No. And it doesn't need to be. No excuses for mediocrity unless you have no actual desire to engage or an argument.
Last time you thought I was arguing I had only made a statement. The only argument would've been on your part, not mine.
Now is that mediocracy on your part or just a simple mistake?
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.
The fact you went right to assuming it must be for another reason about me personally, and not due to me being oppressed or a victim to an unfair system, tells me you're not really after what's best as you say, just what's best for you.
The fact that I figured you'd assume the worst against me, as I said prior, which you did, makes me question your genuine desire in this engagement.
A joke is actually funny.
Well if you didn't get it, which you certainly didn't seem to as I questioned prior, you wouldn't think its funny.
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.
So as a rich white male, who realizes they are where they are due to natural advantages, why haven't you given up enough wealth to the needy so you live like an average individual instead of a king?
How little can someone be paid before it's unacceptable? How long before anyone needs a raise?
The fact that you don't seem to want variety or the ability to choose to be an option is quite concerning. Not everyone is the same.
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.
You made assumptions about me earlier so I figured that meant it might be acceptable. Did something change?
Then we share one of those in common. I never dropped out of high school though. I couldn't and wouldn't have anyway because failure wasn't seen as an option, so I could get out on my own asap without ending up flipping burgers or ending up on the street.
What about those still worthy who are passed on because someone of a less fortunate past are given the opportunity? What if it leads to them ending up on the street? Isn't that just restarting the cycle? What if a higher IQ person gets passed up in the same fashion who's a late bloomer intellectually, who truly could change the world on a grand scale for the better, but doesn't get the chance because someone less fortunate was given the opportunity?
We were constantly told it would take 2 to 4 years for a vaccine to be ready, even by those at the top, yet Trumps warp speed got it done in less than a year. He also allowed for the many shutdown's which we were all told, even by those at the top, did wonders for the environment. I'd hardly say he doesn't care about life or the environment.
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.
Rule's for thee but not for me isn't something people will accept. Those who wish to play that game will have many others join eventually, even if they're not invited to.
Twitter users are way up. Advertisers are being flaky but what's new? Apple is pushing Elon's buttons and he's been talking about making a smartphone for years now, and it's looking like the perfect opportunity for that to occur just may come to pass. Which also means Google will quite likely follow suit, so even more reason for Elon to get into the smartphone industry. He didn't spend $50 billion to watch it fly away.
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.
What about poorly done science? Also confirmation bias?
Sky News is Aussie go to media?
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.
So someone needs help, and you help them regardless. Even if they refuse help I believe, correct? You still help anyway?
If someone needs help, like a job position and skills, but you can't pay now but could potentially later, what's wrong with offering what help you can?
Does everyone you save end up as well off, if not better than before their incident? The point is you did what you could and that's what matters. Similar with offering someone a job position. Some will end up better off, some may not. It's not up to us to decide, it's up to us to help where and how we can.
It's the ability to choose and that potential, that gets people in the situations where you have to save them. Should we put a stop to all those potentials?