The War Room Bet Thread v2

Status
Not open for further replies.
So that was the big juicy Russia burger I've been waiting for? Kinda small and disappointing

Conclusive evidence that the campaign was working with a hostile foreign gov't to steal information from the opposition? And we're just getting started here, though Trump's campaign manager and long-time associate (who note that Trump continued to consult with until his lawyers warned him to stop) has already gone down. It's amazing that an American can be such a hack that they'd tell people that that's no big deal.
 
That would be a good bet with an honest person- whether it will be found that policy concessions were offered in exchange for something (it seems like a fair bet too- could go either way). But angle shooters wouldn't accept any bet-losing definition of "policy concessions."
 
Your lack of self-understanding and projection here are kind of stunning. You're just repeating ridiculous GOP spin and acting like me not buying it is "tribalism."



Er, yeah, it's pretty new. You know that.



Well, if "Whitewater" is referring to something much more broad than the Clinton connection, sure. But a better comparison to the Trump situation is Watergate, though if the burglary was conducted by a hostile foreign gov't in exchange for policy concessions and to help elect a grossly unqualified conman.
Very weak response, but you have to cover your ass I suppose.
 
That would be a good bet with an honest person- whether it will be found that policy concessions were offered in exchange for something (it seems like a fair bet too- could go either way). But angle shooters wouldn't accept any bet-losing definition of "policy concessions."

If you look at the timeline, we already at least have the platform change happening after the campaign was clearly aware that Putin was trying to help.
 
Funny, I seem to have accused you of the same thing recently.

Not seriously, though. But you seriously are trolling. I think that your support of Trump is mostly just driven by racial resentment (and a poor understanding of what is happening in America, given that you don't live here and mostly consume partisan news sources), but I don't think you're dumb enough to just blindly swallow the desperate GOP party line on this.


That part is already confirmed. Read Papadopoulos' statement.
 
Not seriously, though. But you seriously are trolling. I think that your support of Trump is mostly just driven by racial resentment (and a poor understanding of what is happening in America, given that you don't live here and mostly consume partisan news sources), but I don't think you're dumb enough to just blindly swallow the desperate GOP party line on this.

No, seriously. I have at times thought you must be an elaborate troll. I have difficulty understanding how you can subject some beliefs to intense scrutiny and give others almost a complete free pass. Obviously tribalism explains it, but you have at times taken tribalism to a level I thought could only be consistent with trolling.

You still haven't realized I'm not a Trump supporter. The guy is kind of a buffoon and not someone I would want to be friends with. Also, I disagree with him on almost everything.

As discussed previously, 2016 was the first national election I ever voted in (despite being a political guy for decades) and I didn't vote for Trump. Don't plan to vote again, either. More of a one-in-a-lifetime thing, like shooting heroin or something.

Racial resentment...toward which race(s)? My family is multi-racial so that's a hard one to fathom.

I find myself addictively checking the left-wing sources much more than the right-wing ones. I particularly enjoy Salon and the Twitter feeds of Amanda Marcotte and Sally Kohn. I often watch Don Lemon and Rachel Maddow. Mostly, this is for entertainment. I enjoy finding crazy partisan people and exploring their contradictions.

Much of (though not all) the right-wing stuff is just unbearable because it is often deliberately or malevolently stupid. I prefer the left-wing nutters because they are usually earnestly stupid and almost never know how stupid they sound. Further, their stupidity is often couched in intelligent-sounding language. This is fun to see, like watching a puppy trip over its own feet.
 
No, seriously. I have at times thought you must be an elaborate troll. I have difficulty understanding how you can subject some beliefs to intense scrutiny and give others almost a complete free pass. Obviously tribalism explains it, but you have at times taken tribalism to a level I thought could only be consistent with trolling.

Example?
 

But really, when I started reading the WR back in 2015, your very consistent presence was a source of amusement and intrigue. It was rather mysterious to me how someone could have maintained forum posting over more than a decade, and it was almost mind-blowing how threads would mutate around your posting. There were times when I thought you were annoying, but I never thought you were a troll. So I really have no idea where this sentiment that you're a troll comes from, because it's just not consistent with what we see. If I was to pick someone from the left here to be a troll, someone like HomerThompson would be exponentially more fitting, because he has done stuff like post (censored) interracial porn in order to tick off right wingers: literally trolling, in other words. But for some reason I don't see him being accused the same way you are.

You probably hit some combination of presence, insistence and, of course, political position counter to the norm present here, that gets under the skin of guys like waiguoren in a way that they can't intuitively conceive of your existence as anything other than trolling. And when that intuition fails them, they have to learn (like I did, to some extent). It then gets even weirder when waiguoren does immensely embarassing things like offer you emotional counseling because he "senses" that something is off with your posting. What the hell was even that? That's something that could actually be turned into a trollish gimmick.
 
But really, when I started reading the WR back in 2015, your very consistent presence was a source of amusement and intrigue. It was rather mysterious to me how someone could have maintained forum posting over more than a decade, and it was almost mind-blowing how threads would mutate around your posting. There were times when I thought you were annoying, but I never thought you were a troll. So I really have no idea where this sentiment that you're a troll comes from, because it's just not consistent with what we see. If I was to pick someone from the left here to be a troll, someone like HomerThompson would be exponentially more fitting, because he has done stuff like post (censored) interracial porn in order to tick off right wingers: literally trolling, in other words. But for some reason I don't see him being accused the same way you are.

You probably hit some combination of presence, insistence and, of course, political position counter to the norm present here, that gets under the skin of guys like waiguoren in a way that they can't intuitively conceive of your existence as anything other than trolling. And when that intuition fails them, they have to learn (like I did, to some extent). It then gets even weirder when waiguoren does immensely embarassing things like offer you emotional counseling because he "senses" that something is off with your posting. What the hell was even that? That's something that could actually be turned into a trollish gimmick.

