Now London suffers its latest terrorist attack

[Drummond]

Details are still unfolding, although this is now already hours old. A terrorist attack, in the Westminster area of London, has occurred ... currently, 4 are confirmed dead (I believe this includes a terrorist).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4338998/Police-open-fire-outside-House-Commons.html


Four people are dead after a terrorist brought carnage to central London today, mowing down pedestrians on Westminster Bridge and attacking police with knives in the grounds of the Houses of Parliament.

At least 10 people were hit on the crowded bridge when a 4x4 drove along the pavement, knocking down pedestrians before crashing into a fence below Big Ben.

An intruder, described by a witness as 'middle-aged and Asian' and carrying two knives, then managed to break into the grounds of the Parliament and stabbed a police officer before he was shot and injured. The policeman has since died.

It is currently believed one attacker was involved, killing three people, including a policeman, and leaving at least 10 pedestrians and two other police officers seriously injured.

Prime Minister Theresa May was bundled into her car by a plain-clothes police officer and driven quickly from the scene as the attack unfolded. She will chair a meeting of the Government's emergency Cobra Committee tonight.

Scotland Yard said the attack, which comes a year to the day after the terrorist atrocities in Brussels, is being treated 'as a terrorist incident until we know otherwise'.

All of this is reminiscent of the Paris attacks.

I don't think I need comment further to any great extent ... it's still an ongoing story, and the facts speak for themselves. That's despite our Metropolitan Police wanting to be somewhat cautious about EVEN concluding it to be a TERRORIST 'INCIDENT', AT ALL ...

Political correctness has now reached truly insane levels. Hasn't it ?? Where even our police cannot feel 'comfortable' about being forthright enough to publicly recognise terrorism for what it IS, without an attempt at qualification, until they absolutely HAVE to !!! ....

[LongTermGuy]

`First photo of London terrorist`

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7if2fAVAAEDXa5.jpg

[Drummond]

`First photo of London terrorist`



https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C7if2fAVAAEDXa5.jpg

.. and, perhaps, one of the last ? The scum died ... :clap::clap::clap:

[Drummond]

.. hopefully this'll play in the US without difficulty ... ?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-5ptY0PN0

[Drummond]

Details are still unfolding, although this is now already hours old. A terrorist attack, in the Westminster area of London, has occurred ... currently, 4 are confirmed dead (I believe this includes a terrorist).

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4338998/Police-open-fire-outside-House-Commons.html



All of this is reminiscent of the Paris attacks.

I don't think I need comment further to any great extent ... it's still an ongoing story, and the facts speak for themselves. That's despite our Metropolitan Police wanting to be somewhat cautious about EVEN concluding it to be a TERRORIST 'INCIDENT', AT ALL ...

Political correctness has now reached truly insane levels. Hasn't it ?? Where even our police cannot feel 'comfortable' about being forthright enough to publicly recognise terrorism for what it IS, without an attempt at qualification, until they absolutely HAVE to !!! ....

Update: five now reported as dead (one must've died of injuries sustained).

[Black Diamond]

Yikes. I'll wait on the political commentary.

[NightTrain]

Update: five now reported as dead (one must've died of injuries sustained).

5th casualty was a woman pedestrian who died later from her injuries.

[gabosaurus]

The attack provided another chance for Little Donnie to make a fool of himself and further damage U.S.-U.K. relations. :rolleyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/22/donald-trump-jr-tweet-london-mayor-sadiq-khan

[Abbey Marie]

When one of Trump's relatives is as embarrassing as Billy Carter, I'll show some concern.




http://www.debatepolicy.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=9795&stc=1

[Drummond]

The attack provided another chance for Little Donnie to make a fool of himself and further damage U.S.-U.K. relations. :rolleyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/22/donald-trump-jr-tweet-london-mayor-sadiq-khan

So, you just see this as an opportunity to peddle your Leftieism ??

Tell me this, Gabby ---

In your eyes, did five people die in London yesterday, and upwards of 40 people suffer injuries (one fatally) ... just so that you could have an excuse to peddle an anti-Trump cheap shot ???

