100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: "just what is the l'azy left' anyways? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Ive used the term lazy in reference to more than I can remember. Lazy perceived. A person who works hard guages laziness by the length of time it takes one to learn something, repeat a task the same way each time, the length of time to complete tasks. Many articles in recent months on how Amazon perceives laziness. And w strikes your out. Auotas are used to help profits. I fire lazy people always. Be gone. I cant afford lazy people. Bigger companies use HR to weed them out. There are some incredible tests companies put prospective employees through screening and call backs on references are usually worded to find every weakness the individual may have. The bottom line points to waste and employees who dont work to the companies expectations. Then theres those who are too damn lazy to even work or put trash in a trash can. Lazy people stand out. They are usually sitting...always. be careful who you identify as lazy by their habits. others may simply refer to them as sick, disabled, or simply... old. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT???  of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet!  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Did something right? That's like asking if running out of a burning building is the right thing to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
chillax. it's just a sign of growing up.
don't run back into the building. that's just cray cray. and, mentally lazy. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT??? of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT??? of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet! same thing some feel about all the unemployment Trump is taking credit for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited of personal attacks on others.
Kindly address the topic only. soufie Site Admin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
article on LAZY thinking:
Usually, when humans first encounter something new (the example given in the video is learning to tie shoelaces), we need to concentrate in order to learn what needs to be done, execute it and succeed at it. This is very much System 2. However, through repetition and practice, the brain begins to reinforce the patterns of how it worked before, until it is stored in memory and can be done without concentration, almost on auto-pilot (System 1). The problems arise when the brain tries to solve problems which it hasn’t encountered before using System 1, because they appear similar to something it knows or seems obvious (a gut reaction). In these situations, like the example of the cost of a bat and ball for $1.10 in the video, the brain is tricked into using a shortcut and just feeling like the answer should be correct. This is also why people can resist new ideas and innovations when they first hear about them. It is uncomfortable to have to use energy to think through something new and different. It It requires concentration and resources which the brain would rather not use up. For another example, see this illusion which shows that the brain would rather ignore new information. And so the easiest thing to do when faced with these new ideas is for the brain to become defensive and say “I’d rather not bother processing those”. https://www.ideatovalue.com/curi/nickskillicorn/2017/03/lazy-brain-thinking-actually-uncomfortable/ I wonder what 'side' that sounds like? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the right has more problem solving skills. People act like self sufficient means they've never struggled or had tragedy. The left wants to take responsibility out of the hands of the people to be controlled by the govt. That's not the principle this country was founded on.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think the right has more problem solving skills. People act like self sufficient means they've never struggled or had tragedy. The left wants to take responsibility out of the hands of the people to be controlled by the govt. That's not the principle this country was founded on. its not evident in these threads ... problem solving. Most people tend to only believe what their limited experience has been and totally refuse to accept data and facts about much broader and far reaching experience, which is what the article on lazy thinking was about. As far as the country being founded on something, it seems alot of it was made and created off HARD work of people tauted as lazy or inhuman or invaluable. while 'the people' set back allowing them to work hard so they could be lazier and more prosperous themselves. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We aren't gullible enough to believe the data is correct. For instance, do you think the 1st time a shop lifter is caught, it's the 1st time they stole? Of course not. Data can't give the numbers of merchandise stolen. Think....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"just what is the l'azy left' anyways? I think it's those that seem to always say "the government should...," or, "they should do...," or, "what we should do..." It's never "this is what I'm doing," or, "this is what I'm going to do..." and, just who decided what is lazy, and what isn't? I did. That's why I put in the preceding "I think." isn't this america...life, liberty, pursuit of happiness? Yes. But that's kind of important; "pursuit." That means personally doing something. This isn't "America...life, liberty only for those that who want to convince others to change or sacrifice to subsidize or guarantee their happiness without any real or meaningful personal cost or effort." is happiness working nonstop to buy kitschy plastic crap we don't need and didn't know we wanted? For some it is. is the desire for a more relaxed life in a paradise unsullied by the ravages of the 'non lazies' not a fair pursuit of life, liberty, pursuit of happiness? Sure. You just have to create your own unsullied paradise. is happiness slaving away to make others richer and more powerful so they can have more control over you and your paradise or someone else and their paradise??? To some it might be. Other than that, everything you describe here has been particularly facilitated by government intervention. are one's pursuits any more or less valuable than another's? Inherently, no. The individual subjectively defines the value of their pursuits, and through voluntary (or involuntary) group effort subjective pursuits can be achieved. if your pursuits get in the way of others' should you be allowed to continue with them? That's what guns and the ability to pay them off or convince them to pursue other interests are for. does circumstance change opinions? Of course. Anything and everything can change an opinion. should it? Good luck with that: getting people to never change their opinion, or forcing/convincing everyone to share the same opinion. how are these parameters set? Poorly, usually with whatever works at the time that leads to the least amount of bloodshed. how should the be set? Ideally by an omnipotent, omniscient, immortal, beneficial, merciful, loving, altruistic, benevolent tyrant with nothing better to do but above mortal concerns. who gets to decide? Each individual, and/or group the individual cedes power and freedom to. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT??? of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet! same thing some feel about all the unemployment Trump is taking credit for. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT??? of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet! same thing some feel about all the unemployment Trump is taking credit for. you can thank president obama for that. the republicans were lazy and chose not to help the american people. they said no. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"just what is the l'azy left' anyways? I think it's those that seem to always say "the government should...," or, "they should do...," or, "what we should do..." It's never "this is what I'm doing," or, "this is what I'm going to do..." and, just who decided what is lazy, and what isn't? I did. That's why I put in the preceding "I think." isn't this america...life, liberty, pursuit of happiness? Yes. But that's kind of important; "pursuit." That means personally doing something. This isn't "America...life, liberty only for those that who want to convince others to change or sacrifice to subsidize or guarantee their happiness without any real or meaningful personal cost or effort." is happiness working nonstop to buy kitschy plastic crap we don't need and didn't know we wanted? For some it is. is the desire for a more relaxed life in a paradise unsullied by the ravages of the 'non lazies' not a fair pursuit of life, liberty, pursuit of happiness? Sure. You just have to create your own unsullied paradise. is happiness slaving away to make others richer and more powerful so they can have more control over you and your paradise or someone else and their paradise??? To some it might be. Other than that, everything you describe here has been particularly facilitated by government intervention. are one's pursuits any more or less valuable than another's? Inherently, no. The individual subjectively defines the value of their pursuits, and through voluntary (or involuntary) group effort subjective pursuits can be achieved. if your pursuits get in the way of others' should you be allowed to continue with them? That's what guns and the ability to pay them off or convince them to pursue other interests are for. does circumstance change opinions? Of course. Anything and everything can change an opinion. should it? Good luck with that: getting people to never change their opinion, or forcing/convincing everyone to share the same opinion. how are these parameters set? Poorly, usually with whatever works at the time that leads to the least amount of bloodshed. how should the be set? Ideally by an omnipotent, omniscient, immortal, beneficial, merciful, loving, altruistic, benevolent tyrant with nothing better to do but above mortal concerns. who gets to decide? Each individual, and/or group the individual cedes power and freedom to. soooo many problems with this post. don't be lazy. figure out what you did wrong, then get back to me. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We aren't gullible enough to believe the data is correct. For instance, do you think the 1st time a shop lifter is caught, it's the 1st time they stole? Of course not. Data can't give the numbers of merchandise stolen. Think.... is there data that says the first time they are caught is the first time they stole? of course not. just like there is no data suggesting certain people are more violent just because they are more often arrested for violence. IT is also important to understand what data proves or does not prove. data cant give numbers of who is victimized, or who is victimizer, only who the system prosecutes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's funny watching liberals ***** about the stock market losing money when they didn't have anything invested. The recession was about more than the stock market. People lost jobs and homes but liberals were told to blame it on mortgage backed securities. People were refinancing to go on vacations, pay off credit card debit, a new bass boat, etc. They borrowed as much money as banks would lend. They saved absolutely nothing for a rainy day. The first little hick-up and they were screwed. But taking the blame for their mistakes would be crazy. Again, I am puzzled by your logic. I believe you are against welfare, but when these corporations (Citibank, GM...) acted without fiduciary responsibility, corporate welfare was OK for them? Why didn't Citibank use the money THEY saved for a rainy day? (The answer is that the money went to salaries and bonuses to the people on the top of the company instead, they did not lose THEIR jobs) The funny thing about a recession, it hits EVERYone, not just the people who caused it, or who owned the effected stocks. But yet, the people who caused it didn't lose THEIR jobs, when their actions and decisions certainly had a waterfall effect that caused others (in differing business sectors even) to lose their jobs. The bailouts were to keep the value of the dollar from going to **** but you know that already. They were stabilizing our country. So stop pretending it was our govt focused on making a corporation some money. You can't blame one group of people for the recession. Investors losing money when mortgages began to default, had nothing to do with the loss of jobs that caused the foreclosures. There will always be downturns in the economy. You can't protect people from themselves. Consumer debt is just as high now. Which means people haven't learned from their mistakes. The only difference is there is a shortage of new homes being built. We are already in another housing bubble because home prices are out pacing wages. The bubble can't burst because of the shortage of homes. OMG!!! did you just acknowledge the obama administration (who did pretty much everything not only without the support of the republicans but against their opposition for the entire term) of doing something RIGHT??? of helping your wallet??? of saving your finances??? of actually helping the country??? of fixing the biggest worldwide disaster caused by the previous administration??? there may be hope for you yet! same thing some feel about all the unemployment Trump is taking credit for. ah yes, those are the facts now, as they were the facts before this admin came in..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data about welfare fraud is bs. Most case workers deal with the same people year after year. Selling foodstamps is just one form of fraud. Being too lazy to work is the major one. That's not even illegal. Welfare needs reform. Seems Trump is doing that. I'm not sure of the details but I think the reduction starts next year...staggering.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data about welfare fraud is bs. Most case workers deal with the same people year after year. Selling foodstamps is just one form of fraud. Being too lazy to work is the major one. That's not even illegal. Welfare needs reform. Seems Trump is doing that. I'm not sure of the details but I think the reduction starts next year...staggering. no more than data about crime. Either the numbers tell the whole story or they dont, cant pick and choose. I say they dont tell the whole story. We know the welfare fraud (that is caught) just like we know the crime (that is caught) and people have no problem assuming the latter is valid even though they dont assume the former is. Truth is all we have is data to come closest to the truth based on what IS actually known and recorded. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Data about welfare fraud is bs. Most case workers deal with the same people year after year. Selling foodstamps is just one form of fraud. Being too lazy to work is the major one. That's not even illegal. Welfare needs reform. Seems Trump is doing that. I'm not sure of the details but I think the reduction starts next year...staggering. stamps aren't used any more. don't be lazy. if you're gonna spout off about it, get the latest data. 
|
|
|
|
|
