Quantcast
The Official US Politics OT

Forums - Politics Discussion - The Official US Politics OT

Immersiveunreality said:
Machiavellian said:

So is that picture suppose to represent Trump high standards for hiring staff.  Lol, you make this to easy.  Its like playing with a child in their early troll stage.  Once challenge they run out of ideals and resort to nonsense.

So you are saying you have no clue about the DK effect.  Just as I thought, all mouth no action.  When tasked to prove your words you come up short, thanks for playing.  Try better to troll next time.

Sorry to interfere but is it that important?It is a bundle of personal treats and it is not a condition but its just a form of denial mostly formed by ego and upbringing.(And you could say that to some degree most people have it)

It is interesting to talk about mental health and personality treats but it might be just more fruitfull to talk about real political topics in here instead of lingering on hypothesises given a name and that is already difficult to argue about with people in the same political field.

I kinda lean to your side of believing that he has a good chance to have those different personal treats although the "effect" name should have no weight at all and i do not agree with making those kind of collectives but thats just me and that is also offtopic. :p

No its not important if Trump exhibit DK effect or not.  Instead, EricHiggins made this sly remark that people who say someone suffers from the effect is ignorant of what it is.  Since he wanted to call me out like that, I expected him to then show me how ignorant I am in saying Trump exhibit the effect.  Since he punted on his answer, well I had to figure he was trolling and had nothing.

As to the effect itself and how it plays to how a person response to situations, it gives a clue to why we currently see the responses, tweets we currently see from Trump.  Understanding why he acts the way he does gives more insight into how he handle the job of President.  It also leads one to not be shocked by a lot of his responses in view of his character trait.



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
Machiavellian said:

So is that picture suppose to represent Trump high standards for hiring staff.  Lol, you make this to easy.  Its like playing with a child in their early troll stage.  Once challenge they run out of ideals and resort to nonsense.

So you are saying you have no clue about the DK effect.  Just as I thought, all mouth no action.  When tasked to prove your words you come up short, thanks for playing.  Try better to troll next time.

You asked for proof of high standards. I showed not one but two. How many do you specifically require? Will I get a bone if I show more? Why would you assume If he has standards that high when it comes to those types of things, that his standards for the people that work for him would be much lower? How do you think he paid for all that gold and bling, which likely also helped get him that woman? Lazy, useless, good for nothing staff? That's the formula for success alright!

No, I'm saying I'm not a dog and your not the master and we're not playing fetch. You brought up the DK effect, and were quite certain Trump falls under it, and I simply pointed out don't be so sure, since the effect itself points out exactly that. If you're so sure someone else falls into it, then quite possibly, you yourself may very well fall into it as well, if not worse. Maybe, maybe not.

Since I pointed this out already, and instead of proving your words, you simply tried to put the onus on me.... Hmm...

At BOLDED: If you are going to call someone either direct or on the sly ignorant of a subject then yes, the onus is on you to prove your point.  If you cannot then just shut up.  Either you have proof that you understand the topic or you do not.  So far with your answers, the only thing you did was waffle.  So again, if I am ignorant of the DK effect then either prove your words of shut up about it.  

As to the 2 pieces of proof you posted, are you saying a picture of a room is somehow a standard on how Trump hires someone personally for a cabinet position.  That somehow this gaudy room is the standard we should look at for his ability to hire qualified people to important staff position.  I am sorry, I just do not get it.  How does 2 pictures of a room mean anything about Trump ability to hire qualified people to high level staff position.  Should we be asking his personal decorator how they hire people instead of Trump.



HylianSwordsman said:
SpokenTruth said:

This is twice you've proven that you don't fully grasp what the Dunning-Kruger effect is.  I'll explain it in math terms.

Imagine a given subject has 100 units of data to possibly know.  Those on the lower end of the D-K scale who know 5 units of data but are unaware the remaining 95 exist would inaccurately claim their percentage of overall knowledge on that subject is higher than it truly it.  These people often presume there is only 20 units, for example, and would therefore claim they know 25% of all there is to know on the topic when in fact it's just 5%.

On the other end of the D-K effect, those who know 20 units of data and are aware there is still much more to learn will often claim they know 10% of the topic despite actually knowing 20%.

It's a measure of how much they believe that their knowledge comprises all there is to know. Or, better stated, the meta-cognition of personal knowledge.

And yes, it makes a sound.  Sound is the mechanical oscillation of pressure waves through a medium and exists irrespective of a receptive audience.

I feel like that analogy could be improved a bit. It doesn't capture that the more you understand the data, the more you understand the amount that you've yet to understand. I would say it's more like a maze with an unknown number of rooms (it's 100, but people at the start don't know that) and from the entrance you can see 5 of them and don't even know it's a maze yet, so from the entrance you think you can guess the basic path to the other side, you think it's just a simple path. Only when you actually walk to the 5th visible room do you actually see there are tons of branching paths, and realize there's probably upwards of 50 and it'll be quite a task to find your way to the other side.

