The highly educated hate working people. A shocking poll exposes the utter contempt the elite holds the general public

[iam90sbaby 2,725]

Just now, Raven Fan said:

What % of plumbers do you think work for themselves boyo?

Holy chit you're an idiot. 

See above, HT covered this.

Hows it feel to be your age and know you wasted basically your entire life? Sad dude

[Raven Fan 362]

Just now, iam90sbaby said:

You're broke lol

Even if I am I'm more of a man than you since I'm not so insecure that I need to go around bragging about how much I make on some cultist message board.

You best up those anxiety meds boyo.  You're insecurity shines on you like a chit on a plumber.

SAD

[Raven Fan 362]

Just now, iam90sbaby said:

See above, HT covered this.

Hows it feel to be your age and know you wasted basically your entire life? Sad dude

HT covered the % of plumbers who work for themselves?

Wait, you can't read?  Or is your insecurity and betaness just making it hard for you to see?

Love this for you boyo. 

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

2 minutes ago, Raven Fan said:

Of course you do.  They're so smart they'd rather fish chit out of a toilet or risk their lives in the elements than put on nice clothes and go to work in office?

I mean who wouldn't?

For some wearing a tie and reporting to an office is hell.  For some being able to point to something they made other than paper to move from one pile to another or e-files to move from one address to another is very satisfying.

[Raven Fan 362]

Just now, Engorgeous George said:

For some wearing a tie and reporting to an office is hell.  For some being able to point to something they made other than paper to move from one pile to another or e-files to move from one address to another is very satisfying.

If you say so.  I'll wager that you give that plumber the chance to switch places with that lawyer and make 2x the money the vast majority would do it in a heartbeat.

 

[Horseman 2,684]

Let's see, 10K more than a plumber at age 55.  Should have those student loans paid off any day now.  

[Fireballer 2,677]

53 minutes ago, Raven Fan said:

Look up the average salary for a plumbers and carpenters.  How much do you think they make boyo?

You forgot to log back in as BeachGuy

[Fnord 2,487]

15 hours ago, jerryskids said:

OK.  I will start with discussing this blog post, which is very relevant IMO to the OP.  It is about "luxury beliefs," and I am a big believer in this phenomenon with the rich elite.  The text intersperses with graphics too much for me to copy/paste it here, so I'll just provide the link.

https://www.robkhenderson.com/p/status-symbols-and-the-struggle-for

Thoughts?

Interesting. I can certainly see, and agree with, many of the points being made, at least from a broad, 10,000 foot view. When you zoom in to take a closer look at small groups or individuals, it becomes less relevant.

For example, it makes perfect sense that the 1% would be the most likely to support an absurd notion like defunding police. They live in low or no crime areas, stay out of the "bad parts of town" and probably don't know any cops on a personal level.

But in my view and experience, there's little explanation for the disconnect on LGBTQ rights, or environmentalism. I don't hang out in elite circles. My friends are much more likely to be in the trades than have an advanced degree and make well into 6 figures (though I have friends in each group). Those I spend time with are typically apolitical or left of center, with a few exceptions. None of them care about which bathroom the transsexuals are using and all of them realize that humanity needs to curb some habits or our children will be environmentally fukked.

Overall, as I've said already, the subject, while interesting, doesn't move my needle much. Highly educated people with large incomes act like elitists. Big surprise. 

[jerryskids 7,050]

24 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Interesting. I can certainly see, and agree with, many of the points being made, at least from a broad, 10,000 foot view. When you zoom in to take a closer look at small groups or individuals, it becomes less relevant.

For example, it makes perfect sense that the 1% would be the most likely to support an absurd notion like defunding police. They live in low or no crime areas, stay out of the "bad parts of town" and probably don't know any cops on a personal level.

But in my view and experience, there's little explanation for the disconnect on LGBTQ rights, or environmentalism. I don't hang out in elite circles. My friends are much more likely to be in the trades than have an advanced degree and make well into 6 figures (though I have friends in each group). Those I spend time with are typically apolitical or left of center, with a few exceptions. None of them care about which bathroom the transsexuals are using and all of them realize that humanity needs to curb some habits or our children will be environmentally fukked.

Overall, as I've said already, the subject, while interesting, doesn't move my needle much. Highly educated people with large incomes act like elitists. Big surprise. 

Thanks for the response.  I would argue that several items in the OP are examples of luxury beliefs and environmentalism.  Outlawing gas stoves is of little importance to the rich; they can get the latest induction cooktops (which rock btw!).  Same with gas cars:  they can go buy a Tesla or other electric cars.

There are other luxury beliefs which Henderson describes in earlier works, things like single parenthood.  White liberal elite women are at the forefront of pushing for it, but statistically, they tend to not actually BE single parents:  they get married and raise traditional families.

LGBTQ rights are somewhat by definition luxury beliefs.  As I've stated here before, third-world countries don't have the luxury of such beliefs, as they need people to have lots of babies because many of those die and those who don't are needed to work the farm, much like in the US 100+ years ago.  That doesn't make those beliefs bad per se, but they are indeed reserved for cultures with the luxury to support them.

As to whether or not you should care, that's up to you of course.  But these are the people who generally set policy, and they don't like you having freedoms:

Quote

When canvassed on how much freedom the United States should bestow on its citizens, 47 per cent said people had too much freedom compared to 21 per cent who said there was too much control.