I think, Gabby, that you've shown us how morally bankrupt the Left's psychology truly is. Also, I'd contend that you're showing us, as the other side of the same coin, why Conservative thinking is so superior and so much more decent. Because, to a Conservative, individual lives MATTER. Decency in society MATTERS. Standing up for law and order, the safety and security of citizens, MATTERS.

But, what do you do ? You just turn the whole thing into a squalid cheap jibe at someone whose political views you choose to oppose.

Besides which .. the point made against the London Mayor was a perfectly fair and valid one !! Khan DID say that terror attacks are part of living in a big city !!!

What kind of mayor insists that people he's mayor OF, must ACCEPT terrorism as a part of their existence ??

In fact, I can tell you the answer to that one.

A MUSLIM ONE DOES.

[Drummond]

Breaking news, reported just a couple of minutes ago as I type ...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4342254/ISIS-claims-responsibility-London-terror-attack.html


ISIS today claimed that the Westminster attacker was a 'soldier of the Islamic State'.More to follow ..

[Gunny]

The attack provided another chance for Little Donnie to make a fool of himself and further damage U.S.-U.K. relations. :rolleyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/22/donald-trump-jr-tweet-london-mayor-sadiq-khan


You actually posted that drivel? Sinking to new lows are (not we just you)? Let's pretend that bear in the middle of the room isn't there and focus on some who gives a sh*t crap. THERE's a plan.

[gabosaurus]

Drummond, if you were driving in a crowded area and your car suffered a malfunction and blew up, a terror organization would claim you as a "soldier of the Islamic state." :rolleyes:

[Black Diamond]

Another victim: 75 year old taken off life support.

[Gunny]

Drummond, if you were driving in a crowded area and your car suffered a malfunction and blew up, a terror organization would claim you as a "soldier of the Islamic state." :rolleyes:

He lives in one of those places I've "never been too" according to you. Go live in Europe. THEN you can get back to us. Otherwise. you don't know jack sh*t.

[LongTermGuy]

The attack provided another chance for Little Donnie to make a fool of himself and further damage U.S.-U.K. relations. :rolleyes:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/22/donald-trump-jr-tweet-london-mayor-sadiq-khan

Obama and hillary been making fools of themselves for the last 8 years...Trump hasnt been wrong yet...

London with its `open borders to muslims` allowed this piece of shit to be elected...
http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/13eskc.jpg
http://shoebat.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ChkE2myW0AAnOX0.jpg
http://9502-presscdn-0-95.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Screen-Shot-2016-05-07-at-10.35.13-AM-554x600.png
http://www.barenakedislam.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Sadiq-3-1024x515.jpg

[Drummond]

Drummond, if you were driving in a crowded area and your car suffered a malfunction and blew up, a terror organization would claim you as a "soldier of the Islamic state." :rolleyes:

What are you hinting at ? A suggestion - if I read you correctly - that ISIS must be EXCUSED responsibility for those acts that they CLAIM responsibility for ?

State the basis for your certainty, if this is indeed what you're saying, that ISIS holds no responsibility for what happened in London. Or ... STOP trying to EXCUSE terrorists from responsibility for their actions !!!

[Drummond]

He lives in one of those places I've "never been too" according to you. Go live in Europe. THEN you can get back to us. Otherwise. you don't know jack sh*t.

Gabby has no interest in visiting any area that might prove her pet theories wrong.

In the past, when Gabby said she'd be visiting Britain, I suggested she looked in on Tottenham, north London. I did so repeatedly. That London borough has been continually run by a Socialist-led council for several decades. If anywhere would be likely to be a 'shining example of what prolonged Socialist leadership' produces, Tottenham should be !!

But she ducked the challenge. Why ? Because, in large measure, Tottenham is, in actuality, one of the worst run, most decayed boroughs London has. It's a melting pot for ethnic dysfunctionality. The 2011 English riots originated there.

Gabby will never face up to evident proof that her much-lauded Socialism just DOES NOT WORK. She preaches, but never faces truth if it's undesirable truth ...

[sear]

" Tottenham is, in actuality, one of the worst run, most decayed boroughs London has. It's a melting pot for ethnic dysfunctionality. The 2011 English riots originated there. " D #18
A city borough can be the locus of a riot without being the cause.

I wouldn't say America caused the U.S. Revolution. TJ / DOI attributed that to KG3, no taxation without representation ... .

If monthly rent is more affordable in Tottenham, it would then logically tend to disproportionately attract fresh immigrants, those not yet rooted in their new homeland.

[Drummond]

A city borough can be the locus of a riot without being the cause.

I wouldn't say America caused the U.S. Revolution. TJ / DOI attributed that to KG3, no taxation without representation ... .

If monthly rent is more affordable in Tottenham, it would then logically tend to disproportionately attract fresh immigrants, those not yet rooted in their new homeland.

I can't speak with authority about historical American events, as I'm British. Tottenham, though, I do know, and from personal experience ... since I was born in the borough just to the north of it.

I'm not sure that local rent is applicable to what we're meant to be discussing ? But, since you think it is .. well .. let's see what's true of Tottenham, shall we ?

http://www.rightmove.co.uk/property-to-rent/Tottenham/1-bed-flats.html

See for yourself. Average rent .. around £1,000 per calendar month .... and this is in an area which, if you ever pass through it, is squalid, poorly-served by its council .. and a hotbed for discontent. Why ? Because, being Labour-run, it is home to a great many ethnic minorities. In fact, the 'minorities' outnumber the 'indigenous' population substantially.

Tottenham is no stranger to riots. See this ...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-34433752


Thirty years ago PC Keith Blakelock was stabbed in the Broadwater Farm riots in Tottenham, north London. Despite numerous investigations no-one has ever been convicted of his murder.

On 5 October 1985 four policemen burst into the home of Broadwater Farm resident Cynthia Jarrett looking for stolen property.
They failed to find any, but Ms Jarrett had a heart attack and died.

Her death was only weeks after riots in Brixton, south London, which happened following the accidental shooting of Cherry Groce by police officers.

Tottenham has a strong anti-police sentiment running through its population. It has done, for generations.

And, yes ... it's been LEFTIE run for ALL of that time. So ... how come, by now, it isn't some kind of showcase 'paradise' ?

BECAUSE IT'S RUN BY LEFTIES.

Discontent has been simmering just below the surface for decades, and every so often, it boils over. No doubt further riots will happen there in years to come. I also expect it to be the home of future terrorism ...

[Gunny]

A city borough can be the locus of a riot without being the cause.

I wouldn't say America caused the U.S. Revolution. TJ / DOI attributed that to KG3, no taxation without representation ... .

If monthly rent is more affordable in Tottenham, it would then logically tend to disproportionately attract fresh immigrants, those not yet rooted in their new homeland.

Does one not strive to rise above? Or does one stay in the vat with the rest of the swill? If I leave my home and hearth for a better life, THAT is my goal. That as opposed to chickens running from a fight, living in fear then hiding behind the MSMs back to make accusations. I have NO respect for the latter.

[sear]

"I'm not sure that local rent is applicable to what we're meant to be discussing ?" D #20
The relevance has a name.
It was known to the ancients as "cause & effect".
They even recognized the logical fallacy, and named that too: "post hoc ergo propter hoc": after that, therefore because of that.
Again, it has been know for millennia to be a logical fallacy. The rooster's crow does not cause the sun to rise.

If the immigrants were £Trillionaires, they wouldn't need to move.
They could remain in their homeland, build a bigger castle, or buy a country they like better.

Often immigrants don't have those kind of resources, and are thus forced by circumstance to economize. That financial dynamic alone would tend to concentrate them geographically. "Cause & effect".

"it's been LEFTIE run for ALL of that time." D #20
And therefore by logical deduction, before that time it was run by those that were not "LEFTIE".
At what point did it become substandard?

- If everything there was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were elected; why?

- If not all was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were chosen to solve problems, what have the -RIGHTIES- done to help?

[sear]

"Does one not strive to rise above?" G #21
I suspect those very few that don't are comatose.

But as the ancient Chinese aphorism observes, a journey of 1,000 miles begins with a single step.

And if Tottenham is more affordable, should we puzzle at why it attracts recent émigrés?

And if Tottenham is NOT more affordable, and those that live in Tottenham could live in cleaner, safer, more up-scale neighborhoods for the same or lower cost, then they are buffoons. That would not seem to be a plausible explanation.

[Gunny]

The relevance has a name.
It was known to the ancients as "cause & effect".
They even recognized the logical fallacy, and named that too: "post hoc ergo propter hoc": after that, therefore because of that.
Again, it has been know for millennia to be a logical fallacy. The rooster's crow does not cause the sun to rise.

If the immigrants were £Trillionaires, they wouldn't need to move.
They could remain in their homeland, build a bigger castle, or buy a country they like better.

Often immigrants don't have those kind of resources, and are thus forced by circumstance to economize. That financial dynamic alone would tend to concentrate them geographically. "Cause & effect".

And therefore by logical deduction, before that time it was run by those that were not "LEFTIE".
At what point did it become substandard?

- If everything there was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were elected; why?

- If not all was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were chosen to solve problems, what have the -RIGHTIES- done to help?

If you cause your own misery, the effect belongs to YOU. THAT is the "righty" response. Get up and fight. Whining for someone else to take care care of you because you won't is absurd. I was basically a criminal as a teen but I chose to rise above. I have ZERO tolerance for those that will not.

[sear]

"If you cause your own misery, the effect belongs to YOU." G
Indeed.
And even if not, does that make it anyone else's burden?

"Get up and fight. Whining for someone else to take care care of you because you won't is absurd." G
ok
Is there any ethical or moral obligation to accomplish the impossible?

I'm not talkin' bad about MLK.
But would he have been able to accomplish in the 1960's what should have been accomplished in the 1860's, without heroic figures like Harriet Tubman, & Mohandas Gandhi to first lay the groundwork for MLK?

"I was basically a criminal as a teen but I chose to rise above. I have ZERO tolerance for those that will not."
That's fine.
But I do not view it as a binary.
If so, why donate to charity?

Before I graduated high school I had my own lawn-mowing business.

BUT !!

I would not have been able to do so without my own father's generosity. He allowed me to use the family lawn mower for it.
It's a proverbial Catch-22. I couldn't have earned the $money for the lawnmower without the use of the lawnmower.

ref:
Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Micro-Loan Pioneers
Oct 13, 2006 ... Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank have won the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize for pioneering "micro credit," small loans to help the poor run ...


Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Micro-Loan Pioneers (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/10/061013-nobel-peace.html)



Muhammad Yunus - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Yunus)

[Drummond]

The relevance has a name.
It was known to the ancients as "cause & effect".
They even recognized the logical fallacy, and named that too: "post hoc ergo propter hoc": after that, therefore because of that.
Again, it has been know for millennia to be a logical fallacy. The rooster's crow does not cause the sun to rise.

If the immigrants were £Trillionaires, they wouldn't need to move.
They could remain in their homeland, build a bigger castle, or buy a country they like better.

Often immigrants don't have those kind of resources, and are thus forced by circumstance to economize. That financial dynamic alone would tend to concentrate them geographically. "Cause & effect".

And therefore by logical deduction, before that time it was run by those that were not "LEFTIE".
At what point did it become substandard?

- If everything there was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were elected; why?

- If not all was fine, and the "LEFTIES" were chosen to solve problems, what have the -RIGHTIES- done to help?

I see that you're prone to lofty judgmentality - no doubt in the belief that your superficial insights somehow achieve a full grasp of the subject matter you choose to consider.

I've heard of 'cause and effect', thanks very much. I doubt that there's anyone who hasn't (even if you somehow believe otherwise ?).

Ethnic minorities would inevitably choose to settle within those environments best suited to them. The Labour Party (our 'Lefties') have long since been well disposed to ethnic minorities, even to the cost of indigenous populations. So, the areas in which the Left have a firm political base, would be those where the immigrants would want to settle.

That Labour choose to run that environment into the ground, creating a 'benefits rich' culture and consequent financial dysfunctionality, wouldn't much matter to them. They'd claim their benefits from the State. They'd impoverish local resources. Anything for an easy life. Even (.. this is a point you've missed ..) expensive rental properties can be inhabited if the local council is willing to part, or even fully, fund its costs to the expense of the taxpayer.

Trouble is .. with diminishing resources, so less can be spent on upkeeping the local environment. Little to no ACTUAL wealth creation occurs. So, a run-down, decaying environment evolves, in which those living within it know a seething discontent.

Such was Broadwater Farm, in the 1980's. So was the latter-day Tottenham in 2011, leading to the rioting of that year. Grievances are magnified out of all proportion, with destructive criminality its inevitable product.

The terrorist who attacked Westminster days ago is now thought to have been radicalised while he was serving a jail term. His looks to be an example of a criminal nursing grievances (imagined or otherwise) which recruiters took full advantage of. Again --dysfunctionality leading to a destructive outcome, one in which humanity was absent, and subhumanity took its place.

[sear]

"I see that you're prone to lofty judgmentality" D #26
"Lofty"?
I'm flattered.

Judgementalism?
So it might seem to the casual observer. I invite you to post concise quotations as examples, and explain your characterization. I won't hold my breath.

Italo Benin PhD says there are two types of such judgements:
- value judgements, &
- truth judgements.

I consider the former to be mainly subjective, and the latter mainly objective.
I prefer understanding. I rarely waste my time posting personal subjective preference.

"- no doubt"
Often wrong, but never in doubt?

Do you have rational reason to believe your posts are any more valid than mine?
My post addressed the topic.
Your #26 attacks me. ad hom

"in the belief that your superficial insights somehow achieve a full grasp" D
I don't know everything about anything, and have said so for decades.
Albert Einstein, a man whose name is synonymous with genius, was an imperfect man. But his manifold imperfections did not prevent him from introducing us to how speed and gravitation affect the cosmos.

"I've heard of 'cause and effect', thanks very much."
Several have.
I was challenged.
I explained.
Those that don't want the explanation should avoid the challenge.

"Ethnic minorities would inevitably choose to settle within those environments best suited to them."
And I would want my yacht to have 12 staterooms and a dance floor made of inlaid teak & mahogany.
You have stated an irrelevant truism sir or m'am.
Personal preference does not always comport with what is possible. Were it otherwise, there wouldn't be a cancer ward in the land.

"(.. this is a point you've missed ..)"
Again I'm flattered.
But it is a flagrant blunder to assume that simply because I didn't express it explicitly, I'm ignorant of it. Do you also assume the reason I haven't posted the square root of 100 is simply because I don't know it?

"Trouble is .. with diminishing resources, so less can be spent on upkeeping the local environment. Little to no ACTUAL wealth creation occurs. So, a run-down, decaying environment evolves"
Precisely. *
In high school I was taught the name for that is a "ghetto".
And that while by eye they may be recognized by the presence of scavenged abandoned cars, crumbling, neglected infrastructure, and prominent signs of vandalism and crime; they are defined economically.
Ghettos are, according to Ms. Goode, communities where the net economic / financial flow is outward.

* Next time you see a bloke driving around in a rusted out death-trap, why not ask him why he prefers that liability, instead of a brand new car?

[Gunny]

Indeed.
And even if not, does that make it anyone else's burden?

ok
Is there any ethical or moral obligation to accomplish the impossible?

I'm not talkin' bad about MLK.
But would he have been able to accomplish in the 1960's what should have been accomplished in the 1860's, without heroic figures like Harriet Tubman, & Mohandas Gandhi to first lay the groundwork for MLK?

That's fine.
But I do not view it as a binary.
If so, why donate to charity?

Before I graduated high school I had my own lawn-mowing business.

BUT !!

I would not have been able to do so without my own father's generosity. He allowed me to use the family lawn mower for it.
It's a proverbial Catch-22. I couldn't have earned the $money for the lawnmower without the use of the lawnmower.

ref:
Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Micro-Loan Pioneers
Oct 13, 2006 ... Muhammad Yunus and his Grameen Bank have won the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize for pioneering "micro credit," small loans to help the poor run ...