I think there's a major aspect of playacting here. Like, do these people really think that Clinton is a criminal or liar (or was about to die last year) or that Trump isn't? I think on some level maybe--not that they think it is literally, objectively true, but that it reflects their real emotional state. They're angry and they feel done wrong by some mysterious someones, and Clinton seems like one of them, while Trump expresses the same emotion. There is a kind of tribal reality that these guys know on some level isn't objectively true, but as long as their among each other, they can forget that.

A good example is the way they insist that the non-partisan media is secretly biased against them and thus cannot be trusted. Seeing someone put forth a reasonable, fact-based argument for why that is false thus feels like a personal attack, strikes them deep in their souls (in a way, ironically, that an actual personal attack doesn't, as that would just be someone playing the same game on another side and not actually disturbing).

And, yeah, the emotional concern thing was a classic gimmick. I think wai should apply that broadly. That would be hilarious.
 
Remember when you insisted I was wrong to suggest that the availability of $3 haircuts here (on an island with median per capita GDP near US levels) are strongly related to the large supply of cheap labor here?
 
Last edited:
Remember when you insisted I was wrong to suggest that the $3 haircuts here (on an island with median per capita GDP near US levels) are strongly related to the large supply of cheap labor here?

Here's the thread:

http://origin.forums.sherdog.com/th...te-cancel-with-6-months-delay.3611635/page-30

My posts are pretty good in that one.

I'd argue that your belief that deporting a bunch of people would actually *raise* wages goes against historical examples and sound thinking and is only based on your own tribalism (you dislike non-whites being in America and so imagine some kind of crazy benefits from expelling them).
 
Here's the thread:

http://origin.forums.sherdog.com/th...te-cancel-with-6-months-delay.3611635/page-30

My posts are pretty good in that one.

I'd argue that your belief that deporting a bunch of people would actually *raise* wages goes against historical examples and sound thinking and is only based on your own tribalism (you dislike non-whites being in America and so imagine some kind of crazy benefits from expelling them).
So, deporting all the Filipinos, Indonesians and Vietnamese---people who mostly cannot speak Chinese, are unemployable in technology/finance and other skilled positions and came here to perform menial jobs---on this island would not raise the cost of haircuts? Seriously?

I think you are confusing economy-wide wages with wages for low-tier unskilled jobs.
 
So, deporting all the Filipinos, Indonesians and Vietnamese---people who mostly cannot speak Chinese, are unemployable in technology/finance and other skilled positions and came here to perform menial jobs---on this island would not raise the cost of haircuts? Seriously?

I think you are confusing economy-wide wages with wages for low-tier unskilled jobs.

Can't comment on the specifics of your area. Mass deportations in America would drive wages down, though.
 
Can't comment on the specifics of your area. Mass deportations in America would drive wages down, though.

Savage Island. Population 25 million. Median per capita income: $50,000

Natives speak English and mostly attend public schools where they learn to communicate effectively, how to use a computer, basic math and critical thinking.

Immigrants are not allowed on Savage Island. Lower-skilled native people tend to perform jobs such as hair cutting. Due to Baumol's cost disease, wages for hair cutters are quite high, and a simple hair cut costs about $20, tip included.

In the 2018 election, Jack V. is elected dictator for life on Savage Island. Interested in lowering the cost of goods and services on Savage Island, President Jack V. declares that immigrants from the surrounding islands will be free to come as go as they please, subject to a simple background check. They will be allowed to work and the barriers to entry in the labor market will be minimal.

The surrounding islands are very poor and backward. Their citizens do not speak English. However, they do know how to perform low-skill jobs such as cutting hair, collecting coconuts and cleaning toilets.

In the first year, one million foreigners join the workforce on Savage Island. All enter the low-skill labor market. The effect on median per capita income is minimal, as the population has only increased by 4%.

But what will be the effect on the cost of haircuts on Savage Island?
 
Savage Island. Population 25 million. Median per capita income: $50,000

Natives speak English and mostly attend public schools where they learn to communicate effectively, how to use a computer, basic math and critical thinking.

Immigrants are not allowed on Savage Island. Lower-skilled native people tend to perform jobs such as hair cutting. Due to Baumol's cost disease, wages for hair cutters are quite high, and a simple hair cut costs about $20, tip included.

In the 2018 election, Jack V. is elected dictator for life on Savage Island. Interested in lowering the cost of goods and services on Savage Island, President Jack V. declares that immigrants from the surrounding islands will be free to come as go as they please, subject to a simple background check. They will be allowed to work and the barriers to entry in the labor market will be minimal.

The surrounding islands are very poor and backward. Their citizens do not speak English. However, they do know how to perform low-skill jobs such as cutting hair, collecting coconuts and cleaning toilets.

In the first year, one million foreigners join the workforce on Savage Island. All enter the low-skill labor market. The effect on median per capita income is minimal, as the population has only increased by 4%.

But what will be the effect on the cost of haircuts on Savage Island?

The only honest answer is that the question is unknown. What's going on with housing costs? Are they able to survive as hairdressers? How many new haircuts are required vs. new stylists? And so on. Lots of unanswered questions.

Bringing this to the real world, we have had periods of mass deportation (in the U.S. even), and it didn't have the effect that believers in the lump of labor fallacy expected.

So, again, it looks like in the process of trying to find tribalism from me, you just reveal your own.

@oleDirtyBast4rd, BTW, has some really funny examples. He completely flipped on the electoral college right after the election, for example. And recently, he was screeching about Mueller finding crimes that were unrelated to the initial investigation, and I pointed out that the whole Clinton email fake scandal came about as a result of one of the many pointless, politically motivated Benghazi investigations, and he said that he was a kid then.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top