing" are supposed to be.

White guilt and self-loathing is what white males are supposed to feel because they are white.

"Supposed to"? Who says we are supposed to?

Leftist Progressive activists and groups.

And how does this gel with my post earlier about empathy.

I don't know. I didn't read your earlier post, nor do I keep your posts in mind for days when I'm off line, and nobody else does either. Try to make your posts self-contained, so that people know what you're talking about.

You haven't even bothered to address that.

I don't bother with a lot of your posts.

You are more interested in getting on your hobby horse and bashing young people and women.

I don't bash women, I bash modern feminism. Most women don't identify as feminists - feminist =/= woman. I respect women, and I treat them as equals, and I do not, therefore, subscribe to the modern feminist movement, which is itself sexist, illiberal, and authoritarian in nature, as well as dishonest.

I am also not "Bashing" young people. I am simply stating the obvious - that young people have it easier than any generation in the history of mankind, yet they think they have it tough. that's not bashing -- it's no more bashing than your claim that the baby-boomers are the ones who had it easier.

It's a concept being sold by racist leftists applying class theory to identity politics.

Where's it being sold? Where is it suggested that people should feel guilty for being white?

I'll use your line: You live in a bubble, don't you?

[Forty Two]

Ironically, if people actually had a better understanding of the much maligned "sociology studies", they'd be able to identify all these systemic failings in our societies.

They actually wouldn't, because they do not have, and do not graduate with, any real knowledge of how the "systems" in our societies work. That would require a heap of technical and scientific knowledge that they certainly do not teach in a "sociology" program.

The graduates and students who like to think they have identified "systemic" failings in our societies tend to be know-nothings -- your gender studies graduate, for example, thinks they have the knowledge to identify and correct systemic failings in society. The hubris in that, given the courses they take in college, is quite remarkable.

[Forty Two]

The jobs simply aren't there, Lak.

I agree, those jobs aren't there. There's simply not enough demand for sociologists, feminist studies majors, medieval lute music historians and the like. There are a lot of jobs for engineers, programmers and other STEM fields. Then there are trades. Plumbers, electricians, and other skilled workers are in demand. If I had it to do over again I'd be a marine diesel mechanic. Guy who works on my boat just sold his two personal helicopters to buy a 75 acre resort and marina in Costa Rica.

Problem is STEM fields are damn hard graft, and the trades are considered low class. Far easier to do what my old man called 'air and sunshine' degrees and bitch about how you're underemployed.

I watched a news report about a woman who had taken out $300,000 in student loans to get a bachelors in photography at Ringling School of Art here in Sarasota, and now can't pay it back. Ringling costs over 40Gs a year in tuition alone. I'm not surprised she can't pay it back. You have to shoot one fuck of a lot of baby portraits to make 300Gs. Of course, she's all pissed off because the government won't write off those loans and it's just not FAIR!

You're a photographer rEv, does that sound like a rational decision to you?

$300,000 loans for a photography degree in Sarasota? LOL. I did a quick search on realtor.com for Sarasota listings. The first one that came up was a multi-home listing for three separate homes abutting a park. Cost? $319,000 (listed, which means you might get that for $299,000). Buy that, rent out two of the homes to pay the mortgage (borrowing $240,000 would cost about $1800/month. Rent each of the other houses out for $1,000 a month, and you're covered. Free house. Fuck the photography degree -- buy some camera equipment and put up a website advertising child and family photog sessions and self train.

[pErvinalia]

Yes, black is white.

[Forty Two]

Yes, black is white.

No, you're just wrong, as is generally the case.

[laklak]

Yeah it's pretty stupid, eh? I've been trying to talk my older daughter into buying a duplex. The "live in one side rent out the other" idea is a good one, pays for the mortgage and taxes and you've got the asset for later. 319 is pretty low for multi-family in Sarasota, though, it's probably either in Da Hood or Gillespie Park, which is where the homeless have taken over the neighborhood. Used to be a nice neighborhood, we almost bought there 10 years ago, but now you can't walk through it without stepping on a bum. Shame.

[pErvinalia]

Bloody young people today. Not even willing to live in the hood..