The Jordan Peterson Thread - V2 -

[Hog-train]

Trickle down economics does absolutely work.

Now the term gets wrongly mixed in with crony capitalism and that does not work. But remove the gov't aspect and trickle down economics works just fine. Like in most things it is the introduction of gov't that creates the problems and protections and imbalance.

Yea well that's just your opinion isn't it? It's my opinion that it doesn't and haven't seen evidence that it ever worked.

 

[MikeMcMann]

Yea well that's just your opinion isn't it? It's my opinion that it doesn't and haven't seen evidence that it ever worked.

WRONG. Its not an opinion. Its fact.

This is just a percentage of the trickle down that has come from Microsoft alone.

. The company's 1986 initial public offering (IPO), and subsequent rise in its share price, created three billionaires and an estimated 12,000 millionaires among Microsoft employees.

If you follow all those Billionaires and Millionaires and all the spin off businesses they have created and all the jobs and millionaires those have created... and so on and so you would run out of capacity to calculate the continued trickle down benefits that STILL follow.


Try and follow all the companies started or invested in by the Pay Pal mafia and the and all the wealth that has trickled down to their shareholders, employees and various stakeholders.

Individuals whom the media refers to as members of the PayPal Mafia include:

• Peter Thiel, PayPal founder and former chief executive officer who is sometimes referred to as the "don" of the PayPal Mafia[5]
• Max Levchin, Founder and chief technology officer at PayPal sometimes called the "consigliere" of the PayPal Mafia[4][12]
• Elon Musk, is founder of X.com which acquired the company Confinity. Musk later co-founded Tesla Motors and SpaceX, and is the Chairman of SolarCity[3][8][13]
• David O. Sacks, former PayPal COO who later founded Geni.com and Yammer[3]
• Scott Banister, former Ironport CTO and PayPal board member[14]
• Roelof Botha, former PayPal CFO who later became a partner of venture capital firm Sequoia Capital[15]
• Steve Chen, former PayPal engineer who co-founded YouTube.[16]
• David Gausebeck, former PayPal Technical Architect, co-creator of the Gausebeck-Levchin test, co-founder of Matterport Inc., a digital 3-D modeling company. [17]
• Reid Hoffman, former executive vice president who later founded LinkedIn and was an early investor in Facebook, Aviary,[18] Friendster, Six Apart, Zynga, IronPort, Flickr, Digg, Grockit, Ping.fm, Nanosolar, Care.com, Knewton, Kongregate, Last.fm, Ning, and Technorati[3][19][20]
• Ken Howery, former PayPal CFO who became a partner at Founders Fund[21]
• Chad Hurley, former PayPal web designer who co-founded YouTube[8]
• Eric M. Jackson, who wrote the book The PayPal Wars and became chief executive officer of WND Books and co-founded CapLinked.[22]
• Jawed Karim, former PayPal engineer who co-founded YouTube.[15]
• Rod D. Martin, former special counsel to CEO Peter Thiel whose 10X Capital took over Galectin Therapeutics in 2009 and who founded Advanced Search Laboratories in 2012.[23]
• Dave McClure, a former PayPal marketing director, a super angel investor for start up companies[24] and founder of 500 Startups which has hit 500+ investments. [25]
• Andrew McCormack, co-founder of Valar Ventures [26][15]
• Luke Nosek, PayPal co-founder and former vice president of marketing and strategy, became a partner at Founders Fund with Peter Thiel and Ken Howery[27]
• Jason Portnoy, former vice president of financial planning and analysis who later became CFO at Peter Thiel's Clarium Capital, CFO at Palantir Technologies, and founding partner at Subtraction Capital.
• Keith Rabois, a former executive at PayPal who later worked at LinkedIn, Slide, Square, and currently Khosla Ventures, and personally invested in Tokbox, Xoom, Slide, LinkedIn, Geni, Room 9 Entertainment, YouTube, and Yelp.[15]
• Jack Selby, former vice president of corporate and international development at PayPal who co-founded Clarium Capital with Peter Thiel, later becoming managing director of Grandmaster Capital Management.[28]
• Premal Shah, former product manager at PayPal, became the founding president of Kiva.org.[4]
• Russel Simmons, former PayPal engineer who co-founded Yelp Inc.[15]
• Jeremy Stoppelman, former vice president of technology at PayPal who later co-founded Yelp, Inc.[3][5][7][29][30]
• Yishan Wong, a former engineering manager at PayPal, later worked at Facebook and became the CEO of Reddit.[31]

 

[Hog-train]

^^^LOL - This proves Microsoft produced people who created other businesses. That's it.

It doesn't show that a reduction of their TAXES made this happen. They may have done this with or without a reduction in taxes.