As for the tree in a forest question, it depends on how you understand the word sound in that context. If a tree falls in the forest, obviously it makes sound waves, but without an observer, there is no phenomenological sound. In the latter sense of the word sound, it's a similar question to "is your red the same as my red?" in that it speaks of the hearing experience of something, not the physical manifestation that brings about that experience. When we say that something "made a sound" we don't generally mean that sound waves were emitted from it, we mean the actual experience of that sound when we hear it. Sound is not the mechanical oscillation of pressure waves through a medium. Sound is experienced by the mind, because of mechanical oscillations of pressure waves happening to hit our eardrum. As such, those mechanical oscillations would exist irrespective of an observer, but the sound would not. If you wish to have a discussion about phenomenology, however, I think it would be best to take it to PMs, before we're accused of being off topic in the politics thread.

I've already state that I will no longer discuss these topics as we are too far off the rails at this point but it you willing to continue, we can start new threads for each topic.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Can I get a Trump supporter or a right leaning person to explain this level of hypocrisy to me?



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

SpokenTruth said:

Can I get a Trump supporter or a right leaning person to explain this level of hypocrisy to me?

Hi, centrist here.

It's called partisanship. Outside of stirring up unnecessary conflict, I'm not sure what you hope to accomplish by having a partisan source like Now This point out that a partisan source like Fox is, in fact, partisan.



Watch me stream games and hunt trophies on my Twitch channel!

Check out my Twitch Channel!:

www.twitch.tv/AzurenGames

Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:

Can I get a Trump supporter or a right leaning person to explain this level of hypocrisy to me?

I was just about to post that. You beat me to it.

They're very prophetic, no?



Bofferbrauer2 said:
the-pi-guy said:

Trump didn't build the company with his two bare hands.  
His dad started the company.  

Just to add to this point, Donald Trump had an allowance from his dad since he was a baby - a tiny little sum of 200 grand per year. He was already millionaire before he hit puberty due to this. Oh, and his "very small sum" of 1 million loan from his dad (which an everyman like us wouldn't get from any bank under any circumstances even if we could build the Perpetuum Mobile and make billions with it)? Try 413 Millions! Add to this the fact that he inherited the company and heaps of money from his father, and he probably just turned 10 Billions into 10 Billions, not 1 Million into 10 Billions.

So his dad was the multi billionaire back then and Don just inherited it all and has stagnated ever since? How many people win the lottery and piss the majority, if not all of it away in no time? How many turn those millions into billions?

Machiavellian said:
EricHiggin said:

You asked for proof of high standards. I showed not one but two. How many do you specifically require? Will I get a bone if I show more? Why would you assume If he has standards that high when it comes to those types of things, that his standards for the people that work for him would be much lower? How do you think he paid for all that gold and bling, which likely also helped get him that woman? Lazy, useless, good for nothing staff? That's the formula for success alright!

No, I'm saying I'm not a dog and your not the master and we're not playing fetch. You brought up the DK effect, and were quite certain Trump falls under it, and I simply pointed out don't be so sure, since the effect itself points out exactly that. If you're so sure someone else falls into it, then quite possibly, you yourself may very well fall into it as well, if not worse. Maybe, maybe not.

Since I pointed this out already, and instead of proving your words, you simply tried to put the onus on me.... Hmm...

At BOLDED: If you are going to call someone either direct or on the sly ignorant of a subject then yes, the onus is on you to prove your point.  If you cannot then just shut up.  Either you have proof that you understand the topic or you do not.  So far with your answers, the only thing you did was waffle.  So again, if I am ignorant of the DK effect then either prove your words of shut up about it.  

As to the 2 pieces of proof you posted, are you saying a picture of a room is somehow a standard on how Trump hires someone personally for a cabinet position.  That somehow this gaudy room is the standard we should look at for his ability to hire qualified people to important staff position.  I am sorry, I just do not get it.  How does 2 pictures of a room mean anything about Trump ability to hire qualified people to high level staff position.  Should we be asking his personal decorator how they hire people instead of Trump.

You're the one who pointed out that not just Trump had it but it was basically made to define Trump. You never explained that. I also have said we all may be falling under the DK effect to some degree potentially.

Someone who likes a lot of different stuff plated or made of gold, who has had a multi billion dollar business for a long time now, which was doing well for the most part until his political career, is not the type of person who hires people with low standards. That doesn't necessarily mean every single person that get's hired meets his standards, but they are no doubt the best he can get at the time and for the money he's willing to pay.

I was part of a 60 year old multi million dollar company which eventually fell apart, and while there were a few reasons why, one of the main reasons was they slowly kept lowering the employee standards more and more to grow. Along with that, they forced the team leaders to stop being 'mean' and 'pushy' because it led to many of these new hires quitting quickly, which led to the new hires doing less and lower quality work because they could get away with it. It eventually led to the company having little work because the jobs were poorly done and the brand was tarnished. It was soon after on the verge of bankruptcy and was sold off in pieces. While the company would have suffered due to the other issues, it wouldn't have completely fallen apart if the staff was as high quality as it once was.

The type of people you hire, and how you direct them and treat them matters a lot, and that doesn't simply mean treating them like royalty because that can actually be a hindrance. 



The Canadian National Anthem According To Justin Trudeau

 

Oh planet Earth! The home of native lands, 
True social law, in all of us demand.
With cattle farts, we view sea rise,
Our North sinking slowly.
From far and snide, oh planet Earth, 
Our healthcare is yours free!
Science save our land, harnessing the breeze,
Oh planet Earth, smoke weed and ferment yeast.
Oh planet Earth, ell gee bee queue and tee.

SpokenTruth said:

Can I get a Trump supporter or a right leaning person to explain this level of hypocrisy to me?

Wow, that fits Trump so well. Hard to believe they meant Obama with all these back then.



EricHiggin said:

Machiavellian said:

At BOLDED: If you are going to call someone either direct or on the sly ignorant of a subject then yes, the onus is on you to prove your point.  If you cannot then just shut up.  Either you have proof that you understand the topic or you do not.  So far with your answers, the only thing you did was waffle.  So again, if I am ignorant of the DK effect then either prove your words of shut up about it.  

As to the 2 pieces of proof you posted, are you saying a picture of a room is somehow a standard on how Trump hires someone personally for a cabinet position.  That somehow this gaudy room is the standard we should look at for his ability to hire qualified people to important staff position.  I am sorry, I just do not get it.  How does 2 pictures of a room mean anything about Trump ability to hire qualified people to high level staff position.  Should we be asking his personal decorator how they hire people instead of Trump.

You're the one who pointed out that not just Trump had it but it was basically made to define Trump. You never explained that. I also have said we all may be falling under the DK effect to some degree potentially.

Someone who likes a lot of different stuff plated or made of gold, who has had a multi billion dollar business for a long time now, which was doing well for the most part until his political career, is not the type of person who hires people with low standards. That doesn't necessarily mean every single person that get's hired meets his standards, but they are no doubt the best he can get at the time and for the money he's willing to pay.

I was part of a 60 year old multi million dollar company which eventually fell apart, and while there were a few reasons why, one of the main reasons was they slowly kept lowering the employee standards more and more to grow. Along with that, they forced the team leaders to stop being 'mean' and 'pushy' because it led to many of these new hires quitting quickly, which led to the new hires doing less and lower quality work because they could get away with it. It eventually led to the company having little work because the jobs were poorly done and the brand was tarnished. It was soon after on the verge of bankruptcy and was sold off in pieces. While the company would have suffered due to the other issues, it wouldn't have completely fallen apart if the staff was as high quality as it once was.

The type of people you hire, and how you direct them and treat them matters a lot, and that doesn't simply mean treating them like royalty because that can actually be a hindrance. 

Still with the waffling.  You called me out and stated on the sly I was ignorant.  Then when asked to prove your point all you do is make excuses.  We can drop it, as I doubt you any other follow up then the sly dig.

As to Trump having gold plated stuff, why would that have anything to do with his ability to hire good people.  You forget all the failed business, you forget the 6 bankruptcies, you forget that no bank in the US will fund any of his projects and you forget the only bank that has funded him is one already charged with money laundering.  You make it seem like Trump is this great successful man but ignore all the failed businesses under his wing.  You ignore all the lawsuits he has where he doesn't pay for services rendered.  Instead, you focus on the fact that he is a billionaire but forget he inherited his money and with all the failures, bailouts, tax evasions somehow we are to believe he is this great person beyond reproach.  

We have no clue exactly how much a Billionaire Trump is because he will not release his taxes.  We do not know if the fortune left by his father after inflation has dwindled under the administration under Trump.  That question will definitely be answered soon no matter how much has administration tries to stonewall.

So why is it out of all the business Trump tried to do outside of real estate he has come up short.  Could it be that in areas he has absolutely no clue how those business work he is incompetent.  Can we also throw the Presidency there as well.  Another area he has absolutely no experience in and so for looks like he is running it just like all the other failed business.

So No, Trump being a Billionaire who inherited his wealth and has ruined many a businesses, filed Bankruptcy 6 times, Charged with over 5K lawsuits many have to do with not paying his debts is not the model successful business man I would consider going to for advice on anything let alone run the Presidency.



Full Mueller report with redactions is out.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/read-text-full-mueller-report-n994551