5 ms·

> Why do you go on the internet at lie? Anybody can look up fast food employement rates in california and see that you are just bullshiting. Why do you post su

> Why do you go on the internet at lie? Anybody can look up fast food employement rates in california and see that you are just bullshiting. Why do you post such a reply without making any effort whatsoever to check the references I provided and engaging in a modicum of critical thinking. I purposely provided left-leaning references just to be sure there was no room for anyone to claim the source might be biased. The SEIU and BLS are two such organization, and I provided reports from both of them. I apologize my being aggressive. I am just sick and tired of the ignorant, stupid culture we seem to have developed. Anyone --ANYONE-- who has run a non-trivial business fully understands how FORCING a massive increase in business inputs has consequences, which rarely are good. This is one such cases. Politicians sell a higher minimum wage to the ignorant masses as a solution to their problems. The ignorant masses vote for them. Minimum wage is artificially forced upwards. They loose their jobs, earn less money, costs of goods go up, they are replaced with automation, outsourced or replaced by illegal immigrants paid cash under the table (less than minimum wage, of course). We are in desperate need of education in this country. Our voters have become useful idiots.

kragen 1y ago
In case anyone else is looking for the references, they're in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43808719 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43808719, a comment that is currently unfortunately [dead], probably because it's rude. You have to log in and turn on "showdead" in your profile. The links are https://californiaglobe.com/fl/new-seiu-funded-report-admits-20-wage-law-caused-fast-food-job-losses/ https://californiaglobe.com/fl/new-seiu-funded-report-admits... and https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qwllx1iv8q1ecudz6z59v/BRG_Impacts-of-20-Min-Wage-Report_2.18.25_FINAL.pdf?rlkey=zy6b96c3s5ngjeactf30hui77&e=4&st=guugtn2c&dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qwllx1iv8q1ecudz6z59v/BRG_Imp....
- robomartin 1y ago
  I often find it interesting to see what gets flagged and downvoted or characterized as rude on various platforms, including here on HN. Saying somethings is "ignorant" or "stupid" is deemed a negative, when, on the other side, what is being said is in a range between lies and outright dumb and uninformed. This is particularly egregious when it is accompanied by no obvious effort to investigate and understand before making a comment. It is fine to challenge anything anyone says, of course. The way you do it is, to, for example, ask a question: "I don't think I agree, what evidence can you provide?" or "Can you clarify your position?", etc. The Biden situation is a perfect example of this. Half the country was screaming about his mental decline and beyond obvious incapacity. How did that half of the country get treated? They were insulted and attacked from every angle. What was the truth? The president was senile and incapacitated, likely since almost his first days in office. So, what is more obscene and rude? To tell someone who is uninformed, ignorant and who refuses to look at reality that they are, in fact, uninformed and ignorant, or for that person to continue to support lies and attack anyone who tries to highlight the truth? Another way to put it is the intellectually lazy and uninformed actually do damage to society. They are led by the nose for the benefit of political and other forces. And that's why they are sometimes referred to as "useful idiots". At some point calling them out for what they are cannot be considered to be more obscene than the damage they cause society.
  - kragen 1y ago
    Your [dead] comment begins, "Downvoters: You are ignorant and lazy. Do some research and use your brains!" While arguably courtesy does demand that commenters use their brains and make an effort to investigate and understand (because the alternative is polluting the discussion with bullshit), being ignorant, dumb, or uninformed is not rude, since only voluntary actions can be rude. Accusing people of being ignorant and lazy and not using their brains, however, is rude. I'll be surprised if you can find any social circle where that's false; at most, respected members of a group are permitted to criticize lower-status people in such a way, but not vice versa. It's rude for five different reasons: 1. It replaces a critique of a particular claim with a criticism of the person making the claim, which not only directly harms the clarity of the discussion (because it's not clear which claim you're disagreeing with) but also tends to provoke ego-defense responses from the person being criticized. In fact, such criticisms are far more common as a means to intentionally offend the person being criticized than as a disinterested evaluation of their competence. 2. It's implicitly boasting, because in order to judge how informed or intelligent someone else is, you need to be very well informed indeed about the area they're commenting on. Even if you are in fact very well informed (which you have not always been when you've made such comments in the past; for example, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43431287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43431287 commenting on solar hot water heating, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519616 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519616 commenting on atmospheric carbon capture, and in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42424685 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42424685 commenting on solar panel lifetimes) it is considered rude in most cultures to talk about how great you are. For example, you may notice at this very moment that you are getting annoyed at me for doing that myself. 3. It tends to foster Twitter-style partisan debate rather than curious open-minded inquiry, because now that you've put your status on the line as well as your interlocutor's, anyone else commenting on the factual aspects of the issue will be read as attacking at least one of you and possibly both. Not only does it make it harder for them to admit they were wrong; it also makes it harder for you to admit that you were wrong. I note that in none of the three threads I linked in my last point where I corrected you on fairly cut-and-dried factual issues did you ever publicly admit you were wrong, and in one case you went on to repost the same misinformation in another thread later, and I had to correct you again, so you hadn't even admitted it to yourself. (I note with approval, however, that you apparently haven't reposted it in months.) 4. Sometimes your judgment of your interlocutor is mistaken, so it just adds more misinformation to a discussion already swimming in misinformation. For example, sometimes your interlocutor is well-informed but has different information than you have, or they're very intelligent but made a rare misjudgment in the discussion in question, or is actually correct. 5. Like your digressions about Biden, both the boasting and the criticism of the person are irrelevant to the discussion—even ignorant, lazy, dumb people often say true things, even if only by chance, and even very well informed, industrious, brilliant people sometimes say false ones. In many contexts, though not all, bringing up irrelevant points is considered rude. It's unfortunate that you phrased your comment on the minimum wage in this way, because you presented extremely informative evidence demonstrating the falsity of a widespread point of view. That's useless to people who already agree with you, but the people to whom it could be of most service—those who are mistaken—will have a harder time receiving it when it starts by attacking their egos. By "calling them out for what they are", you are not reducing the damage they do to society; you are increasing it. I'd like to urge you to attempt to comment more civilly and less arrogantly in the future.

kragen 1y ago

In case anyone else is looking for the references, they're in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43808719 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43808719, a comment that is currently unfortunately [dead], probably because it's rude. You have to log in and turn on "showdead" in your profile. The links are https://californiaglobe.com/fl/new-seiu-funded-report-admits-20-wage-law-caused-fast-food-job-losses/ https://californiaglobe.com/fl/new-seiu-funded-report-admits... and https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qwllx1iv8q1ecudz6z59v/BRG_Impacts-of-20-Min-Wage-Report_2.18.25_FINAL.pdf?rlkey=zy6b96c3s5ngjeactf30hui77&e=4&st=guugtn2c&dl=0 https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/qwllx1iv8q1ecudz6z59v/BRG_Imp....

robomartin 1y ago
I often find it interesting to see what gets flagged and downvoted or characterized as rude on various platforms, including here on HN. Saying somethings is "ignorant" or "stupid" is deemed a negative, when, on the other side, what is being said is in a range between lies and outright dumb and uninformed. This is particularly egregious when it is accompanied by no obvious effort to investigate and understand before making a comment. It is fine to challenge anything anyone says, of course. The way you do it is, to, for example, ask a question: "I don't think I agree, what evidence can you provide?" or "Can you clarify your position?", etc. The Biden situation is a perfect example of this. Half the country was screaming about his mental decline and beyond obvious incapacity. How did that half of the country get treated? They were insulted and attacked from every angle. What was the truth? The president was senile and incapacitated, likely since almost his first days in office. So, what is more obscene and rude? To tell someone who is uninformed, ignorant and who refuses to look at reality that they are, in fact, uninformed and ignorant, or for that person to continue to support lies and attack anyone who tries to highlight the truth? Another way to put it is the intellectually lazy and uninformed actually do damage to society. They are led by the nose for the benefit of political and other forces. And that's why they are sometimes referred to as "useful idiots". At some point calling them out for what they are cannot be considered to be more obscene than the damage they cause society.
- kragen 1y ago
  Your [dead] comment begins, "Downvoters: You are ignorant and lazy. Do some research and use your brains!" While arguably courtesy does demand that commenters use their brains and make an effort to investigate and understand (because the alternative is polluting the discussion with bullshit), being ignorant, dumb, or uninformed is not rude, since only voluntary actions can be rude. Accusing people of being ignorant and lazy and not using their brains, however, is rude. I'll be surprised if you can find any social circle where that's false; at most, respected members of a group are permitted to criticize lower-status people in such a way, but not vice versa. It's rude for five different reasons: 1. It replaces a critique of a particular claim with a criticism of the person making the claim, which not only directly harms the clarity of the discussion (because it's not clear which claim you're disagreeing with) but also tends to provoke ego-defense responses from the person being criticized. In fact, such criticisms are far more common as a means to intentionally offend the person being criticized than as a disinterested evaluation of their competence. 2. It's implicitly boasting, because in order to judge how informed or intelligent someone else is, you need to be very well informed indeed about the area they're commenting on. Even if you are in fact very well informed (which you have not always been when you've made such comments in the past; for example, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43431287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43431287 commenting on solar hot water heating, in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519616 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42519616 commenting on atmospheric carbon capture, and in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42424685 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42424685 commenting on solar panel lifetimes) it is considered rude in most cultures to talk about how great you are. For example, you may notice at this very moment that you are getting annoyed at me for doing that myself. 3. It tends to foster Twitter-style partisan debate rather than curious open-minded inquiry, because now that you've put your status on the line as well as your interlocutor's, anyone else commenting on the factual aspects of the issue will be read as attacking at least one of you and possibly both. Not only does it make it harder for them to admit they were wrong; it also makes it harder for you to admit that you were wrong. I note that in none of the three threads I linked in my last point where I corrected you on fairly cut-and-dried factual issues did you ever publicly admit you were wrong, and in one case you went on to repost the same misinformation in another thread later, and I had to correct you again, so you hadn't even admitted it to yourself. (I note with approval, however, that you apparently haven't reposted it in months.) 4. Sometimes your judgment of your interlocutor is mistaken, so it just adds more misinformation to a discussion already swimming in misinformation. For example, sometimes your interlocutor is well-informed but has different information than you have, or they're very intelligent but made a rare misjudgment in the discussion in question, or is actually correct. 5. Like your digressions about Biden, both the boasting and the criticism of the person are irrelevant to the discussion—even ignorant, lazy, dumb people often say true things, even if only by chance, and even very well informed, industrious, brilliant people sometimes say false ones. In many contexts, though not all, bringing up irrelevant points is considered rude. It's unfortunate that you phrased your comment on the minimum wage in this way, because you presented extremely informative evidence demonstrating the falsity of a widespread point of view. That's useless to people who already agree with you, but the people to whom it could be of most service—those who are mistaken—will have a harder time receiving it when it starts by attacking their egos. By "calling them out for what they are", you are not reducing the damage they do to society; you are increasing it. I'd like to urge you to attempt to comment more civilly and less arrogantly in the future.