Do you even know WTF trickle down is?

 

[MikeMcMann]

^^^LOL - This proves Microsoft produced people who created other businesses. That's it.

It doesn't show that a reduction of their TAXES made this happen. They may have done this with or without a reduction in taxes.

Do you even know WTF trickle down is?

Reduction of taxes is something only gov't can do. Go back and read my first post as I am not referring to crony capitalism which is gov't protecting the money of the wealthy.

Remove gov't doing that stuff and it is fact Trickle Down economics works.

The multi billion dollar company company created thousands of multi billionaires and millionaires as that wealth created in the company trickled to those people. Many of those people have gone off and started thousands of businesses and they employee 10,000s of thousands of employees who all enjoy a trickle down of that initial microsoft wealthy. Those people and all those employees also buy houses and cars, etc and that wealth is then trickled to those who sell those things and so and so on.

There is no denying this fact.

Follow the PayPal mafia links in my threads and then go and see all the companies invested in or started by that group with that initial PayPal money. That initial money has trickled and trickled and trickled and multiplied thousand fold.


The TRUE definition of Trickle Down Economics (and not the politicized one) is that wealth created at the top (by a Founder and Corporation, for example) will trickied down and benefit many other down stream continually.

 

[Hog-train]

The TRUE definition of Trickle Down Economics (and not the politicized one) is that wealth created at the top (by a Founder and Corporation, for example) will trickied down and benefit many other down stream continually.

You don't get to re-define what a term is.

"Trickle-down economics, also referred to as trickle-down theory, is an economic theory that advocates reducing taxes on businesses and the wealthy in society as a means to stimulate business investment in the short term and benefit society at large in the long term."

All you showed was people who once worked at Microsoft went on to build other companies.

 

[MikeMcMann]

You don't get to re-define what a term is.

"Trickle-down economics, also referred to as trickle-down theory, is an economic theory that advocates reducing taxes on businesses and the wealthy in society as a means to stimulate business investment in the short term and benefit society at large in the long term."

All you showed was people who once worked at Microsoft went on to build other companies.

I've already conceded I'm not referring too the popularized and political use of the words created or popularized in the Reagan era.

I'm referring to underlying concept that is devoid of crony capitalism.

Our language is loaded with phrases that lead people into false beliefs and harmful actions, but the one I would nominate as the worst and most destructive of all is “trickle-down economics.”

It was devised by Democrats in the 1980s as a way to attack President Reagan’s economic policy combination of tax rate cuts and some relaxation of federal regulations. They needed a catchy, easy-to-remember zinger to fire at Reagan; a line that would keep their voting base angry. Cite

 

[Liquid Smoke]

This guy makes 60k a month ranting about sjws and trans? fucking hell.

And here we are just giving it away. War roomers cucked again.

 

[Takes_Two_To_Tango]

 

[jamesmiller14]

I've already conceded I'm not referring too the popularized and political use of the words created or popularized in the Reagan era.

I'm referring to underlying concept that is devoid of crony capitalism.

Our language is loaded with phrases that lead people into false beliefs and harmful actions, but the one I would nominate as the worst and most destructive of all is “trickle-down economics.”

It was devised by Democrats in the 1980s as a way to attack President Reagan’s economic policy combination of tax rate cuts and some relaxation of federal regulations. They needed a catchy, easy-to-remember zinger to fire at Reagan; a line that would keep their voting base angry. Cite

I understand you. The problem that @Hog-train is having is that these buzzwords and terms have been programmed to trigger him via the media.

Of course success trickles down. Trickle down economics does happen and therefore does work.

But politico's branded 'trickle down economics' as a policy of cutting taxes for the rich in hopes of advancing and supplementing a process that already occurs in economics with or without government interference, which is trickle-down success.

But you can't use that term anymore or people that have watched too much CNN will fall in the floor and start twitching.

 

[Lead]

They look like father/son in that shot

 

[Takes_Two_To_Tango]

 

[blackhat]

I like Jordan Peterson, he's brilliant and exceptional in a lot of ways. What I appreciate most is his discussion about the dangers of radical ideology.

One of my critiques though, is that he tends to open an idea, then multi-threads the discussion into 15 other ideas and stories, then 25 minutes later he returns to the original point and by then I'm wandering into my own thoughts. Makes me feel like I have ADD lol.

Personally I like very concentrated information without filler. His new book had way too much filler for my liking.

Also I'm skeptical about some of his religious interpretations.

Overall, he's a solid guy. I almost always enjoy listening to him.

 

[MikeMcMann]

I understand you. The problem that @Hog-train is having is that these buzzwords and terms have been programmed to trigger him via the media.

Of course success trickles down. Trickle down economics does happen and therefore does work.