 

[Raven Fan 362]

18 hours ago, Horseman said:

Let's see, 10K more than a plumber at age 55.  Should have those student loans paid off any day now.  

Oh look, the insecure, beta bish who needs to lie to strangers on some pathetic message board to get his non-functioning rocks off.

Meanwhile IRL he has to steal a $7 stream and can't afford a $500 bet.

Love this for you boyo. 

[Fnord 2,487]

42 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Thanks for the response.  I would argue that several items in the OP are examples of luxury beliefs and environmentalism.  Outlawing gas stoves is of little importance to the rich; they can get the latest induction cooktops (which rock btw!).  Same with gas cars:  they can go buy a Tesla or other electric cars.

There are other luxury beliefs which Henderson describes in earlier works, things like single parenthood.  White liberal elite women are at the forefront of pushing for it, but statistically, they tend to not actually BE single parents:  they get married and raise traditional families.

LGBTQ rights are somewhat by definition luxury beliefs.  As I've stated here before, third-world countries don't have the luxury of such beliefs, as they need people to have lots of babies because many of those die and those who don't are needed to work the farm, much like in the US 100+ years ago.  That doesn't make those beliefs bad per se, but they are indeed reserved for cultures with the luxury to support them.

As to whether or not you should care, that's up to you of course.  But these are the people who generally set policy, and they don't like you having freedoms:

 

I see your point. But think about that "elite" responding to the poll. They're saying there should be less freedom, but freedom of "what" isn't explored. My suspicion is that ultimately they feel as if their own freedoms should not be restricted, only the freedoms of the "underclass." So does that really count as being "in favor of" reduced freedoms? How would those enacting policy approach such a thing?

I know it's arguing semantics, but that's how I see it.

[Hardcore troubadour 15,908]

They only had disdain for them until they voted for Trump.  Now they hate them.  Democracy!  

[Engorgeous George 2,332]

Imagine confusing accredition from schools with education.  Certainly one can gain an education at formal institutions.  OIne can also gain it at the library or off the internet.  One can also gain it from being observant and inquisitive and testing hypothesis and skills.

 

Me, my formal education involved multiple universities and multiple degrees but my informal education proved much more interesting and useful, not to mention fun*.

 

 

 

 

*Special thanks to Anne Marie, Alice, Gina Marie, Sue, Bridgette, Linda, Lisa, Anne, Jane, and Valerie.

[jerryskids 7,050]

1 hour ago, Fnord said:

I see your point. But think about that "elite" responding to the poll. They're saying there should be less freedom, but freedom of "what" isn't explored. My suspicion is that ultimately they feel as if their own freedoms should not be restricted, only the freedoms of the "underclass." So does that really count as being "in favor of" reduced freedoms? How would those enacting policy approach such a thing?

I know it's arguing semantics, but that's how I see it.

I'm not sure I see your distinction.  Yes, the elites want to reduce YOUR freedoms, but not THEIRS.  

There are plenty of ways in which their behaviors would skirt reductions in general freedoms.

They fly to Davos on private jets, and get into SUV caravans, so that they can meet to discuss restrictions on you in the name of saving the planet.

They shut down the public schools during Covid, but their kids still got educated.  They shut down the economy, but they still got expensive dinners and salon jobs (not trying to pick on Cali Dems here, just things that leapt to my mind).

 

[Dizkneelande 1,136]

30 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

I'm not sure I see your distinction.  Yes, the elites want to reduce YOUR freedoms, but not THEIRS.  

There are plenty of ways in which their behaviors would skirt reductions in general freedoms.

They fly to Davos on private jets, and get into SUV caravans, so that they can meet to discuss restrictions on you in the name of saving the planet.

They shut down the public schools during Covid, but their kids still got educated.  They shut down the economy, but they still got expensive dinners and salon jobs (not trying to pick on Cali Dems here, just things that leapt to my mind).

 

It’s not a poll of mega-elites. It’s regular schmoos who think they are elite like some of the leftists here -

The poll defined elites as "those having a postgraduate degree, a household income of more than $150,000 annually, and living in a zip code with more than 10,000 people per square mile. Approximately 1% of the total U.S. population meets these criteria."

[Fnord 2,487]

On 1/25/2024 at 3:29 PM, Dizkneelande said:

The poll defined elites as "those having a postgraduate degree, a household income of more than $150,000 annually, and living in a zip code with more than 10,000 people per square mile. Approximately 1% of the total U.S. population meets these criteria."

Yeah, this caught my eye, especially the population bit. It's not like you're only going to find someone meeting all the other criteria living in a dense urban center. I don't like that portion of the methodology. 

While thinking about some other things I stumbled on this article which nicely dovetails into this thread. Turns out I'm more aligned with a "liberaltarian" ethos than I am with either of the individual parts of that label.

[seafoam1 3,397]

6 minutes ago, Fnord said:

Yeah, this caught my eye, especially the population bit. It's not like you're only going to find someone meeting all the other criteria living in a dense urban center. I don't like that portion of the methodology. 

While thinking about some other things I stumbled on this article which nicely dovetails into this thread. Turns out I'm more aligned with a "liberaltarian" ethos than I am with either of the individual parts of that label.

Maybe rat on him as us your character.