It's kind of pathetic of me, but coming to lemmy I had this idea that maybe it would be like reddit of old, before it went to shit. It was foolish of me to think I could still find quality human beings on the Internet.
Tinidril
joined 2 years ago
How do you think someone gets to be the CEO of a decently sized corporation? Hard work? Lots of people work hard, many a lot harder than CEOs. Supernormal Intelligence? CEOs are certainly more intelligent than everage, but they aren't rocket scientists, no matter what Elon wants us to think.
What makes them CEO material is a laser focus on the bottom line, and the willingness to absolutely anything to make that line go up faster. Being ethically compromised as human beings is part of the job description. Mentally healthy people are not qualified to be CEOs. That's the way our system is designed to function.
Did I really need to specify "not all CEOs"? It's entirely possible that there are some CEOs that don't suck. There are probably CEOs that do suck, but for an entirely different reason. However, I think the vast majority of CEOs do fall under this umbrella, which is the best you are going to get with broad generalizations. I do have some experience with small business CEOs, and they certainly fit this pattern, but that's just my personal experience.
Yeah, you’re still misunderstanding everything and arguing semantics.
You claimed that people on "the left" didn't vote for Harris. There is no possible interpretation of that assertion without determining who "the left" is. The is a semantic argument at it's core. I too hate arguing semantics, but they are important. I will again point out that you just straw-manned me as choosing to ignore the consequences of not voting. My entire point was to defend the left against your charge. Why would I care to do that if I didn't agree it was a bad thing to do? You accusing me of (I assume intentionally) misunderstanding you really looks projection.
Sure US democrats are right of center relative to EU politics
That is not what I said. I did not reference the EU at all. You seem to think that left to right being a spectrum means that it's an entirely relative distinction. It isn't. Anyways, in the common rhetoric, when Democrats accuse the left of being disloyal to the party, they are not talking about the ideological breadth of the Democratic party, they mean the part of the party that's further left than the rest of the party. I believe you when you say that you did not intend to say the same, but you have to realize that you can't just ignore the political context in which you use words like that. Intentional or not, you joined the chorus of establishment Democratic voices using those same words.
one would assume we would operate off of the Overton window in US politics as our frame of reference
It's not really a matter of the overton window, though I can see why I could have made that more clear. I think I just cleared that up above. To state it again simply, the words you used are being used by the Democratic establishment, and they are not talking about anyone left of the fascists. They are talking about the "Bernie wing", and they make that clear.
But nah, whatever “wins” the argument I guess. I’m done talking to you. Bye bye.
How unsurprising.
"piece of shit" is your term, not mine or the study's. If you want to know more, it's on the Interwebs. What I will say is that feeling like they have earned what they have because they are inherently better than others is pretty core to the CEO pathology.
I guess that depends on how permanent the effect is. It certainly makes them shittier for a time.
That's not what this is about. Elected representatives met with Uber and negotiated a deal. With a referendum, I can choose where my vote goes, but my influence on the outcome is minuscule. (As it should be as one of many members of society).
The Monopoly test seems to cover the causation question pretty well. Select one player at random and give them extra money or property at the start of the game, with all players being aware. The advantaged players become more anti-social in their play, and after the game will self-rate their "skill" level much higher than the disadvantaged players, downplaying the impact of their advantage.
I made no such refusal. I just called out your whataboutism. Whether Trump will be functionally worse than Biden for Palestinians is a pretty academic exercise though. Dead is dead, and both Trump and Biden have blood on their hands. I'm not as impressed as you are that Biden extended their lifespans by 4 days, in-between weapons shipments.
I never said that everything Trump said is an exact opposite of the truth. He just speaks with no concern whatsoever for what's true. It's all lies, true or not. Your goofy interpretation of that is so dumb that it can only be disingenuous.
Anyways, this conversation came from your statement about Democrats only doing good things or something to that effect. Democrats being better than Republicans, or Biden being better than Trump, is not the bar you set, you disingenuous little shit.
What willful ignorance? I've said nothing to exonerate Trump for the harm he is responsible for. He has simply not been the subject of this conversation at all. You can't defend Biden, so you're shifting to whataboutism. It's a pretty obvious dodge, but I guess it's all you've got.
I don't believe Trump ever told the truth in his entire life, and I'm pretty sure he doesn't understand truth as a concept. I never said anything to indicate otherwise. This discussion was about Biden who has a completely different set of psychological pathologies.
I couldn't care less what Biden has to gain. He is full-on an ideological Zionist from what I can tell, and he also has an interest in keeping friendly with AIPAC, but I won't claim his motivations are as clear or transactional as Trump's.
The weapons he withheld were a bare minimum and did supply him with the only modicum of political cover he had. It was also a way to try and keep America's hands looking clean without actually applying pressure on Netanyahu to stop the genocide. It's the same gambit a lot of Democrats still play when they talk about "defensive weapons" as if those weapons don't enable aggression by shielding Israel from the consequences of their actions.
I guess I did have to specify "not all CEOs". Yes, from time to time there are going to be exceptions. I don't accept your assertion that it's common, but I'm sure that, on average, the US is worse than most other countries in this regard.
Nobody gets hired as CEO for "leadership capacity" alone. They also have to demonstrate what they will lead the people to do, and that better be something that will make the shareholders money. Bernie Sanders has generational leadership skills, and no board of directors would ever hire him as a CEO, not unless they want the employees walking off with the company.
Another thing I will concede is that I'm talking about public corporations, the kind that are listed on the stock market. Those dynamics don't change much when you leave the US, unless it's a country where the government forces it.