Nobel Peace Prize Goes to Micro-Loan Pioneers (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/10/061013-nobel-peace.html)


Muhammad Yunus - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_Yunus)


Your response is all over the map and makes no sense. Looks like we have ONE thing in common. I used to trudge base housing with my lawn mower every Saturday. I wanted real Levi's instead of sears Best and my parents didn't have the $ for them. So I mowed lawns to pay for my own stuff.

I give to charity monthly. Comes out of my check. Because I CHOOSE to give. You may as well turn into the wind and piss as demand it from me. I am not against helping those who truly need help. I'm against wrote programs run by who gives a crap as long as I get a check government employees who don't do their jobs and keep the system in check. We got more handouts in this country than the Mormons. If you weed out the abusers, there is more for those who truly need help.

[sear]

"I am not against helping those who truly need help. I'm against wrote programs run by who gives a crap as long as I get a check government employees who don't do their jobs and keep the system in check." G
I suspect you've presented a position here shared by most of the 7+ billion of us infesting the planet.

How do you want to split the baby?

Wealth distribution has been bedeviling human culture since the Garden of Eden.
Did Eve save half the apple for Adam? $#@! no !!

I suspect there are migrant illegal farm workers that work harder, under harsher conditions, for longer hours, for less pay than $Billionairs like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet work.
Shouldn't there be some connection?
If not, why does the U.S. military pay "hazardous duty" pay?

"If you weed out the abusers, there is more for those who truly need help."
Pavarotti could not have sung that refrain more beautifully sir.

BUT !!

In practical terms, it's a system best regulated at the family, and church-group levels.

Expanding it to government level reduces it to government standards. And that means just what you'd expect from a bureaucracy.

It may seem paradoxical.
But I've long believed that charitable acts, whether volunteering at the local kitchen, or donating clothing, or food, or heating fuel, etc; benefits the donor as much or more than the recipients.

BUT !!

Leverage it out to a government imposed compulsion, and it can become as you say, an opportunity ripe for abuse.

Perhaps government "welfare" programs are as much about easing the conscience of the governing & governed, as it is about serving the needy.
Churches used to attend to that; part of the reason they are tax exempt.

It may have been a horrid blunder for us to allow government to horn in on their valued territory. That may be a lose / lose proposition.

[Gunny]

I suspect you've presented a position here shared by most of the 7+ billion of us infesting the planet.

How do you want to split the baby?

Wealth distribution has been bedeviling human culture since the Garden of Eden.
Did Eve save half the apple for Adam? $#@! no !!

I suspect there are migrant illegal farm workers that work harder, under harsher conditions, for longer hours, for less pay than $Billionairs like Bill Gates or Warren Buffet work.
Shouldn't there be some connection?
If not, why does the U.S. military pay "hazardous duty" pay?

Pavarotti could not have sung that refrain more beautifully sir.

BUT !!

In practical terms, it's a system best regulated at the family, and church-group levels.

Expanding it to government level reduces it to government standards. And that means just what you'd expect from a bureaucracy.

It may seem paradoxical.
But I've long believed that charitable acts, whether volunteering at the local kitchen, or donating clothing, or food, or heating fuel, etc; benefits the donor as much or more than the recipients.

BUT !!

Leverage it out to a government imposed compulsion, and it can become as you say, an opportunity ripe for abuse.

Perhaps government "welfare" programs are as much about easing the conscience of the governing & governed, as it is about serving the needy.
Churches used to attend to that; part of the reason they are tax exempt.

It may have been a horrid blunder for us to allow government to horn in on their valued territory. That may be a lose / lose proposition.

You're talking to a blue collar worker. You think I don't know how hard we work?

My church will STILL feed and clothe you. It wouldn't be my church otherwise. You're trying to sound important and intelligent and you are neither.

[sear]

"You're talking to a blue collar worker. You think I don't know how hard we work?" G
My point was broader than that.
It is NOT how hard any ONE group works.
Instead my point was about the DIFFERENTIAL of $economic reward. Why should a guy with an easier, safer job get paid more than a guy with a more exhausting, lower paying job?

I've been working for years before I graduated high school.
And in my experience, the easier, the safer, the more civilized the job, the better it pays.

