• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Kapaernick

Jimmy Higgins said:
Man, your income is a clear indication of whatever judgement I feel like making.
Click to expand...
In a corrupt society, income is not a clear indication of intelligence, rather it's an indication of threat/benefit to the corrupt. If you are intelligent and not full of hatred at corruption, you end up high income. If you are intelligent, but hate corruption in the USA, you're going to be lower income. If you're not intelligent, and support corruption, you're going to be high middle income, maybe even become a congressman. If you're not intelligent, and hate corruption, you're going to be low income.

Unless you support the corrupt, you're going to be lower income. Some intelligent people can't, because they unfortunately aren't able to get over being a piece of shit to other humans.

Excessively intelligent people who hate corruption are ALWAYS forced into low socioeconomic positions by the corrupt- they are direct threats to the easy life of the corrupt if they make any gains which allow them to band together and take down the corrupt.


/end tangent
 
Kharakov said:
Unless you support the corrupt, you're going to be lower income.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is largely true, and related to what I was saying a lot earlier about Kapaernick being a hypocrite, because he was already heavily benefiting from a corrupt system while supposedly protesting another corrupt system.
 
Kharakov said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Man, your income is a clear indication of whatever judgement I feel like making.
Click to expand...
In a corrupt society, income is not a clear indication of intelligence, rather it's an indication of threat/benefit to the corrupt. If you are intelligent and not full of hatred at corruption, you end up high income. If you are intelligent, but hate corruption in the USA, you're going to be lower income. If you're not intelligent, and support corruption, you're going to be high middle income, maybe even become a congressman. If you're not intelligent, and hate corruption, you're going to be low income.

Unless you support the corrupt, you're going to be lower income. Some intelligent people can't, because they unfortunately aren't able to get over being a piece of shit to other humans.

Excessively intelligent people who hate corruption are ALWAYS forced into low socioeconomic positions by the corrupt- they are direct threats to the easy life of the corrupt if they make any gains which allow them to band together and take down the corrupt.


/end tangent
Click to expand...

Oh brother.... Sorry for derail, but your income is based on demand. The more your work, the higher your work is in demand. If you want more income, educate yourself into a profession that is in high demand. Not complicated.
 
Jimmy, I disagree, but discussing it further would derail things.
I was just giving anothet example where German media tend to be uncritical. Reading about #BLM in German media, they never mention that most shootings they protest are justified, nor their links with black supremacism and terrorism (they lionize do-called Black Liberation Army). No wonder than that German players are falling for Kaep's nonsense.
 
Kharakov said:
Jimmy Higgins said:
Man, your income is a clear indication of whatever judgement I feel like making.
Click to expand...
In a corrupt society, income is not a clear indication of intelligence, rather it's an indication of threat/benefit to the corrupt. If you are intelligent and not full of hatred at corruption, you end up high income. If you are intelligent, but hate corruption in the USA, you're going to be lower income. If you're not intelligent, and support corruption, you're going to be high middle income, maybe even become a congressman. If you're not intelligent, and hate corruption, you're going to be low income.

Unless you support the corrupt, you're going to be lower income. Some intelligent people can't, because they unfortunately aren't able to get over being a piece of shit to other humans.

Excessively intelligent people who hate corruption are ALWAYS forced into low socioeconomic positions by the corrupt- they are direct threats to the easy life of the corrupt if they make any gains which allow them to band together and take down the corrupt.


/end tangent
Click to expand...
Never has such an obviously sarcastic statement been taken so seriously.
 
Harry_Bosch said:
Oh brother.... Sorry for derail, but your income is based on demand. The more your work, the higher your work is in demand. If you want more income, educate yourself into a profession that is in high demand. Not complicated.
Click to expand...

That is not always the case. Specifically NFL. There is a demand for maybe 100 prolate spheroid tossers, backups included. Yet there must be thousands of people who are very proficient at throwing it. Spiral and all. There is no rational reason why Kaep, Mannings et al should be paid millions.
I.e. NFL is a textbook example of a failed market. If it was a functioning market, these players would not be making more than $80k or so.
 
Derec said:
I.e. NFL is a textbook example of a failed market. If it was a functioning market, these players would not be making more than $80k or so.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They are grossly, hugely overpaid.
 
William A. Baurle said:
Derec said:
I.e. NFL is a textbook example of a failed market. If it was a functioning market, these players would not be making more than $80k or so.
Click to expand...

Agreed. They are grossly, hugely overpaid.
Click to expand...

They are making less than they deserve but they are making closer to what they deserve because of their union.

If the money does not go to the players it goes to the owner.

The least deserving and least needed person involved.

No owner ever won a football game. They don't even serve the sodas. They do nothing except meddle where they don't belong.

All teams should be community owned and democratically run.

The age of the stupid lazy ignorant masters taking from all the real workers must end.
 
Derec said:
Harry_Bosch said:
Oh brother.... Sorry for derail, but your income is based on demand. The more your work, the higher your work is in demand. If you want more income, educate yourself into a profession that is in high demand. Not complicated.
Click to expand...