But politico's branded 'trickle down economics' as a policy of cutting taxes for the rich in hopes of advancing and supplementing a process that already occurs in economics with or without government interference, which is trickle-down success.

But you can't use that term anymore or people that have watched too much CNN will fall in the floor and start twitching.

Ya I can see you right about him.

When Jordan talks about trickle down economics he is not talking about the politicized crony capitalism model. He is referring to what in referring to above and he is right just as I'm right.

The problem is, as you say the buzzwords now define the discussion for many and they are reacting to those Buzz words even if that is not what Jordan or I are expressing.

So if Jordan or myself says having people amass wealth is good for all as the benefits trickle down to others, a media'bot will instantly react saying that is reticle trickle down economics and it does not work. We then point out it does work with examples like the PayPal Mafia and they segway to crony capitalism. And I'm certainly not going to argue government interjecting themselves in is good and we can see the results. You take a concept that works like capitalism, add government and you get this monster called crony capitalism.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

"Women who wear make-up and get sexually harassed are hypocrites"
taking this guy seriously in 2k18

JP crushed the can interviewer.

 

[Unknown Pleasures]

To look pretty. Same reason some guys will use hair gel/wax or whatever. I won't debate the rest of Peterson's work but that clip is quite jarring. He sounds like the neanderthals that have propped him up to messiah status.

The suggestion that women use lipstick because it simulates sexual arousal is just so off the field that I'm kinda stunned. Let's ignore the fact that not all lipsticks are red (in fact most used on a day to day basis aren't), does anyone reallly think that women in general put it on thinking "yes, this will make me look sexually aroused and all those men around me will go apeshit" while laughing diabolically? Maybe it's just the fact that for multiple reasons that is a standard of beauty so they strive towards that. You know, Occam's razor and all.

While laughing diabolically? Probably not. Is it however a subconscious motivator; it seems plausible to me, but I actually prefer to defer to experts.

Men's dress in the workplace is typically very conservative. In a professional environment men typically only show their face and hands uncovered. Even rolled up sleeves is often considered inappropriate.

Women are rewarded more for their attractiveness, that's why they spend so much of their lifetime in the bathroom as compared to men. They also know that they can receive benefits from it (i.e. favored threatment despite beauty not being a requirement of the job). In other words, it allows for a prejudice to work in their favor. Do they laugh diabolically wearing uncomfortable shoes in the work place? Probably not. But let's not kid ourselves that the motivation goes beyond I just want to be pretty.

 

[21 Savage]

H3 used to be so good but in the past like 3 years theyve gone to absolute dogshit

 

[Takes_Two_To_Tango]

 

[21 Savage]

To look pretty. Same reason some guys will use hair gel/wax or whatever. I won't debate the rest of Peterson's work but that clip is quite jarring. He sounds like the neanderthals that have propped him up to messiah status.

The suggestion that women use lipstick because it simulates sexual arousal is just so off the field that I'm kinda stunned. Let's ignore the fact that not all lipsticks are red (in fact most used on a day to day basis aren't), does anyone reallly think that women in general put it on thinking "yes, this will make me look sexually aroused and all those men around me will go apeshit" while laughing diabolically? Maybe it's just the fact that for multiple reasons that is a standard of beauty so they strive towards that. You know, Occam's razor and all.

fitting in?
societal norms?
self empowerment?

na mate all lipstick is red and only used for the purpose of making yourself look like a fuck toy for your neanderthal co-workers so that they will subconsciously treat you better but it might also lead to you being sexually harassed so can we really not blame you if it happens to you? : )

havent ready every page but has any cultist here even critcized him for this? if not its worse than i first thought lmao

bonus:

why is jordan wearing that tie if he doesnt want me to choke him with it while we fornicate on his desk????

 

[Der Eisbär]

H3 used to be so good but in the past like 3 years theyve gone to absolute dogshit

Ahahahaha. Triggered butthurt leftist is upset that more and more popular figures have turned against their extremism

 

[RubberGuard5]

fitting in?
societal norms?
self empowerment?

na mate all lipstick is red and only used for the purpose of making yourself look like a fuck toy for your neanderthal co-workers so that they will subconsciously treat you better but it might also lead to you being sexually harassed so can we really not blame you if it happens to you? : )

havent ready every page but has any cultist here even critcized him for this? if not its worse than i first thought lmao

bonus:

why is jordan wearing that tie if he doesnt want me to choke him with it while we fornicate on his desk????

You are treating the lipstick thing like it's a ridiculous idea, while it is a pretty established theory in evolutionary psychology. There must be a reason why men all over the world find the red lipstic most attractive. It is either rooted in our biology or it independetly developed by cultural transmission on the whole planet. What sounds more plausible?