Again, please read for content. You're responding to things I'm not saying and that can't be reasonably inferred from the sentences I'm typing. I am not saying slavery exists now in the United States, I am not saying wage labor is slavery, and I even said up front it's an example in which there's mobility but is still not a good system. So do you agree that there are poor systems that still have some level of social mobility?

If you are signing up to do a job that makes your company a million dollars an hour, but there are a million people who can do the job, then you will be paid very little. Your pay is decided by how many similarly skilled workers can do the job, how much the job produces, how much the job costs to get into, and so on so forth. It is not completely commensurate with the value you bring to the table, and often your job brings a massive amount of value to the table and the market still can't support it.

Why are you assuming I have no investments? If you "have done your research" then you would know that making a 7% annual return on your money is the background for stock investing.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 6 2021 08:07pm

I'm responding to everything you are saying to be truthful.

Facts are that you tried to use slavery as an example of a meritocracy when it clearly is nothing of the such. Those were people forced to do something against their God-Given right to say no. "Promotions", or "a little less poor treatment" is not the same thing as earning a living wage where everyone (no matter what you look like) is permitted to shoot their shot on the same court (i.e. discrimination based on sex, gender, race, religion, etc is federally prohibited).

Also, again, the fact that a company profits doesn't mean you inherently deserve more if the contribution to said profit is a drop in the river. If you feel you have skills that are being under-valued, then apply to a job that will pay what you feel you're worth. You have that freedom - everyone does. I did.

Lastly, the one thing you said that does warrant a concise response - I never said you don't invest. Never met you so how would I know? You speak of investing as if it's the answer to the "classic white picket fence" life, so I am simply asking why if you have that all figured out, we are still even debating?

If you have that all figured out, you beat me - money that generates itself will always defeat a full-time job (nice paycheck or not).

You have realized that you're not going to spin this back on me at this point and that I am still going to hold you to proving your stance / admitting where your beliefs lie before I take you seriously, right?

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jun 6 2021 09:29pm

I can't talk with you if you aren't capable of responding to what I'm saying.

I did not say slavery is a meritocracy. I said it was a system with some level of mobility. I don't think you are intentionally misrepresenting what I'm saying, I think you just have very poor reading comprehension.

" For instance, the "best slaves" were often elevated to slaver assistants by the masters. They would get treated a bit better and be responsible for keeping the other slaves in line. This is definitely "mobility" afforded to slaves, but it's far from a good system. Agreed?"

If this is not using slavery as an example of "promotion", or "a little less poor treatment", then you will have to elaborate quite a bit.

I simply am incapable of understand how anyone could interpret this statement differently. When you put something in writing on the inter-webs, it can easily be found.

/edit - a meritocracy is exactly that - a system of mobility based on merit earned by one's hard work (companies call raises for good work "merit increases" for a reason). You have referenced an oppressive system that denigrates certain social groups for nothing other than appearance as an example of mobility based on merit because they may become the "slaver assistant" as some sort of "promotion".

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jun 6 2021 10:15pm

So then you've contradicted yourself lol

You're saying this is definitely an example of a meritocracy in this poist, and just before said "Facts are that you tried to use slavery as an example of a meritocracy when it clearly is nothing of the such."


You seem to have an issue following a simple train of thought, and that's probably the more underlying issue that's causing your lack of comprehension and communication ability.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 6 2021 08:21pm

Inaccurate in all fairness.

I simply pointed out your direct quote that used a synonym for promotion ("elevation to slaver assistant") with slavery as the example. A meritocracy is one where everyone has the same chance (equality of opportunity is alive and well, equity is not capitalism, moral, or fair and never will be, because it takes from those who worked harder to give to those who didn't earn it. That's actually the dictionary definition of theft and I loathe theft. We earn our success and we pay our fair price for the goods and services we want out of the money earned through our own merits).

The troll bridge is now closed. I have given you enough chances and you still haven't provided a single belief of your own other than comparing slavery to a meritocracy. There's just nothing to work with here, so I have no reason to infer otherwise.

Be well

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jun 6 2021 08:37pm

If you think this is trolling then I think you need to grow a thicker skin. I haven't said anything that would scratch a 15 year old, much less somebody claiming to be a 40 year old man.

As for the conversation itself, if you can't handle this level of interaction you won't have much success with conversation on this forum. You are a very poor communicator and that's not going to be an issue you only have with me.

This post was edited by Thor123422 on Jun 6 2021 08:32pm

Oh and unrelated to any conversations I've had with anyone -- I felt the need to put this out there as a general statement for anyone who reads.

My stances do not apply to those who were unfortunately just dealt a raw hand (i.e. the disabled). I speak of those who are capable without hindrance outside of their control but choose not to use their given capabilities.

That is all. Night!

This post was edited by CyrusTheGreat on Jun 6 2021 09:23pm