"You're trying to sound important and intelligent and you are neither." G
You are 100% correct that I am neither.

And you are 100% incorrect that I'm trying to do any such thing.

My interest here is concepts. I THRIVE on concepts.

"Important"? (your word)
To whom?
About what?
Why on EARTH would I POSSIBLY care?!?!

"Intelligent"?
I have no wish to seem the fool.
But my résumé has uniquely prepared me for such exchanges.

I post to inquire, inform, or persuade.
Your attribution of egotistical motive embarrasses you, not me.

I eagerly invite you to critique my posted words.

But you are clearly vastly beyond your depth in accurately assessing my motives. Presume me an imbecile if it pleases you.
The concepts exchanged will delight no more or less either way.

"The neurotic has suspicions, the psychotic has convictions." psychiatrist Thomas Szasz

"All honors wounds are self-inflicted." Andrew Carnegie

[Elessar]

I post to inquire, inform, or persuade.

I eagerly invite you to critique my posted words.

.

I've stayed out of this, but good luck with the word in bold with this forum.
You may want to know your audience before 'preaching'.

[Gunny]

My point was broader than that.
It is NOT how hard any ONE group works.
Instead my point was about the DIFFERENTIAL of $economic reward. Why should a guy with an easier, safer job get paid more than a guy with a more exhausting, lower paying job?

I've been working for years before I graduated high school.
And in my experience, the easier, the safer, the more civilized the job, the better it pays.

You are 100% correct that I am neither.

And you are 100% incorrect that I'm trying to do any such thing.

My interest here is concepts. I THRIVE on concepts.

"Important"? (your word)
To whom?
About what?
Why on EARTH would I POSSIBLY care?!?!

"Intelligent"?
I have no wish to seem the fool.
But my résumé has uniquely prepared me for such exchanges.

I post to inquire, inform, or persuade.
Your attribution of egotistical motive embarrasses you, not me.

I eagerly invite you to critique my posted words.

But you are clearly vastly beyond your depth in accurately assessing my motives. Presume me an imbecile if it pleases you.
The concepts exchanged will delight no more or less either way.


Post an actual thought. I have ZERO problem responding. I'm responding to what you are doing. Which is nonsensical. You're all over the place, trying to cover for you inability using big words. Bring a singular argument per thread and I will respond to that argument. Otherwise, you've turned this into an about you thread. You've addressed everything BUT the actual topic.

I got to run to the store. When I get back ... let's f-ing play.

[Elessar]

Post an actual thought. I have ZERO problem responding. I'm responding to what you are doing. Which is nonsensical. You're all over the place, trying to cover for you inability using big words. Bring a singular argument per thread and I will respond to that argument. Otherwise, you've turned this into an about you thread. You've addressed everything BUT the actual topic.

I got to run to the store. When I get back ... let's f-ing play.

You noticed that too, I see. Not being staff, I did not address it.

[Gunny]

You noticed that too, I see. Not being staff, I did not address it.

\Got nothing to do with being staff. He's not breaking any rules. He can bring it. I don't come to the dance to not dance. But yeah ... easy read. One thing he didn't figure in is are us. We got all kinds of skills 'round here.

[Drummond]

"Lofty"?
I'm flattered.

Judgementalism?
So it might seem to the casual observer. I invite you to post concise quotations as examples, and explain your characterization. I won't hold my breath.

Italo Benin PhD says there are two types of such judgements:
- value judgements, &
- truth judgements.

I consider the former to be mainly subjective, and the latter mainly objective.
I prefer understanding. I rarely waste my time posting personal subjective preference.

Often wrong, but never in doubt?

Do you have rational reason to believe your posts are any more valid than mine?
My post addressed the topic.
Your #26 attacks me. ad hom

I don't know everything about anything, and have said so for decades.
Albert Einstein, a man whose name is synonymous with genius, was an imperfect man. But his manifold imperfections did not prevent him from introducing us to how speed and gravitation affect the cosmos.

Several have.
I was challenged.
I explained.
Those that don't want the explanation should avoid the challenge.

And I would want my yacht to have 12 staterooms and a dance floor made of inlaid teak & mahogany.
You have stated an irrelevant truism sir or m'am.
Personal preference does not always comport with what is possible. Were it otherwise, there wouldn't be a cancer ward in the land.

Again I'm flattered.
But it is a flagrant blunder to assume that simply because I didn't express it explicitly, I'm ignorant of it. Do you also assume the reason I haven't posted the square root of 100 is simply because I don't know it?

Precisely. *
In high school I was taught the name for that is a "ghetto".
And that while by eye they may be recognized by the presence of scavenged abandoned cars, crumbling, neglected infrastructure, and prominent signs of vandalism and crime; they are defined economically.
Ghettos are, according to Ms. Goode, communities where the net economic / financial flow is outward.

* Next time you see a bloke driving around in a rusted out death-trap, why not ask him why he prefers that liability, instead of a brand new car?

Oh, good grief !!

How much of your post is about a serious attempt to debate anything even loosely related to the thread's subject-matter, and how much is about image projection ?

I've no interest in your self-absorbed thinking. At the end of the day, we are here to debate issues (or, on occasions, perspectives). The debate(s) to be had stand or fall according to the quality of the debate, and the merits of arguments presented, when tested against their counterparts (if any). Albert Einstein's capacity or otherwise for 'perfection' is neither here nor there !!

[Abbey Marie]

My point was broader than that.
It is NOT how hard any ONE group works.
Instead my point was about the DIFFERENTIAL of $economic reward. Why should a guy with an easier, safer job get paid more than a guy with a more exhausting, lower paying job?

I've been working for years before I graduated high school.
And in my experience, the easier, the safer, the more civilized the job, the better it pays.
...
.

Re: your initial question, one big reason why that guy with the "easier" safer job gets paid more, is the law of supply and demand. Skilled neurosurgeons are harder to find than bus drivers, and can demand more.

Another big reason is that often, that so-called easier, safer job comes with the risk of causing a lot of damage if not done right. That structural engineer who blunders is going to cause a lot more significant trouble than an errant mailman.

Finally, there are pressures and stresses to some jobs that the outside observer does not understand. The cardiologist who recently saved my life was surely under a ton of pressure to perform well.

I will say that anyone who puts their life on the line is in a distinct category and imo, deserves to be very well paid. Courage and sacrifice can't be over-valued.

[sear]

A #37

Understood, and well articulated.

My less clearly articulated counterpoint:

You've described it in terms of capitalism.
Capitalism may be the BEST system. But it is not the only system: "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."
Is there an intrinsic reason "the pie" (GDP) should not be distributed to reward harder work?

As you know, in some cases it is. Oil rig roustabouts for example tend to be paid well.
That's in part because there's plenty of profit to share.

But there are nursing jobs going begging, as some native Americans don't want to clean bed-pans.

[Gunny]

Re: your initial question, one big reason why that guy with the "easier" safer job gets paid more, is the law of supply and demand. Skilled neurosurgeons are harder to find than bus drivers, and can demand more.

Another big reason is that often, that so-called easier, safer job comes with the risk of causing a lot of damage if not done right. That structural engineer who blunders is going to cause a lot more significant trouble than an errant mailman.

Finally, there are pressures and stresses to some jobs that the outside observer does not understand. The cardiologist who recently saved my life was surely under a ton of pressure to perform well.

I will say that anyone who puts their life on the line is in a distinct category and imo, deserves to be very well paid. Courage and sacrifice can't be over-valued.You have to define it, Abs. I l slammed my doc and her 2 male nurses into the wall. Must have not been her day for Gunny BS. She nailed my ass. Guess who the only person I recognized when when I woke up 20 days later? And yes I'm laughing. She wasn't taking any crap from me.

Whether or not it matters, I sent her a thank you letter.

[Kathianne]

You have to define it, Abs. I l slammed my doc and her 2 male nurses into the wall. Must have not been her day for Gunny BS. She nailed my ass. Guess who the only person I recognized when when I woke up 20 days later? And yes I'm laughing. She wasn't taking any crap from me.

Whether or not it matters, I sent her a thank you letter.

I hope you sent flowers or candy with the letter! I know you were out of your gourd, but really! LOL!