That is not always the case. Specifically NFL. There is a demand for maybe 100 prolate spheroid tossers, backups included. Yet there must be thousands of people who are very proficient at throwing it. Spiral and all. There is no rational reason why Kaep, Mannings et al should be paid millions.
I.e. NFL is a textbook example of a failed market. If it was a functioning market, these players would not be making more than $80k or so.
Click to expand...

Thousands of people?? Do you watch football? There are probably about 6 total A+ QBs in the NFL, and they can command just about any salary that they want.
 
untermensche said:
William A. Baurle said:
Agreed. They are grossly, hugely overpaid.
Click to expand...

They are making less than they deserve but they are making closer to what they deserve because of their union.

If the money does not go to the players it goes to the owner.

The least deserving and least needed person involved.

No owner ever won a football game. They don't even serve the sodas. They do nothing except meddle where they don't belong.

All teams should be community owned and democratically run.

The age of the stupid lazy ignorant masters taking from all the real workers must end.
Click to expand...

Football is my favorite sport. I was a D1 bench warmer in the 80s. There is no sport that requires great ownership and management. The best managed teams are always the most successful teams. Cleveland has far more talent than New England. And yet Cleveland is routinely the worst team in the NFL, where NE is legendary. Why? Because of management. Cleveland has the worse ownership/management team in the NFL, NE probably the best.

Much like an army unit, a football team identifies the strengths and weaknesses of its opponent as well as its own, creates a strategy, prepares for its encounter with the opposition, and executes that strategy. Every player and coach has goals and objectives, and meanwhile they’re trying to improve individually and as a team every day. Each position has unique responsibilities that they must perform, whether it’s blocking, tackling, catching, running, throwing, kicking, or defending. A coaching staff must coordinate its full roster in both training and its team’s games.

Management has to continually draft the right player, create the right atmosphere, motive the team, be flexible, and etc.
 
Harry_Bosch said:
untermensche said:
They are making less than they deserve but they are making closer to what they deserve because of their union.

If the money does not go to the players it goes to the owner.

The least deserving and least needed person involved.

No owner ever won a football game. They don't even serve the sodas. They do nothing except meddle where they don't belong.

All teams should be community owned and democratically run.

The age of the stupid lazy ignorant masters taking from all the real workers must end.
Click to expand...

Football is my favorite sport. I was a D1 bench warmer in the 80s. There is no sport that requires great ownership and management. The best managed teams are always the most successful teams. Cleveland has far more talent than New England. And yet Cleveland is routinely the worst team in the NFL, where NE is legendary. Why? Because of management. Cleveland has the worse ownership/management team in the NFL, NE probably the best.

Much like an army unit, a football team identifies the strengths and weaknesses of its opponent as well as its own, creates a strategy, prepares for its encounter with the opposition, and executes that strategy. Every player and coach has goals and objectives, and meanwhile they’re trying to improve individually and as a team every day. Each position has unique responsibilities that they must perform, whether it’s blocking, tackling, catching, running, throwing, kicking, or defending. A coaching staff must coordinate its full roster in both training and its team’s games.

Management has to continually draft the right player, create the right atmosphere, motive the team, be flexible, and etc.
Click to expand...

A team needs a head coach and a GM and many assistant coaches and a lot of supporting personel.

It doesn't need some asshole dictator taking credit for doing nothing.
 
untermensche said:
Harry_Bosch said:
Football is my favorite sport. I was a D1 bench warmer in the 80s. There is no sport that requires great ownership and management. The best managed teams are always the most successful teams. Cleveland has far more talent than New England. And yet Cleveland is routinely the worst team in the NFL, where NE is legendary. Why? Because of management. Cleveland has the worse ownership/management team in the NFL, NE probably the best.

Much like an army unit, a football team identifies the strengths and weaknesses of its opponent as well as its own, creates a strategy, prepares for its encounter with the opposition, and executes that strategy. Every player and coach has goals and objectives, and meanwhile they’re trying to improve individually and as a team every day. Each position has unique responsibilities that they must perform, whether it’s blocking, tackling, catching, running, throwing, kicking, or defending. A coaching staff must coordinate its full roster in both training and its team’s games.

Management has to continually draft the right player, create the right atmosphere, motive the team, be flexible, and etc.
Click to expand...

A team needs a head coach and a GM and many assistant coaches and a lot of supporting personel.

It doesn't need some asshole dictator taking credit for doing nothing.
Click to expand...

There are a lot of factors that go into a successful operation. Bill Belichick had mixed results at two previous coaching jobs. His teams were pretty average for the Jets and Browns. New England had better talent and lost prior to the current regime. Tom Brady was a 6th round pick in 2000, bypassed by every team in the NFL 6 times. NE owner Robert Taft and his management team had mixed results in the 90s. But together: the team, coach, management team, ownership team, came together to be probably the greatest team in history over the past 8 years. Take away one of the components, and you have the Cleveland Browns.
 
Last edited:
Yes without Tom Brady Belichick is not as good a coach.

Brady deserves every penny he makes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom