By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

Come up with some better quality content instead of parroting others. They weren't assumptions, they were statements.

Create better content? Is this YouTube or a chat forum? I'm not getting paid.

No. And it doesn't need to be. No excuses for mediocrity unless you have no actual desire to engage or an argument.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

That is a false equivalency.

Building foundations for equality and equity in every facet of society does not mean that highly intelligent, high achieving individuals are at a disadvantage.

The issue that you don't seem to grasp is that, when someone is LGBTQI or have a different cultural/ethnic background, can be denied equivalent roles or opportunities, even when they have the same level of intellectual fortitude and would hypothetical be capable of the same achievements.

You likely have never been on the receiving end of this, but it actually does happen and still does happen.

Hating white people and being racist towards them because you say they have an advantage is acceptable, but hating higher IQ people and also trying to tear them down due to that advantage isn't acceptable? Should hate towards rich smart people be stopped at all costs?

You mean like the time I didn't get the job because they chose the bosses sons idiot white friend instead? So we should put a stop to some racism but not favoritism? No big deal though right? I'm sure you'll assume I just went back home to my castle and lounged in the Olympic sized pool all day.

That isn't what I have said at all, do not put words in my mouth or re-read my statement and try to comprehend it in it's appropriate context.
But I'll try and dumb it down some more and reword it to try and make it a little more palatable.

My issue is that race should not come into it, but it does... And those of different ethnic/cultural backgrounds or sexuality/gender are disadvantaged.. Even when they have the same or better I.Q. than the comparative white, straight, male and are capable of the same potential achievements.
Thus the need for building the foundations of equality and equity so that they have the same opportunities to succeed.

It's not about hate, it's not about jealousy, it is about enabling people with similar potential to succeed in life, rather than holding someone back simply because they are born gay.

The fact you got passed over may have been for another reason, perhaps you didn't have the right attitude? I have been passed over on job roles before simply because I was over-qualified.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

Stop trolling.

I wasn't. I made a good joke, and I used another point you made earlier about aspects to strengthen my point. You didn't say anything about lacking content this time though which makes me wonder if you even got the point.

A joke is actually funny.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

Are you really trying to justify people working and not being paid for it? I think you aren't grasping something here.

I am managing a company, I know how these things actually work... You have what is called a "Probation Period". - Usually a company will hire you as a casual or permanent employee, but for the Probation Period (Usually 3-6 months) you can be fired at the drop of the hat for any number of reasons.

Casual employees can just have their hours cut down to 0 even 12 months down the line, they are casual and don't have guaranteed hours.

If you walk into a company and are employed by the company, even if you are just doing training or a few trial shifts, you are taking someones time... And they need to be paid for it.

Apprenticeships and Internships are also paid here, because it's the right thing to do. - They start off at a lower wage, but as they invest more of their time and their skills improve, their rate of pay increases rather substantially. As it should.

End of the day people need to eat and pay bills, the only way that happens is if you actually pay them for it. Clearly the American way is inferior to the working class.

Some people think the minimum wage isn't enough. Is the minimum wage acceptable? Was it before it was raised? Will it be after it's raised again? What if people are willing to work for that now, knowing they'll be better off later because of it? That's the same concept with unpaid positions, simply with a greater degree of delayed gratification.

If that person happens to be white, they live like a king or queen anyway so what would the oppressive wait for pay even matter?

If you work, you need to get paid for it, otherwise you are being taken advantage of.

And as a white male, I can assure you... I live like a king. But I worked hard to get where I am to earn this income, but I also got paid for it the entire time, even while I was working whilst at school.

The fact you are even arguing for people to bend-the-knee to unpaid work is just baffling, you do know companies can afford to hire people, right? We have a payroll.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

I doubt Trump was ever actually poor.
I.E. Living on the streets with just the clothes on his back.

Do I dare assume you've never had to deal with that either? Does that put you and Trump in the same camp? 

You shouldn't make any assumptions without evidence.

You do realise I was homeless as a child? Also a high-school drop out. - My parents were extremely abusive.

Now 24~ years later, I own houses, managing a company, save lives, earn more than they do collectively and have succeeded in life... And still haven't talked to them since I was a kid. Who needs parents?

So if you assume I was given every opportunity under the sun, you would be highly mistaken.
Unfortunately the same avenues I was presented in life to succeed is not always available to those of different genders and ethnic backgrounds, certainly not in the 90's, it's far better today, but still not perfect.

And unlike Trump, I actually value life and the environment.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

You are right, Twitter didn't sit down and give those individuals that opportunity and that was clearly a fault of Twitter.

Still, being a hypocrite is not a good thing. - Clearly even yourself can recognize that?

You're right, being hypocritical isn't a good thing, but when powerful people and businesses are doing that to great success and getting away with it while hurting others, then it's fair game for everyone to play that game if they choose to.

It's not like people haven't been trying to do the right thing for a while now. Even Elon tried and was getting nowhere. So he decided to take a leap for mankind by purchasing Twitter and now throwing it back in their faces.

Not everyone learns the easy way. You no doubt must understand that doing what you do.

It is only fair game because the people allow it.

Twitter is faltering currently, it will be interesting to see how it goes long term, may just become the next myspace.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

So basically you only believe polls you agree with?

Conservatives in general agree with polls that look to make sense based on how they were conducted and how the data is presented.

Some did buy into the red wave cool aid which was relatively obvious wasn't going to happen long before the election. When the media who's always against you is agreeing they're about to get crushed by you, it should set off alarms that something ain't right.

Well, that is a good way to reinforce a confirmation bias.

The media issue is an entirely different kettle of fish, it's very black and white in the USA with nothing in between.

Over here it's all right-wing conservative rubbish that plays on the politics of fear to garner clicks and revenue.

ConservagameR said:
Pemalite said:

You seem to be confused, so I will dumb it down further. What people do, doesn't concern me.

What does concern me is people being marginalized or mistreated, remember I am a first responder, life comes first, I have morals.

What those people do, who you're responding to, certainly does.

Lots of people have morals. Your morals don't outweigh someone else's ability to offer or choose.

If someone chooses to drive irresponsibly and goes off a cliff, were they wrong to do so? Are they immoral? Are you going to save them anyway, knowing full well they vary well may do it or something else irresponsible again later?

If someone wants to offer an unpaid position and someone else willingly chooses to accept it, knowing it'll likely lead to a stable paid position or even just the knowledge and skills that will get them where they want to go eventually, that's unacceptable?

I will try and frame it a different way... Because it seems it went over your head again.

How someone got into a predicament is irrellevent, it's how that person is coping, how that person is feeling that matters.

I.E. I don't care if someone was speeding and wrapped themselves around a telephone pole, I do care about getting that person out and into the ambulance by using the jaws of life.

In short, what they did to get there is irrelevant. But what happens after while they suffer is definitely drawing on my empathy.

Yes if someone takes an unpaid position in hopes it might result in something down the line is just false hope.
That just opens up the potential for businesses to abuse the ability to use free labor for menial tasks.

--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--