the truth that no one whats to admit is that america has no "job creators"
movie bob made a smart move doing his own gameshow
if young americains whant a job they might have to band together and form a small bussinus or other means of creating their own work because no one is looking to give them jobs
I love these liberal media reviewers! They fancy themselves intellectuals because they can go on five minute long tangents about how fair and unbiased they are. I love how this guy goes to such lengths to convince us he's objective, bad-mouthing the Democrats when it's obvious that he agrees 100% with them. Both the Dems and the Reps are lyin sons of bitches. Government has been, since time immemorial, pathologically incapable of telling the truth. Same thing goes for the media, btw...
Let me just say "I like Bob!"... Really! I do! He has great insight and an amazing ability to analyze and summarize information compellingly.
But I do not agree with his conclusion here or where his basis for at least that portion of his argument comes from. The Brave New World is out there, but farming and things like "blue collar jobs" will not fade away when it gets here. In fact the future won't be very bright if they do, so don't encourage them to go quietly.
1. The idea about corn causing obesity is pure bs, obesity is caused by too many calories taken in and too few put out, whether those calories come from corn, rice, lettuce, brussel sprouts or whatever really doesn't matter.
2. Actually, the corn subsidies are actually not nessacary but, actually it's likely we'll stay a major agricultural producer, we're actually generally better at the developing world than a lot of farming, even without subsidies, while this only ...
@SmilingJack100 On your first point: he was saying that the everything gets pumped full of corn, which is one possible source of obesity as you said. It's just that corn has a high calorie content, so when stuff gets pumped full with it like a stripper with heroin it makes a lot of people fat. "High fructose CORN syrup" is a swear word in the nutrition community for a reason.
@teniguafez Actually, high frutose corn syrup is only a swear word in unscientific superstitious members of the nutritional community. High fructose corn syrup is no worse than normal sugar and the only reason people get fat that has anything to do with high fructose corn syrup is they eat too many overly sugary foods, it's the same as it would be with beet sugar, cane sugar, etc. I didn't say it was a source of obesisty, you did, corn really doesn't have that high of a calorie content.
@teniguafez Actually, high frutose corn syrup is only a swear word in unscientific superstitious members of the nutritional community. High fructose corn syrup is no worse than normal sugar and the only reason people get fat that has anything to do with high fructose corn syrup is they eat too many overly sugary foods, it's the same as it would be with beet sugar, cane sugar, etc. I didn't say it was a source of obesisty, you did, corn really doesn't have that high of a calorie content.
@SmilingJack100 Of course it's no worse than normal sugar. But just about everything sold in the US is packed to the gills with HFCS, not normal sugar. Corn just happens to be the culprit in this case. If beets were getting subsidized and everything was packed with beet sugar, he'd be talking about beets, not corn.
@teniguafez Well, first off, that's not even that true, sugary foods are filled to the gills with sugar and those are the foods people are eating, but even more importantly, people are just eating too MUCH food, which is the most important thing. Secondly, bob made it out to be that corn in and of itself is bad for you, so you're wrong on both counts really.
@SmilingJack100 Look on everything sold in US supermarkets. 7 times out of 10 one of the first three ingredients will be HFCS. Even in ostensibly "healthy" foods like juice.
And Bob did no such thing. He said that everything we eat has too much corn in it, which is true. If beet sugar were being used, he'd say "Everything you eat has too much beet in it."
@teniguafez No, that's not what he was inferring, he was inferring there was something harmful about corn itself. And secondly, sugar being in things isn't honestly the worst thing as long as people practice portion control, which is really the issue in terms of american obesity no some sort of attempt to subsidize the corn industry.
The real movement of people is to the South not the coast. I generally like this show but you've really ignored the most important migration of people to the Southwest and South not really the coast per say. In fact California has been losing massive numbers of people. Yes the Southeast has coast but Altanta, Vegas, Dallas, El Paso, Phoenix etc aren't on the coast. The transition of this country is away from the Rust Belt but it's also from many coastal regions all to the Sunbelt.
Holy shit this is got to be one of the few youtube political rants that makes Americans sound intelligant lol.... keep it up Bob and I might even stop making fun of Americans one day!
Hey Bob hope you won't stop making thease episodes they are really intresting even to me (I am not american) hope that you make more, although I know you work alot with the Escapist and Screwattack, but this is really good.
I still can't wrap my head around how growing you're own food is bad. people are fat because they don't eat right/do physical activity; not because we grow a lot of corn. and wouldn't we be saving money for all the things made by US instead of having to import? just because you can rant doesn't mean you should. If you aren't an expert then you're misleading sheeple with you're misplaced anger and not fully informed opinions.
I think his point wasn't that growing your own food is bad, but that subsidizing an industry that is more and more obsolete in the American economy leads to over-production as the companies will only produce what is safe to invest in. And since corn is one of the few agricultural products that the USA can still be slightly competitive in the majority of the industry makes that. Which leads to too much availability, lowers prices, corn in everything and thus, fat people.
@GeneralRemy because it is a cycle...as a country develops it goes through periods...our period of farming and manufacturing is over and needs to be taken over by developing nations....see CHINA....we on the other hand need to stop holding onto these and move toward hi tech industry if we are going to make it....same thing happened to britain...same thing happened to germany...same thing happened to japan....same thing is happening to us...and if we fight it we will lose
I hate this idea that repealing the minimum wage will create more jobs not just for the reason Bob gave but also because I don't see why they would give jobs to more people when they could just make them work insane hours. Now I know what you're thinking; "Then no one would want to work for them". I agree. However they won't have much of a choice if almost all of the big corporations are doing this and I have a feeling this is an idea that will become REALLY popular with big business men.
Wow, I'm really surprised. I've never agreed with your opinion on movies, and I consider you to be incredibly blinded by nostalgia in your criticisms of the games industry, but you're pretty much exactly in-line with me on politics. Go figure.
You'll never see meaningful growth in any facet of life. The country is run by the finance-oligarchs of Wall Street, who, like any imperial rulers, employ zero-growth policies. To progress means for people who are not them to have wealth, which they can't have.
They'll maintain this control even if it means collapsing the world economy, engulfing the world in regional wars fed into larger ones, and turning America into a brutal police state where every group is labeled "terrorist."
@misterprickly umm, no, I am canadian as well and really, as long as Harper is in office we are heading down the same path as the united states. I agree that, if the united states pulls it's head out of it's lase fair ecomomic politicised bottom and embraced the future they really would be worthy of "greatest country on earth" saddly, it's not happening. Too bad.
I do believe that Canada has it waaaay better than America BUT lets not forget the price we ALL paid to get it that way AND the hard work/sacrifice that's to come.
It also doesn't help to have a person like Harper on the Canadian throne (he's like the love-child of Mike Harris and W) and the current political turmoil.
Interesting take. Can't say I don't see a lot of good points there. I just sort of wish there was something for the middle of the country to be important at. The east coast, west coast, and the south all have purposes right now that probably aren't going away any time soon. But if the theory presented here is correct (and it probably is) there won't be anything for the middle of the country to do. Maybe if some new type of industry headquartered there after farming shrinks?
@Frankfurter4444 there is Google opens a bunch of data farms in Iowa and Im sure other companies have down the same in other parts of the country we just need to teach more computer centric skills
You point out how this now focuses power along the coastal states. The thing is the more sparsely populated, central "Heartland" states mean as much as any other state. In other words: So 800 thousand voters of South Dakota are as important as the 37 million(!) voters of California. One state can swing a presidential election.
Democracy ain't perfect, but this could be better.
In the first 60 seconds you accuse a MASSIVE conspiracy to sabotage the economy just to get a President out of office.
Reeeeeeally?
I'm pretty sure even the majority of corporations are NOT going to screw over 4 years of profits for such a vague political influence, you think every employee interview where they reject a qualified and valued applicant they chuckle to themselves "Ha Ha! Take that, Obama!"?!?!?
@Treblaine yeah they don't NEED to sacrifice 4 years of profits to get a president out of office they can still make money and pay off politicians at the same time.
@Winglezz367 I'm not going to deny that business have undue influence (lobbying, and employment bribery) but Bob's essential argument is that most businesses are deliberately hurting themselves to hurt Obama's administration.
@Treblaine how exactly are they hurting themselves? from my point of view their management is still making more money a year than most Americans do in a lifetime. small businesses are one thing but the big guys don't seem to be hurting for profits.
@Winglezz367 All capitalists care about is money. Losing profits is the ONLY way they can be hurt.
Managers don't run make decisions, they follow orders. It is the executive who stipulate and fall in profits directly hit their riches.
There are other reasons (including selfish business reasons) for why unemployment remains so high. But self-sabotage to ruin presidency is NOT one of them.
All right, we're chasing metaphysical rabbits here, although, if your interested in this type of thing (and anime), check out my web show! But, I'm done bogging down this comment section with off topic replies.
Nice one Bob, it's glad to see someone looking at both views and calling both sides out for the bullshit. Please keep doing this series along with your others!
Watching this reminds me of transhumanism to some degree; notably that humans won't have to do any physical work themselves due to 'robots'.
The real question now lies to how long it will take for people to shift into more productive fields; such as the ones mentioned by Bob. Since the kids of farmers/manufacturers are probably quite aware of the situation and so few people will actively pursue a way into that job, and it's not like it's the dream job of people outside the job either.
I suppose the real question at the end of this is whether we need to "go there;" whether we need to be at the forefront of this great leap forward. If we want to continue to be a true superpower then yes, but for a lot of the people who live in the supposedly outdated "heartland," I would guess their culture etc. is more important. Whether America goes back to just being its own place (pre-WWII America) or evolves as Bob suggests, I don't think either future is really a bad one.
I understand your point, but fail to agree with you completely. Hollowing out the country by moving everyone to the coast. Isn't really gunna be that good of a thing. We then would have this giant waste land in the center of America and over crowding and unreasonable costs of living on the coast. You think the coast is that great? In cali you have to get a lisence to work fast food. Thats right you have to get a license so people can crap on your day.
@iamironpenguin Um... Hasn't he ALWAYS injected his opinion into everything? He never asks you to believe what he says, just to get people thinking more. I'd say this is no different.
@Rubberman202 watch some of his TGO episodes again, I mean usually what he gives as info is arguably opinion, its less his opinion there, and if it is opinion its less CONCENTRATED, It was not raw TGO opinion, it was more like, giving you an idea to think about yourself, which is arguably opinion, but now he is giving you that idea, and shoving down how he wants you to think about it, it was kinda opinion, but less concentrated
We didn't have jobs under Bush, either. Presidents really don't have as big an impact on the economy as we believe or want them to. They can raise or lower taxes and their fed chairman controls the interest rate. That's it. Dollars they spend doesn't create more dollars and it's money they will into existence. Even though there's the occasional massive bail out (under Bush and Obama), it only saves certain companies, not industries. Would be nice if they could make a difference, though.
Wow. That's the first AmericanBob where it's really come together into a well executed whole.
On his topic, I agree with most of it but will add the hard truth he's still kinda overlooked even here where it's topically relevant: How much total do the top tiers of society (those with 6+ figure yearly incomes) actually put back into the consumption cycle to actually allow for jobs to be created? After all, all jobs are reliant on the perpetuated free flow of money through the system.
I'm ashamed to say that we here in the UK have similar problems.
Industry has all but gone in the last 30 years, as had our previous level of agriculture.
APoliticians keep trying to bolster their influence by trying to ocnvince people that they can bring those sectors back despite there being no chance in hell of that happening.
We are a service industry now, much like your country.
At least in the States you have the potential for industry with your oil supplies and stuff. Us? Nothing.
- With regards to the 'alpha male' bullshit Bob, allow me to quote Chris Titus: Why don't you climb down off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge and get the hell over it!
- I saw nothing here that suggested any sort of research of any kind, making this just another impotent political rant based purely on opinion like so many others. He speaks with authority. Doesn't mean he has it.
- Regarding the future though, I think he's...kinda right.
@Narratorway "I saw nothing here that suggested any sort of research of any kind, making this just another impotent political rant based purely on opinion like so many others. He speaks with authority. Doesn't mean he has it."
...
Since when has Bob claimed that this wasn't the case?
So you want to stamp out that last 1% of americans that still make food huh?
We'll all become artists and scientists and use poems as currency, and sing songs as we wait for the slow boat from China to bring us parts to fix the robots that run all the factory farms.
But Bob! Plato said that Justice is every person doing what they are meant to do, in the confines of a society! If what I'm meant ot do is farm, then isn't it unjust for me to do ANYTHING else?
300 Billion a year is a small price to pay for JUSTICE! Right?
@Philosotaku Justice is subjective, and there's a flaw in your logic. Asking other people to make accommodations just so that you can do what you think you're meant to do just makes you look conceited. Why should they have to pay so that one person can do what they want? Because Plato, who isn't even still alive, thought it should be that way? You have to think of the big picture, life isn't fair and that means some people have to be left behind for the greater good. It's sad, but true.
@pacmanphobia While I thought my sarcasm was clear enough, guess not, anyway, your opening statement negated everything you said afterward, if Justice is subjective, your opinion of Justice is irrelevant.
To be serious for a moment, I like to think of Justice as a solid concept, with blacks and whites, and YOU SHALL NOT PASS', it seems like everything becomes a little to cartoony if we leave it all up to interpretation.
@Philosotaku I considered sarcasm when I first read your comment, but sarcasm is not really obvious when you're in youtube comments. Also, you misinterpreted my comment. I was not stating my opinion of justice, I was pointing out the flaw in the argument you made.
"the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause."
Justice varies from culture to culture and so is subjective.
@pacmanphobia No worries, text is hard to innterperate.
Anyway, I'm going ot say this and that'll be the end of it, justice is objective, period, if it's not, we have to accept that Hitler's genocide wasn't a villian, we have to think of slavery as alright also, because if justice is truely subjective, than those acts are excusable, as only being SUBJECTIVELY wrong.
Justice is objective, no matter how you slice it, there are some acts that are always wrong, no matter what.
@Philosotaku I really hate to do this, but nothing is objective if you get right down to it. Technically, this could all be a dream and everything you ever learned could be wrong. Which also means that the facts in this universe could be a fabrication and so everything is based on your personal interpretation of the dream. You could even not exist at all, it seems illogical but that logic is also subjective since logic is based on inference and reasoning which varies from person to person.
@pacmanphobia "I" really hate to do this, but your wrong again:
I can prove that a square exists solely on the fact that we have a concept of a square. It has no physical qualities, and in fact only exists in geometrical principle. It doesn't matter if all the world is a dream, no matter how deluded you are, our concept of a 4 sided object necessitates it's existence. That in mind, what else can we prove exists? I can prove "I" exist, some would argue God, and broad concepts, such as Justice.
@Philosotaku I'm not deluded, I don't believe that this is all a dream, but it's true that it's possible. And by dream I really just mean that it's possible nothing you see, hear, feel, taste, and smell are real. As for proving you exist, most people would say that you exist because empty space cannot think, but there's a problem there. Empty space cannot think in the rules of our universe, but those same rules could also not exist at all. I don't believe this is the case though.
@KommisarKowl Not really a genetic fallacy since I didn't suggest a conclusion based on Plato not being alive. My conclusion was based on the 2 sentences before the one you quoted.
You're suggesting that just because Plato is dead that his expertise doesn't matter, which is an unacceptable premise. Also, if you're using "justice" as a synonym for morality, then you're dead-wrong.
@KommisarKowl More of that people need to understand that his expertise is not as applicable to modern day things, he lived in a different society with different views, different technology, a different culture, and in different times. When I noted that he isn't alive I was referencing these facts but couldn't do more than just imply due to the character limitation.
"...moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause"
"that his expertise is not as applicable to modern day things, he lived in a different society with different views, different technology, a different culture, and in different times. "
Have you read Plato? The problems of Athens are extraordinarily similar to the problems of today. In fact, the mantra of political theory is "All Political Theory is a footnote on Plato." Just because someone wrote in a differing time period doesn't mean they aren't qualified to discuss...
...problems of today. If that were the case, these thinkers would be forgotten and art like Shakespeare would not be able to produce emotional reactions due to their ontic context. Moreover, ethics are not relative and certainly not relative to culture. Example
If cultural relativism is true, then the holocaust is justified.
The holocaust is not justified.
Therefore, moral relativism is not true.
Therefore, morality is objective and is not limited by culture.
@KommisarKowl Hitler believed that the Jews were to blame for Germany's poverty and economic struggles at the time and so he believed that he was justified in what he did to the Jews. Nazi Germany thought it was justified, the USA did not; since these two disagree on whether the holocaust is justified or not then it's relative to which country you're in.
"the body of moral principles or values governing or distinctive of a particular culture or group"
"Nazi Germany thought it was justified, the USA did not; since these two disagree on whether the holocaust is justified or not then it's relative to which country you're in." This proves nothing. Just because a disagreement is had, doesn't mean that the nature of morality is subjective. What the implications of what you're saying is that because Germany believed that the holocaust is morally laudible, that it is. There is no way of avoiding that; that's what cultural relativism is
Moreover, I have no idea what you are saying by defining ethics. If you are trying to prove their subjectivity with dictionary. com, I'm afraid you're at a loss as The Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy defines ethics as: "The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. "
Also, Santa Clara University states that ethics are "not the same as doing "whatever society accepts." In any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical." They go on to say that, "ethics refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues."
@KommisarKowl Humans are incapable of objective thought. Right and wrong are subjective, if ethics are based on right and wrong then they are based on something subjective and so cannot be objective. In order to be subjective something must be independent of personal experience, perception, and emotion. Since ethics are a combination of these of societies as a whole, ethics are close to objective, but they aren't.
@pacmanphobia If humans aren't capable of objective thought, then math and logic are impossible. Math and logic are not impossible. Therefore, humans are capable of objective thought. And ethics are independent of personal experience, perception, and emotion as they are known intuitively and are functions of reason. To believe that culture dictates morality is to believe in a majoritarian conception of morality in which individual choice doesn't matter.
@KommisarKowl Math is not objective, any math you do is based on your perception and interpretation of rules. If I told you 2+2=5 you would say I'm wrong. Why would you say that? Because you were taught 2+2=4 by a teacher who said it to you. But what if they didn't say that and you were hallucinating? Logic isn't objective either since logic is based on inference and reasoning both of which are subjective since they vary from person to person. Math is really close, but isn't quite objective.
@pacmanphobia "Why would you say that? Because you were taught 2+2=4 by a teacher who said it to you. "
No. because 2+2=4 is always true. It is a tautology. Numbers exist on the cartesian plot and two spaces to the right of 2 is always 4. Also, if I am hallucinating, then math is still always true. This is something known since Descartes and even before that with Plato.
"Logic isn't objective either since logic is based on inference and reasoning both of which are subjective since they vary from person to person. Math is really close, but isn't quite objective."
Logic is always certain as well and is based on objectivity and deduction. If P then P, P, therefore P is always true. There is simply no way around this. Also, if everything is subjective like you say it is, then so is the statement that everything is subjective. Therefore, we can't know even that.
@KommisarKowl Pretty much on the everything is subjective topic, that's why I started the comment with I really hate to do this since the argument is obnoxious since it's unbeatable.
"since the argument is obnoxious since it's unbeatable." You still haven't attempted to solve the self-refuting nature of this claim. If everything is subjective, then the claim "everything is subjective" is also subjective. Therefore, we can't know anything.
Therefore, your hypothesis (everything is subjective) is untenable because it is self-refuting. If everything is subjective and objectivity is the criteria of knowledge, then we can know nothing. If we know nothing, why would we even bother trying to do philosophy? How is Moviebob any more or less correct than anyone else?
@KommisarKowl That's why I started by saying "I really hate to do this" since proving the hypothesis wrong is impossible, the hypothesis is my last resort for when I'm tired of arguing and still think the person I'm arguing with is wrong. It's an out.
@KommisarKowl So you're going to try and disprove the omni-contradictory hypothesis? Good luck with that, many have tried before you. Remember that the hypothesis also contradicts the Law of Non-Contradiction and tautology so you can't use those in this context.
If something contradicts the law of Non-Contradiction, it's a contradiction and therefore a bad argument. There's nothing to disprove. Your argument has refuted itself; my work is done.
@KommisarKowl The point of the omni-contradiction hypothesis is not that nothing is true, the point is that we can't really know for sure that anything is true. And since you were trying to prove for sure that something objective exists, the omni-contradiction contradicts you and you had no way to remove this contradiction. In other words, it refuted you.
It contradicted you. If everything is subjective then that is subjective too. If it's subjective, then how do you know if it's true? Therefore it's self-refuting.
Also, a google search of "omni-contradiction" hypothesis yields no results and I cannot meet anyone who studies philosophy who accepts the truth of your hypothesis. Then again, most people in philosophy don't accept self-refuting arguments. Mainly because they're self-refuting.
Also, if the nature of this argument is inductive and is attempting to work as a theory, it lacks falsifiability and can be thrown out the window on those grounds also.
@KommisarKowl I do agree that it's stupid and lacks falsifiability, but you can't deny the truth behind the hypothesis that we can't really know anything for sure. We can't know anything for sure, a thousand years ago it was fact that the world was flat and the earth was the center of the universe. Even today there are still many things we can't explain like dark flow. Even if the facts in our universe are true you still see things through your own perception and can't fully understand things.
@pacmanphobia You're confusing induction and deduction. Yes, we can know things and yes, math, logic, and laws of physics are objective and known a priori. Anything beyond that is known through probability. If this is your idea of "winning" an argument: leveling all knowledge, then you need to find a better solution. There is literally no serious philosopher who would use a self-refuting argument as a means in order to "win." It doesn't make any sense.
Also, we don't know if the Earth is round or flat. However, it is highly probably that it is round and it is the best explanation we have, so it's round. Done. That's how induction works. You don't need a "Omni-contradictory hypothesis," (which I still haven't seen an extraneous explanation of) to know things. And just because a culture believes something, doesn't make it true.
@KommisarKowl "And just because a culture believes something, doesn't make it true."
...
I never said that was the case. In fact that was why I said ethics are subjective so I think you misunderstood what I meant. God dammit I think we actually have agreed the entire time but kept misunderstanding each other.
When I said math is subjective I was talking about the math you do in your mind since it's affected by what you personally were told, not math the concept. Same with logic and laws.
Ethics aren't subjective and your entire argument is thrust with the "cultural subjectivity" argument, which is disingenuous at best. Math is also not subjective. The answer to 2 + 2 is always 4. All bachelors are unmarried. All bodies take up weight. If these are negated, a contradiction emerges. These are basic facts. Tautologies are always true. End of story.
There is NOTHING this intelligent that I've heard being said on TV or other media. Likewise, even if I don't entirely agree, which is rare, this is all very insightful and forward thinking, especially from a non-American perspective. I concur, keep this up Bob!
That's why Goldman Sachs was his top contributor and why the bailouts and stimulus plan were the biggest amount of corporatism America has seen since the New Deal. Moreover, regulations prop companies up and allow corporations to exist.
Also, I love the fact that it's only the Republicans that are in bed with Big Business. Obama didn't subsidize McDonalds.
The other side of this argument is that we need those agricultural/manufacturing jobs to support the more intellectual pursuits and if the government doesn't support them they'll disappear and all those intellectuals will starve naked and homeless. And while, yes, we can find those less fortunate than us to do the dirty work what happens when their economies evolve too? We can hope for an automated solution to these things, but we're not there and need to look at the now.
great show, but i feel its somehow a bit superficial still, if you really speccialise in potitics you can go deep and really uncover the heart of it all.
but poeple neet to know the superficial to, and as far as i can tell a large portion of the american people hasn't much of a clue. so... keep it up
the uk is also going through a similar change but what i find scary about this is the rate this change is moving. if it keeps moving at this rate there wont be enough jobs for unskilled or basically educated people, which could be the majority of people.
Education has become more of a necessity more than ever but yet its not taken as seriously in certain countries and i dont mean just with kids. when people loose their jobs theres no option for skill development as it costs, so they're stuck
Great insight, in Ireland we have a somewhat similar situation.
Are economy is split between dairy&meat manufacturing vs. the highly sought-after ICT and Scientific development area.
Ireland has been the forefront of European ICT industry & up untill recently, we had one of the lowest wages for some of the highest educated workforce in the EU.. perfect modle....
BUT!:
Rural farming folk are now having sway over new Gov, and resulting on us ignoring what we're good at..
Corrupion, Lobbyism and greed is an international problem in a globalised world. Here in germany its been the dead coal industry and now nuclear power stations who dangers “Jobs“.
@Skinnyoompalumpa Well it never did exclusively. Faggot originally referred to a bundle of sticks in archaic English and was actually used as a unit of measure. The word itself comes from the Latin "Fasces" meaning the same thing (fasces is also root word for "Fascism" - something to irk racist with).
Faggot also refers to a British meat ball-like food product, as well a techneque both in welding and knitting.
When referring to a person, however, it always means gay.
Even scientists need laborers, even artists need a crew or someone to fetch and make the material they need, and even robots need people to fix them. Listen Bob I work hard for a living, I have to support my family since my parents store is going out of business. I never managed to save up for a proper education and am merely self taught in a lot of technical aspects. I hope I can get something a little more pleasant one day, but til then I’m an average work-a-day blue collar worker. (cont)
@Raditz86 I'm no alpha male Bobo. And pretty much everyone I work with is the same way, we're all just trying to get by. Your image of a laborer is about 50 years old there Bob. Get with the program. Some of us can't find jobs other places as the economy is crap. Some of those guys I work with are quite smart, they lost their jobs in other feilds and had to work for us. It's an unfortuante truth that not everyone can sit in an airconditioned room and get paid for 6 and a half mins of work
Aside from your very valid points, you seem to have an alarming disregard for a certain group of people. Not everyone has what it takes to become a scientist or engineer, and our broken limp educational system isn't helping. Some people need to be spot welders or assembly line workers just to sustain themselves, and to pass them off as unimportant is unfair and borderline intellectual elitism. These "Alpha Males" that you have a grudge against are, in fact, also people.
I think there is a total and complete disconnect from the primary issue in the world. Creating a financial trade market is weak because London is the primary currency trade post, Chicago's commodity market is declining, and more and more foreign financial markets are booming in the BRIC states.
The idea behind green jobs is whether or not it brings manufacturing it will bring industrial IPs to America, and simultaneously lower dependence on OPEC countries which will ease international policy.
America grows more than just corn. Sure it's mostly corn, but we also produce significant amounts of meat, oranges and grains. Probably more foods too, but those are the ones I actually know we produce a lot of.
BASIC POINT OF VIDEO: The country's changing. It'll be scary. It'll be unstoppable.
Letting those subsidies lapse has another benefit as well. the corn that is exported to other countries thanks to the imf or simply because of the price, will have an increased price or simply not be available, so these countries will have to support there own agriculture more fervently. or as the politician say JOBS.
I didn't hate this video as much as the last three, because most of what you said is pretty true.
My complaint now is you don't seem to care about other people, and enjoy wallowing in what you perceive as your keen intellect (when really everything you said I had heard from other sources already.) Your hatred for perceived "alpha males" (and how do YOU know where they would work?) is really obnoxious, stupid and unreasonable.
Grow up, get over yourself and stop crapping on total strangers.
the truth that no one whats to admit is that america has no "job creators"
movie bob made a smart move doing his own gameshow
if young americains whant a job they might have to band together and form a small bussinus or other means of creating their own work because no one is looking to give them jobs
flarescarab777 18 hours ago
Leave them to darwin I say
lotro4ever4000 1 week ago
turn the corn to biofuel sounds ok
Beastkingzetta 2 weeks ago in playlist THE ALL-STAR LIST
I love these liberal media reviewers! They fancy themselves intellectuals because they can go on five minute long tangents about how fair and unbiased they are. I love how this guy goes to such lengths to convince us he's objective, bad-mouthing the Democrats when it's obvious that he agrees 100% with them. Both the Dems and the Reps are lyin sons of bitches. Government has been, since time immemorial, pathologically incapable of telling the truth. Same thing goes for the media, btw...
90saredashit 3 months ago
@90saredashit So what you're saying is that the US CAN be a manufacturing/agricultural powerhouse once again?
MobiusCoin 1 week ago
/watch?v=0MFv-h4ZhLI
Like American Bob just watch this?
ApolloBobTom 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself Kill yourself
MarieCuts 3 months ago
more american bob please
TBman256 3 months ago 2
A new Great Leap Forward? Not a bad idea, especially when the last one led to famine, government corruption, and a devastated economy.
Not a bad idea, Bob.
ZZDaikun 4 months ago
is he ever going to do anymore of these?
viking977 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@viking977 ah remember the days when kansas was an economically relevant state
httm241 4 months ago
Let me just say "I like Bob!"... Really! I do! He has great insight and an amazing ability to analyze and summarize information compellingly.
But I do not agree with his conclusion here or where his basis for at least that portion of his argument comes from. The Brave New World is out there, but farming and things like "blue collar jobs" will not fade away when it gets here. In fact the future won't be very bright if they do, so don't encourage them to go quietly.
(continued...)
NAdducci09 5 months ago
nice !!!
nystmind 5 months ago
Ok, a few things here.
1. The idea about corn causing obesity is pure bs, obesity is caused by too many calories taken in and too few put out, whether those calories come from corn, rice, lettuce, brussel sprouts or whatever really doesn't matter.
2. Actually, the corn subsidies are actually not nessacary but, actually it's likely we'll stay a major agricultural producer, we're actually generally better at the developing world than a lot of farming, even without subsidies, while this only ...
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
@SmilingJack100 employs a small percentage of the country, we will likely remain a huge agricultural power, regardless of subsidies.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
@SmilingJack100 On your first point: he was saying that the everything gets pumped full of corn, which is one possible source of obesity as you said. It's just that corn has a high calorie content, so when stuff gets pumped full with it like a stripper with heroin it makes a lot of people fat. "High fructose CORN syrup" is a swear word in the nutrition community for a reason.
teniguafez 5 months ago
@teniguafez Actually, high frutose corn syrup is only a swear word in unscientific superstitious members of the nutritional community. High fructose corn syrup is no worse than normal sugar and the only reason people get fat that has anything to do with high fructose corn syrup is they eat too many overly sugary foods, it's the same as it would be with beet sugar, cane sugar, etc. I didn't say it was a source of obesisty, you did, corn really doesn't have that high of a calorie content.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
@teniguafez Actually, high frutose corn syrup is only a swear word in unscientific superstitious members of the nutritional community. High fructose corn syrup is no worse than normal sugar and the only reason people get fat that has anything to do with high fructose corn syrup is they eat too many overly sugary foods, it's the same as it would be with beet sugar, cane sugar, etc. I didn't say it was a source of obesisty, you did, corn really doesn't have that high of a calorie content.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
@SmilingJack100 Of course it's no worse than normal sugar. But just about everything sold in the US is packed to the gills with HFCS, not normal sugar. Corn just happens to be the culprit in this case. If beets were getting subsidized and everything was packed with beet sugar, he'd be talking about beets, not corn.
teniguafez 5 months ago
@teniguafez Well, first off, that's not even that true, sugary foods are filled to the gills with sugar and those are the foods people are eating, but even more importantly, people are just eating too MUCH food, which is the most important thing. Secondly, bob made it out to be that corn in and of itself is bad for you, so you're wrong on both counts really.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
@SmilingJack100 Look on everything sold in US supermarkets. 7 times out of 10 one of the first three ingredients will be HFCS. Even in ostensibly "healthy" foods like juice.
And Bob did no such thing. He said that everything we eat has too much corn in it, which is true. If beet sugar were being used, he'd say "Everything you eat has too much beet in it."
teniguafez 5 months ago
@teniguafez No, that's not what he was inferring, he was inferring there was something harmful about corn itself. And secondly, sugar being in things isn't honestly the worst thing as long as people practice portion control, which is really the issue in terms of american obesity no some sort of attempt to subsidize the corn industry.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
very nice
Nickster3526 5 months ago
"Republicans and Democrats are both lying their asses off." you could have just said that. All politicians in all parties just spew shit.
NinjaRacoonDelta2 5 months ago
@NinjaRacoonDelta2 No, stop drawing false equivilances, period.
SmilingJack100 5 months ago
great video bob. At times I grow tired of the responses with the "Americans are spending less and saving more" For some reason that is a problem.
Akumatrunigga 5 months ago
well spoken
XvaleckX 5 months ago
But it is *affected and not effected. Grammar Nazi, reporting in.
TheThrobbingParson 5 months ago in playlist More videos from moviebob
This is the best video you've ever made, Bob.
TheThrobbingParson 5 months ago in playlist More videos from moviebob
The real movement of people is to the South not the coast. I generally like this show but you've really ignored the most important migration of people to the Southwest and South not really the coast per say. In fact California has been losing massive numbers of people. Yes the Southeast has coast but Altanta, Vegas, Dallas, El Paso, Phoenix etc aren't on the coast. The transition of this country is away from the Rust Belt but it's also from many coastal regions all to the Sunbelt.
jmoney13000 5 months ago
You should make more American Bobs. These are awesome
gammazuma 5 months ago
The Zeitgeist Movement has been talking about this for quite some time now
/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w
ZialusPT 6 months ago
Holy shit this is got to be one of the few youtube political rants that makes Americans sound intelligant lol.... keep it up Bob and I might even stop making fun of Americans one day!
Psycholosophere 6 months ago
....Wow. Bob, keep doing what you're doing. This is brilliance, and the fact that so many simply can't see it is mind numbing.
thirion1850 6 months ago
Hey Bob hope you won't stop making thease episodes they are really intresting even to me (I am not american) hope that you make more, although I know you work alot with the Escapist and Screwattack, but this is really good.
TheMorphBall 6 months ago
I still can't wrap my head around how growing you're own food is bad. people are fat because they don't eat right/do physical activity; not because we grow a lot of corn. and wouldn't we be saving money for all the things made by US instead of having to import? just because you can rant doesn't mean you should. If you aren't an expert then you're misleading sheeple with you're misplaced anger and not fully informed opinions.
GeneralRemy 7 months ago
@GeneralRemy i couldn't agree with you more.
fatbob316 6 months ago
@GeneralRemy
I think his point wasn't that growing your own food is bad, but that subsidizing an industry that is more and more obsolete in the American economy leads to over-production as the companies will only produce what is safe to invest in. And since corn is one of the few agricultural products that the USA can still be slightly competitive in the majority of the industry makes that. Which leads to too much availability, lowers prices, corn in everything and thus, fat people.
hammerboi87 6 months ago
@GeneralRemy because it is a cycle...as a country develops it goes through periods...our period of farming and manufacturing is over and needs to be taken over by developing nations....see CHINA....we on the other hand need to stop holding onto these and move toward hi tech industry if we are going to make it....same thing happened to britain...same thing happened to germany...same thing happened to japan....same thing is happening to us...and if we fight it we will lose
trexrawrrawrrawr 6 months ago
I hate this idea that repealing the minimum wage will create more jobs not just for the reason Bob gave but also because I don't see why they would give jobs to more people when they could just make them work insane hours. Now I know what you're thinking; "Then no one would want to work for them". I agree. However they won't have much of a choice if almost all of the big corporations are doing this and I have a feeling this is an idea that will become REALLY popular with big business men.
swordhunter12 7 months ago
while i like your series, you do show your bias a bit too much, which isnt really a bad thing, but makes me roll my eyes a little
jegsimmonsproduction 7 months ago
Wow, I'm really surprised. I've never agreed with your opinion on movies, and I consider you to be incredibly blinded by nostalgia in your criticisms of the games industry, but you're pretty much exactly in-line with me on politics. Go figure.
getzoncrack 7 months ago 34
@getzoncrack What have you disagreed with him on in terms of movies?
Markunator 5 months ago
@getzoncrack
Wow, it's almost as if people have different opinions on different topics! Go figure.
supaflyjohnson 3 months ago
You'll never see meaningful growth in any facet of life. The country is run by the finance-oligarchs of Wall Street, who, like any imperial rulers, employ zero-growth policies. To progress means for people who are not them to have wealth, which they can't have.
They'll maintain this control even if it means collapsing the world economy, engulfing the world in regional wars fed into larger ones, and turning America into a brutal police state where every group is labeled "terrorist."
GXEntertainment 7 months ago
If America want's to survive all they have to do is look NORTH to see the perfect example of how to do so.
misterprickly 7 months ago 32
@misterprickly
Oh, yes, we must look to those who have a ridiculous surplus of apostrophes.
EmergeAzureThunder 7 months ago
@EmergeAzureThunder We paid for'em and by-golly we're gonna use'em!
misterprickly 7 months ago
@misterprickly umm, no, I am canadian as well and really, as long as Harper is in office we are heading down the same path as the united states. I agree that, if the united states pulls it's head out of it's lase fair ecomomic politicised bottom and embraced the future they really would be worthy of "greatest country on earth" saddly, it's not happening. Too bad.
leosign225 6 months ago
@misterprickly
I don't mean to drill hols in my own bout but things might be better up hear then they are.
cacman83 6 months ago
@cacman83
IDK how to reply to that BUT I'll try. -_-
I do believe that Canada has it waaaay better than America BUT lets not forget the price we ALL paid to get it that way AND the hard work/sacrifice that's to come.
It also doesn't help to have a person like Harper on the Canadian throne (he's like the love-child of Mike Harris and W) and the current political turmoil.
BTW... It's holes, boat and here!
misterprickly 6 months ago
Comment removed
httm241 4 months ago
@misterprickly perfect? far from it
MrChingchongdingdong 1 month ago
Comment removed
TheGamingBritShow 7 months ago
Smart man this guy is
bustapunk101 7 months ago
Interesting take. Can't say I don't see a lot of good points there. I just sort of wish there was something for the middle of the country to be important at. The east coast, west coast, and the south all have purposes right now that probably aren't going away any time soon. But if the theory presented here is correct (and it probably is) there won't be anything for the middle of the country to do. Maybe if some new type of industry headquartered there after farming shrinks?
Frankfurter4444 7 months ago
@Frankfurter4444 there is Google opens a bunch of data farms in Iowa and Im sure other companies have down the same in other parts of the country we just need to teach more computer centric skills
SgtKaneGunlock 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
This is common sense for you.
erik4727 7 months ago
Slight problem: Democracy
You point out how this now focuses power along the coastal states. The thing is the more sparsely populated, central "Heartland" states mean as much as any other state. In other words: So 800 thousand voters of South Dakota are as important as the 37 million(!) voters of California. One state can swing a presidential election.
Democracy ain't perfect, but this could be better.
Treblaine 7 months ago
In the first 60 seconds you accuse a MASSIVE conspiracy to sabotage the economy just to get a President out of office.
Reeeeeeally?
I'm pretty sure even the majority of corporations are NOT going to screw over 4 years of profits for such a vague political influence, you think every employee interview where they reject a qualified and valued applicant they chuckle to themselves "Ha Ha! Take that, Obama!"?!?!?
Treblaine 7 months ago
@Treblaine yeah they don't NEED to sacrifice 4 years of profits to get a president out of office they can still make money and pay off politicians at the same time.
Winglezz367 7 months ago
@Winglezz367 I'm not going to deny that business have undue influence (lobbying, and employment bribery) but Bob's essential argument is that most businesses are deliberately hurting themselves to hurt Obama's administration.
And that's bollocks.
Treblaine 7 months ago
@Treblaine how exactly are they hurting themselves? from my point of view their management is still making more money a year than most Americans do in a lifetime. small businesses are one thing but the big guys don't seem to be hurting for profits.
Winglezz367 7 months ago
@Winglezz367 All capitalists care about is money. Losing profits is the ONLY way they can be hurt.
Managers don't run make decisions, they follow orders. It is the executive who stipulate and fall in profits directly hit their riches.
There are other reasons (including selfish business reasons) for why unemployment remains so high. But self-sabotage to ruin presidency is NOT one of them.
Treblaine 7 months ago
If you going to talk about jobs. Then you should make a video talking education system use in America, and what, you think, should be done about.
Your 'future' well never happen, if the 'furture' of America is left stupid.
J1P2K 7 months ago
All right, we're chasing metaphysical rabbits here, although, if your interested in this type of thing (and anime), check out my web show! But, I'm done bogging down this comment section with off topic replies.
Philosotaku 7 months ago
Nice one Bob, it's glad to see someone looking at both views and calling both sides out for the bullshit. Please keep doing this series along with your others!
brocxboisterous 7 months ago
More videos theses are really informative.
exosfear512 7 months ago
Watching this reminds me of transhumanism to some degree; notably that humans won't have to do any physical work themselves due to 'robots'.
The real question now lies to how long it will take for people to shift into more productive fields; such as the ones mentioned by Bob. Since the kids of farmers/manufacturers are probably quite aware of the situation and so few people will actively pursue a way into that job, and it's not like it's the dream job of people outside the job either.
ZexionSephiroth 7 months ago
I suppose the real question at the end of this is whether we need to "go there;" whether we need to be at the forefront of this great leap forward. If we want to continue to be a true superpower then yes, but for a lot of the people who live in the supposedly outdated "heartland," I would guess their culture etc. is more important. Whether America goes back to just being its own place (pre-WWII America) or evolves as Bob suggests, I don't think either future is really a bad one.
samwantstobattle 7 months ago
I understand your point, but fail to agree with you completely. Hollowing out the country by moving everyone to the coast. Isn't really gunna be that good of a thing. We then would have this giant waste land in the center of America and over crowding and unreasonable costs of living on the coast. You think the coast is that great? In cali you have to get a lisence to work fast food. Thats right you have to get a license so people can crap on your day.
eismatt 7 months ago
HERE LIES MOVIE BOB:
A once great guy who gave us an idea of philosophy and having us think for ourselve, Then he injected his opinion into everything.
R.I.P.
iamironpenguin 7 months ago
@iamironpenguin Um... Hasn't he ALWAYS injected his opinion into everything? He never asks you to believe what he says, just to get people thinking more. I'd say this is no different.
Rubberman202 7 months ago
@Rubberman202 watch some of his TGO episodes again, I mean usually what he gives as info is arguably opinion, its less his opinion there, and if it is opinion its less CONCENTRATED, It was not raw TGO opinion, it was more like, giving you an idea to think about yourself, which is arguably opinion, but now he is giving you that idea, and shoving down how he wants you to think about it, it was kinda opinion, but less concentrated
iamironpenguin 7 months ago
2:51
The corn subsidies are also cause of ethanol.
Smael64 7 months ago
You're American Bob shows come off as really... angry.
Rubberman202 7 months ago
We didn't have jobs under Bush, either. Presidents really don't have as big an impact on the economy as we believe or want them to. They can raise or lower taxes and their fed chairman controls the interest rate. That's it. Dollars they spend doesn't create more dollars and it's money they will into existence. Even though there's the occasional massive bail out (under Bush and Obama), it only saves certain companies, not industries. Would be nice if they could make a difference, though.
yoda87960 7 months ago
I hate to say it, but Bob's right. It use to by that 50% of Americans worked on farms. Now it's only 2%, and most of that 2% is over the age of 60.
J1P2K 7 months ago
Wow. That's the first AmericanBob where it's really come together into a well executed whole.
On his topic, I agree with most of it but will add the hard truth he's still kinda overlooked even here where it's topically relevant: How much total do the top tiers of society (those with 6+ figure yearly incomes) actually put back into the consumption cycle to actually allow for jobs to be created? After all, all jobs are reliant on the perpetuated free flow of money through the system.
chiblast100x 7 months ago
Oh, a leftard who's watched food inc. I will give great credence to the message in this internet video, for sure.
jamminjago 7 months ago
I'm ashamed to say that we here in the UK have similar problems.
Industry has all but gone in the last 30 years, as had our previous level of agriculture.
APoliticians keep trying to bolster their influence by trying to ocnvince people that they can bring those sectors back despite there being no chance in hell of that happening.
We are a service industry now, much like your country.
At least in the States you have the potential for industry with your oil supplies and stuff. Us? Nothing.
TheJboy88 7 months ago
I really shouldn't get into this...but whatev.
- With regards to the 'alpha male' bullshit Bob, allow me to quote Chris Titus: Why don't you climb down off the cross, use the wood to build a bridge and get the hell over it!
- I saw nothing here that suggested any sort of research of any kind, making this just another impotent political rant based purely on opinion like so many others. He speaks with authority. Doesn't mean he has it.
- Regarding the future though, I think he's...kinda right.
Narratorway 7 months ago
@Narratorway "I saw nothing here that suggested any sort of research of any kind, making this just another impotent political rant based purely on opinion like so many others. He speaks with authority. Doesn't mean he has it."
...
Since when has Bob claimed that this wasn't the case?
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia He hasn't so far as I know and I never claimed otherwise.
Narratorway 7 months ago
So you want to stamp out that last 1% of americans that still make food huh?
We'll all become artists and scientists and use poems as currency, and sing songs as we wait for the slow boat from China to bring us parts to fix the robots that run all the factory farms.
Endocrom 7 months ago
you make me sad
weyandt123 7 months ago
But Bob! Plato said that Justice is every person doing what they are meant to do, in the confines of a society! If what I'm meant ot do is farm, then isn't it unjust for me to do ANYTHING else?
300 Billion a year is a small price to pay for JUSTICE! Right?
Philosotaku 7 months ago
@Philosotaku Justice is subjective, and there's a flaw in your logic. Asking other people to make accommodations just so that you can do what you think you're meant to do just makes you look conceited. Why should they have to pay so that one person can do what they want? Because Plato, who isn't even still alive, thought it should be that way? You have to think of the big picture, life isn't fair and that means some people have to be left behind for the greater good. It's sad, but true.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia While I thought my sarcasm was clear enough, guess not, anyway, your opening statement negated everything you said afterward, if Justice is subjective, your opinion of Justice is irrelevant.
To be serious for a moment, I like to think of Justice as a solid concept, with blacks and whites, and YOU SHALL NOT PASS', it seems like everything becomes a little to cartoony if we leave it all up to interpretation.
Philosotaku 7 months ago
@Philosotaku I considered sarcasm when I first read your comment, but sarcasm is not really obvious when you're in youtube comments. Also, you misinterpreted my comment. I was not stating my opinion of justice, I was pointing out the flaw in the argument you made.
"the quality of being just; righteousness, equitableness, or moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause."
Justice varies from culture to culture and so is subjective.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia No worries, text is hard to innterperate.
Anyway, I'm going ot say this and that'll be the end of it, justice is objective, period, if it's not, we have to accept that Hitler's genocide wasn't a villian, we have to think of slavery as alright also, because if justice is truely subjective, than those acts are excusable, as only being SUBJECTIVELY wrong.
Justice is objective, no matter how you slice it, there are some acts that are always wrong, no matter what.
Philosotaku 7 months ago
@Philosotaku I really hate to do this, but nothing is objective if you get right down to it. Technically, this could all be a dream and everything you ever learned could be wrong. Which also means that the facts in this universe could be a fabrication and so everything is based on your personal interpretation of the dream. You could even not exist at all, it seems illogical but that logic is also subjective since logic is based on inference and reasoning which varies from person to person.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia "I" really hate to do this, but your wrong again:
I can prove that a square exists solely on the fact that we have a concept of a square. It has no physical qualities, and in fact only exists in geometrical principle. It doesn't matter if all the world is a dream, no matter how deluded you are, our concept of a 4 sided object necessitates it's existence. That in mind, what else can we prove exists? I can prove "I" exist, some would argue God, and broad concepts, such as Justice.
Philosotaku 7 months ago
@Philosotaku I'm not deluded, I don't believe that this is all a dream, but it's true that it's possible. And by dream I really just mean that it's possible nothing you see, hear, feel, taste, and smell are real. As for proving you exist, most people would say that you exist because empty space cannot think, but there's a problem there. Empty space cannot think in the rules of our universe, but those same rules could also not exist at all. I don't believe this is the case though.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
"Because Plato, who isn't even still alive, thought it should be that way?"
Genetic fallacy.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Not really a genetic fallacy since I didn't suggest a conclusion based on Plato not being alive. My conclusion was based on the 2 sentences before the one you quoted.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
You're suggesting that just because Plato is dead that his expertise doesn't matter, which is an unacceptable premise. Also, if you're using "justice" as a synonym for morality, then you're dead-wrong.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl More of that people need to understand that his expertise is not as applicable to modern day things, he lived in a different society with different views, different technology, a different culture, and in different times. When I noted that he isn't alive I was referencing these facts but couldn't do more than just imply due to the character limitation.
"...moral rightness: to uphold the justice of a cause"
Definition of justice from an online dictionary.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pacmanphobia
"that his expertise is not as applicable to modern day things, he lived in a different society with different views, different technology, a different culture, and in different times. "
Have you read Plato? The problems of Athens are extraordinarily similar to the problems of today. In fact, the mantra of political theory is "All Political Theory is a footnote on Plato." Just because someone wrote in a differing time period doesn't mean they aren't qualified to discuss...
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
...problems of today. If that were the case, these thinkers would be forgotten and art like Shakespeare would not be able to produce emotional reactions due to their ontic context. Moreover, ethics are not relative and certainly not relative to culture. Example
If cultural relativism is true, then the holocaust is justified.
The holocaust is not justified.
Therefore, moral relativism is not true.
Therefore, morality is objective and is not limited by culture.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Hitler believed that the Jews were to blame for Germany's poverty and economic struggles at the time and so he believed that he was justified in what he did to the Jews. Nazi Germany thought it was justified, the USA did not; since these two disagree on whether the holocaust is justified or not then it's relative to which country you're in.
"the body of moral principles or values governing or distinctive of a particular culture or group"
#1 definition of ethic. Try googling ethics.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
"Nazi Germany thought it was justified, the USA did not; since these two disagree on whether the holocaust is justified or not then it's relative to which country you're in." This proves nothing. Just because a disagreement is had, doesn't mean that the nature of morality is subjective. What the implications of what you're saying is that because Germany believed that the holocaust is morally laudible, that it is. There is no way of avoiding that; that's what cultural relativism is
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Moreover, I have no idea what you are saying by defining ethics. If you are trying to prove their subjectivity with dictionary. com, I'm afraid you're at a loss as The Internet Encylopedia of Philosophy defines ethics as: "The field of ethics (or moral philosophy) involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong behavior. "
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Also, Santa Clara University states that ethics are "not the same as doing "whatever society accepts." In any society, most people accept standards that are, in fact, ethical." They go on to say that, "ethics refers to well-founded standards of right and wrong that prescribe what humans ought to do, usually in terms of rights, obligations, benefits to society, fairness, or specific virtues."
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Humans are incapable of objective thought. Right and wrong are subjective, if ethics are based on right and wrong then they are based on something subjective and so cannot be objective. In order to be subjective something must be independent of personal experience, perception, and emotion. Since ethics are a combination of these of societies as a whole, ethics are close to objective, but they aren't.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia If humans aren't capable of objective thought, then math and logic are impossible. Math and logic are not impossible. Therefore, humans are capable of objective thought. And ethics are independent of personal experience, perception, and emotion as they are known intuitively and are functions of reason. To believe that culture dictates morality is to believe in a majoritarian conception of morality in which individual choice doesn't matter.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Math is not objective, any math you do is based on your perception and interpretation of rules. If I told you 2+2=5 you would say I'm wrong. Why would you say that? Because you were taught 2+2=4 by a teacher who said it to you. But what if they didn't say that and you were hallucinating? Logic isn't objective either since logic is based on inference and reasoning both of which are subjective since they vary from person to person. Math is really close, but isn't quite objective.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia "Why would you say that? Because you were taught 2+2=4 by a teacher who said it to you. "
No. because 2+2=4 is always true. It is a tautology. Numbers exist on the cartesian plot and two spaces to the right of 2 is always 4. Also, if I am hallucinating, then math is still always true. This is something known since Descartes and even before that with Plato.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
"Logic isn't objective either since logic is based on inference and reasoning both of which are subjective since they vary from person to person. Math is really close, but isn't quite objective."
Logic is always certain as well and is based on objectivity and deduction. If P then P, P, therefore P is always true. There is simply no way around this. Also, if everything is subjective like you say it is, then so is the statement that everything is subjective. Therefore, we can't know even that.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Pretty much on the everything is subjective topic, that's why I started the comment with I really hate to do this since the argument is obnoxious since it's unbeatable.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@pacmanphobia
"since the argument is obnoxious since it's unbeatable." You still haven't attempted to solve the self-refuting nature of this claim. If everything is subjective, then the claim "everything is subjective" is also subjective. Therefore, we can't know anything.
You're argument doesn't work. Deal with it.
I know it because "self-refutation" matters.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
*your
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Therefore, your hypothesis (everything is subjective) is untenable because it is self-refuting. If everything is subjective and objectivity is the criteria of knowledge, then we can know nothing. If we know nothing, why would we even bother trying to do philosophy? How is Moviebob any more or less correct than anyone else?
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl That's why I started by saying "I really hate to do this" since proving the hypothesis wrong is impossible, the hypothesis is my last resort for when I'm tired of arguing and still think the person I'm arguing with is wrong. It's an out.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Proving anything is impossible if all knowledge is subjective. Therefore, discourse is impossible.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl Yep, it's not just self contradictory it's omni-contradictory which is why I use it as a way out and despise having to use it.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
You just admitted that the Law of Non-Contradiction exists. The law of non-contradiction is tautological. Therefore, objective knowledge exists.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl So you're going to try and disprove the omni-contradictory hypothesis? Good luck with that, many have tried before you. Remember that the hypothesis also contradicts the Law of Non-Contradiction and tautology so you can't use those in this context.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
If something contradicts the law of Non-Contradiction, it's a contradiction and therefore a bad argument. There's nothing to disprove. Your argument has refuted itself; my work is done.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl My argument also refuted you so my work is done as well. :)
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Show me where this happened because "self-refuting" only means that you refute yourself.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl The point of the omni-contradiction hypothesis is not that nothing is true, the point is that we can't really know for sure that anything is true. And since you were trying to prove for sure that something objective exists, the omni-contradiction contradicts you and you had no way to remove this contradiction. In other words, it refuted you.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
It contradicted you. If everything is subjective then that is subjective too. If it's subjective, then how do you know if it's true? Therefore it's self-refuting.
Also, a google search of "omni-contradiction" hypothesis yields no results and I cannot meet anyone who studies philosophy who accepts the truth of your hypothesis. Then again, most people in philosophy don't accept self-refuting arguments. Mainly because they're self-refuting.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Also, if the nature of this argument is inductive and is attempting to work as a theory, it lacks falsifiability and can be thrown out the window on those grounds also.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl I do agree that it's stupid and lacks falsifiability, but you can't deny the truth behind the hypothesis that we can't really know anything for sure. We can't know anything for sure, a thousand years ago it was fact that the world was flat and the earth was the center of the universe. Even today there are still many things we can't explain like dark flow. Even if the facts in our universe are true you still see things through your own perception and can't fully understand things.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia You're confusing induction and deduction. Yes, we can know things and yes, math, logic, and laws of physics are objective and known a priori. Anything beyond that is known through probability. If this is your idea of "winning" an argument: leveling all knowledge, then you need to find a better solution. There is literally no serious philosopher who would use a self-refuting argument as a means in order to "win." It doesn't make any sense.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Also, we don't know if the Earth is round or flat. However, it is highly probably that it is round and it is the best explanation we have, so it's round. Done. That's how induction works. You don't need a "Omni-contradictory hypothesis," (which I still haven't seen an extraneous explanation of) to know things. And just because a culture believes something, doesn't make it true.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl "And just because a culture believes something, doesn't make it true."
...
I never said that was the case. In fact that was why I said ethics are subjective so I think you misunderstood what I meant. God dammit I think we actually have agreed the entire time but kept misunderstanding each other.
When I said math is subjective I was talking about the math you do in your mind since it's affected by what you personally were told, not math the concept. Same with logic and laws.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@pacmanphobia
Ethics aren't subjective and your entire argument is thrust with the "cultural subjectivity" argument, which is disingenuous at best. Math is also not subjective. The answer to 2 + 2 is always 4. All bachelors are unmarried. All bodies take up weight. If these are negated, a contradiction emerges. These are basic facts. Tautologies are always true. End of story.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl I agree with almost everything you've said, read the message I sent you to see why.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
@KommisarKowl In the 3rd sentence I meant to say objective, not subjective.
pacmanphobia 7 months ago
another week, another great commentary. Great stuff Bob.
y2j3r3my 7 months ago
Hey Bob, these videos are really entertaining and thought provoking even when I sometimes don't agree with you. Keep up the good work!
tiatmod 7 months ago
@tiatmod
There is NOTHING this intelligent that I've heard being said on TV or other media. Likewise, even if I don't entirely agree, which is rare, this is all very insightful and forward thinking, especially from a non-American perspective. I concur, keep this up Bob!
drakencorin 7 months ago
Also, Bob considers himself an "intellectual"
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
>Corporations hate Obama
That's why Goldman Sachs was his top contributor and why the bailouts and stimulus plan were the biggest amount of corporatism America has seen since the New Deal. Moreover, regulations prop companies up and allow corporations to exist.
Also, I love the fact that it's only the Republicans that are in bed with Big Business. Obama didn't subsidize McDonalds.
KommisarKowl 7 months ago
The Venus Project.
Kestral03 7 months ago
The other side of this argument is that we need those agricultural/manufacturing jobs to support the more intellectual pursuits and if the government doesn't support them they'll disappear and all those intellectuals will starve naked and homeless. And while, yes, we can find those less fortunate than us to do the dirty work what happens when their economies evolve too? We can hope for an automated solution to these things, but we're not there and need to look at the now.
cymonsgames 7 months ago
@Fridathewesternllama
He'd be too busy going after those "jocks" who bullied him to institute real reform.
Skinnyoompalumpa 7 months ago
great show, but i feel its somehow a bit superficial still, if you really speccialise in potitics you can go deep and really uncover the heart of it all.
but poeple neet to know the superficial to, and as far as i can tell a large portion of the american people hasn't much of a clue. so... keep it up
BTW, did anyone chek out Adam Curtis yet?
ptwob 7 months ago
you're very insightful
wolfjak 7 months ago
Keep the American Bob commentaries comming, you will undoubtably have endless meterial to work with.
P.S.
Can you do a game overthinker on the recent Supreme Court Ruling on Violence in Videogames. I am sure you could rant a great deal on that subject.
SeaTac411 7 months ago
the uk is also going through a similar change but what i find scary about this is the rate this change is moving. if it keeps moving at this rate there wont be enough jobs for unskilled or basically educated people, which could be the majority of people.
Education has become more of a necessity more than ever but yet its not taken as seriously in certain countries and i dont mean just with kids. when people loose their jobs theres no option for skill development as it costs, so they're stuck
hoptop77 7 months ago
Dear Bob,
You are awesome!
Thank you.
GheoBlackPlum 7 months ago
Great insight, in Ireland we have a somewhat similar situation.
Are economy is split between dairy&meat manufacturing vs. the highly sought-after ICT and Scientific development area.
Ireland has been the forefront of European ICT industry & up untill recently, we had one of the lowest wages for some of the highest educated workforce in the EU.. perfect modle....
BUT!:
Rural farming folk are now having sway over new Gov, and resulting on us ignoring what we're good at..
Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
conorthehippyful 7 months ago
Stunningly insightful Bob, you've got my support
thebattleforX9 7 months ago
Wow, uh... last I heard (from FAUX NOESS!!!1!) those in the upper income range tend to vote for democrats.
QUINTIX256 7 months ago
Corrupion, Lobbyism and greed is an international problem in a globalised world. Here in germany its been the dead coal industry and now nuclear power stations who dangers “Jobs“.
Bosperus 7 months ago
Sorry Bob, but americans will never choose to face the truth about anything. People hate truth. So we're just fucked, and thats the end of it
ADeadlierSnake 7 months ago
exposure needed
butter1011 7 months ago
"The future could be a great place, if we have the guts to go there"
*applause*
secretworldleader 7 months ago 2
@Fridathewesternllama
Rather her than a permavirgin faggot who worships Japan. Hell I'd rather ANYONE than tubby here
Skinnyoompalumpa 7 months ago 2
@Skinnyoompalumpa How can you be a faggot and a virgin?
BijiSan 7 months ago
@BijiSan
"Faggot" doesn't mean gay person anymore buddy.
Skinnyoompalumpa 7 months ago
@Skinnyoompalumpa Well it never did exclusively. Faggot originally referred to a bundle of sticks in archaic English and was actually used as a unit of measure. The word itself comes from the Latin "Fasces" meaning the same thing (fasces is also root word for "Fascism" - something to irk racist with).
Faggot also refers to a British meat ball-like food product, as well a techneque both in welding and knitting.
When referring to a person, however, it always means gay.
OlaftheFlashy 7 months ago
Even scientists need laborers, even artists need a crew or someone to fetch and make the material they need, and even robots need people to fix them. Listen Bob I work hard for a living, I have to support my family since my parents store is going out of business. I never managed to save up for a proper education and am merely self taught in a lot of technical aspects. I hope I can get something a little more pleasant one day, but til then I’m an average work-a-day blue collar worker. (cont)
Raditz86 7 months ago 2
@Raditz86 I'm no alpha male Bobo. And pretty much everyone I work with is the same way, we're all just trying to get by. Your image of a laborer is about 50 years old there Bob. Get with the program. Some of us can't find jobs other places as the economy is crap. Some of those guys I work with are quite smart, they lost their jobs in other feilds and had to work for us. It's an unfortuante truth that not everyone can sit in an airconditioned room and get paid for 6 and a half mins of work
Raditz86 7 months ago
Aside from your very valid points, you seem to have an alarming disregard for a certain group of people. Not everyone has what it takes to become a scientist or engineer, and our broken limp educational system isn't helping. Some people need to be spot welders or assembly line workers just to sustain themselves, and to pass them off as unimportant is unfair and borderline intellectual elitism. These "Alpha Males" that you have a grudge against are, in fact, also people.
voidmaster45 7 months ago
@voidmaster45
I agree with your points but at the same time perhaps Bobis using a dark thought he had just to make his point.
or even poke fun at what a big dork he know he is.
InspectorKen88 7 months ago
I think there is a total and complete disconnect from the primary issue in the world. Creating a financial trade market is weak because London is the primary currency trade post, Chicago's commodity market is declining, and more and more foreign financial markets are booming in the BRIC states.
The idea behind green jobs is whether or not it brings manufacturing it will bring industrial IPs to America, and simultaneously lower dependence on OPEC countries which will ease international policy.
BHSNgamer 7 months ago
America grows more than just corn. Sure it's mostly corn, but we also produce significant amounts of meat, oranges and grains. Probably more foods too, but those are the ones I actually know we produce a lot of.
BASIC POINT OF VIDEO: The country's changing. It'll be scary. It'll be unstoppable.
Nickompoop 7 months ago
Letting those subsidies lapse has another benefit as well. the corn that is exported to other countries thanks to the imf or simply because of the price, will have an increased price or simply not be available, so these countries will have to support there own agriculture more fervently. or as the politician say JOBS.
TheCrimsonLion 7 months ago
I didn't hate this video as much as the last three, because most of what you said is pretty true.
My complaint now is you don't seem to care about other people, and enjoy wallowing in what you perceive as your keen intellect (when really everything you said I had heard from other sources already.) Your hatred for perceived "alpha males" (and how do YOU know where they would work?) is really obnoxious, stupid and unreasonable.
Grow up, get over yourself and stop crapping on total strangers.
TheSamuraiGoomba 7 months ago