No, it blows for the hardworking too. Plain historical fact.
People are destroying Tesla charging stations
- Thread starter BrightShinyGirl
- Start date
UltraChad
Chaddius Maximus
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2024
- Posts
- 6,950
Hard work =/= working for their own benefit.
Just like hard work=/= valuable work.
Plain economic fact....capitalism isn't for the people who think they are entitled to equity because they exist.
People are entitled to equity because they exist.
AllAmericanMale
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2016
- Posts
- 1,900
Destroying them I hadn't heard, but I guess unplugging unattended Teslas is a thing now.
dmallord
Humble Hobbit
- Joined
- Jun 15, 2020
- Posts
- 5,410
In 2525... if man is still alive...
domroger
Really Dirty Old Man
- Joined
- May 2, 2009
- Posts
- 3,245
Tesla share now $240.01.
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
BrightShinyGirl
Abusive Little Bitch
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2013
- Posts
- 8,585
Why?
domroger
Really Dirty Old Man
- Joined
- May 2, 2009
- Posts
- 3,245
Now $221.37,will Tesla drop below $200 this week?
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Posts
- 19,260
If women can survive…
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
. The the climate though. Think of the climate!
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2015
- Posts
- 19,260
Written on Feb 11, 2022
What was the climate in 2022?
What was the climate in 2022?
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
The same as it is now. That’s the point. The only thing that changed was Elon supports President Trump. Nothing but virtue signaling from the usual suspects.Written on Feb 11, 2022
What was the climate in 2022?
You are making a compelling case against capitalism.
Under capitalism, work that is valuable today can be worthless tomorrow, because of decisions made completely outside the workers' control.
That is not how things in general should work.
And people are entitled to equity just because they exist,.
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
Another example of when you’ve been Radicalized by leftist hive mentality. Not only in the dooood’s personal life but now his violent behavior.
We see it on this forum. People roundly cheered for hurting others and intentionally trying to torpedo our economy. No wonder you maroons lost.
We see it on this forum. People roundly cheered for hurting others and intentionally trying to torpedo our economy. No wonder you maroons lost.
So? He should not have done that. Now he is suffering the consequences.
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
If you believe in Darwin, then you know there is no equality in nature. Not ever in the animal kingdom and most certainly in humankind. Nobody is entitled to anything.
Go thou and do likewise.
Civilization is not nature and should not try to imitate it.
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
Exactly what consequences is he “suffering?” The loss of your approval? Somehow I don’t think he gives a damn…
HumpDayHoratio
Slightly Aged
- Joined
- Jul 18, 2022
- Posts
- 8,463
You might want to brush up on Descent of Man-Darwin.
Shocker. He doesn’t agree with you. I’ve read Darwin. You’re no Darwin.
AlexBailey
Kinky Tomgirl
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2019
- Posts
- 11,334
Only one of those guys is going to own the next President, and the one after that, and the one after that….
Really, the richest man in the world… Why would he not invest two billion into the next election when money in politics has been determined by the SCOTUS to be a form of free speech?
You dupes have given the country away to monied interests over people. You have effectively killed democracy.
Harm to his business. A thing more precious to him than the lives of his children.
You are not thinking of Darwin. You are thinking of Herbert Spencer.
Social Darwinism is a philosophy[note 1] based on flawed readings of Charles Darwin's biology text On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859). The philosophy came into existence towards the end of the 19th century, though one can trace its origins all the way back to the ideas of Thomas Malthus (1766-1834).
Social Darwinists took the biological ideas of Charles Darwin (often mixing them with the theories of Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and of Malthus) and attempted to apply them to the social sciences. They became especially interested in applying the idea of "the survival of the fittest" (their words, not Darwin's) in a social context, as this would excuse existing applications of racism, colonialism, and unfettered capitalism (for them, at least). Social Darwinism also became a tool to argue that governments should not interfere in human competition (as it existed at the time) in any way; and that the government should take no interest in, for example, regulating the economy, reducing poverty or introducing socialized medicine. In other words, have a laissez-faire policy. Because (pseudo)science, bitches!
Proponents of this philosophy tend to forget that altruism first evolved because it was evolutionarily advantageous: tribes full of altruistic folks working together were more successful as a group, and thus out performed and outbred tribes of more selfish humans that couldn't work as a team. In other words altruism is an aspect of Darwinism; you can't claim to be applying evolutionary theory to social dynamics if you refuse to accept any form of social altruism when humanity as we know it couldn't have evolved without the trait.
The term "Social Darwinism" originated in Great Britain with the work of Herbert Spencer, who used the phrase "survival of the fittest"https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Wikipedia%27s_W.svg/12px-Wikipedia%27s_W.svg.png in 1864. However, his work found more fertile ground in the US where it was taken up by William Graham Sumner who was accused of advocating a "dog-eat-dog" philosophy. This set of ideas was also influenced by the writings of Thomas Malthus, who had argued that war was a check on population growth and that welfare promoted population growth among the poor and thus drove down wages. Indeed, what is often called "Social Darwinism" might be more accurately called "Social Malthusianism", since Malthus explicitly promoted policies which one can construe as Social Darwinism.[7] The influence of Malthus could be seen in Victorian-era workhouses; reforming (in actuality, virtually eliminating) the Poor Laws; and in a general upper-class contempt for the lower classes for their demands of charity. This trend also built on the ideas of Jeremy Bentham's utilitarianism, one of the strongest ideologies of the British middle-class, which promoted the view that workers chose the poor life and that workhouses would encourage those who wanted to succeed to do so. Darwin himself feared his theory would be used for this purpose.
At the same time, the "struggle school" of Social Darwinism was developing. In this view, nations grew and expanded as a result of conflicts with their neighbors. For many, this justified overseas expansion by powerful nations at the expense of the weak and necessitated the development of strong military forces.
At more or less the same time, the movement of "Reform Darwinism" originated. This variant emphasized the need for change and adaption in human society to meet new conditions. For example, Reform Darwinists argued that the Constitution of the United States should be reinterpreted to meet changing conditions in the US. However, some reformers felt that they could use the principles of (Social) Darwinism to justify imperialist, classist, racist, and sexist opinions (because this was the 19th century, after all). And at the extreme of these views was eugenics, originally developed by Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton. Certain eugenicists advocated state policies such as forced sterilization of the "unfit" (by their standards, of course).[8]
Similar threads
