People generally don't gauge their own happiness by comparisons with past centuries. They gauge their happiness by comparisons with their living peers.
Houses being “cheap” in the post-war era was subsidized by the GI Bill, and since then the price is going up primarily due to subsidizing by the FHA. In that respect you could say housing costs are socialized. In my own opinion, very recent increases are due to speculation.
I totally buy the enlightenment ideal and the fact that we are doing better overral. My problem is that I think we get to a point where comparisons against peers dominate objective comfort, and at this point it's much harder to evolve. Total equality would be the obvious step forward, but it's pretty hard to think of it as possible. I guess we would need to fully manipulate genes as a starting point.
Take note on how all this progress and human happiness was/is OPPOSED by religion. The Enlightenment was opposed tooth and nail by the church. Had it not happened (had the church won...) we'd be living in Christian Taliban-land now. D.A., J.D. NYC
It's comments like this that make me disengage from all forms debate on the internet : spontaneous, insubstantial, ego-driven, and pointless. What reaction exactly do you expect your statement to induce? Come on man, you can do better than this.
@@its_eis If you discount either the validity or the relevance of the admittedly very generalized observation you are free to offer counter-arguments. Disengagement is also an option.
By definition, populism refers to movements from the populous, so of course it’s the exactly correct use of the word. You have to remember he’s first a linguist.
@@chemquests So when exactly does popular support count as "from the populous" and where exactly do movement with popular support come from if not the populus?
@@hooligan9794 just using the dictionary definition as a starting point www.dictionary.com/browse/populism it’s about who’s interests are being represented, the elite or the common people. On some issues there may not be a clean division, but frequently there are economic issues where opinions differ along these categories. The presumption in your initial comment seemed to question whether populist ideas are inherently anti-establishment; it seems in cases where common sentiment supports established policy we tend not to bother with the distinction of calling it a populist policy. Perhaps the term only applies when the conflict exists.
i wanna be like a dolphin or something or maybe a killer whale or maybe a killer whale with a gun on each side which fire dolphins whose mouths are filled with bees so whenever it barks it shoots bees
OH MY GOD!! He tries to start from "so-called" first principles and makes a theory of how the work should operated. Don't fall for this witch doctor: there have been many before him and many more will follow. He is not worth listening to.
Popular left wing leaders are just popular left wing leaders. Popular right wing leaders are populist leaders. I think Steven's political biases are showing.
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/9miVG2xT5jY/mqdefault.jpg)
People generally don't gauge their own happiness by comparisons with past centuries. They gauge their happiness by comparisons with their living peers.
@ 32:18 he discusses pollutants climate impact - decreased greatly.
Talk about the cost of housing compared to earlier centuries.
Houses being “cheap” in the post-war era was subsidized by the GI Bill, and since then the price is going up primarily due to subsidizing by the FHA. In that respect you could say housing costs are socialized. In my own opinion, very recent increases are due to speculation.
How would graphs look like in the domains of Number of singles or irrationality?
I totally buy the enlightenment ideal and the fact that we are doing better overral.
My problem is that I think we get to a point where comparisons against peers dominate objective comfort, and at this point it's much harder to evolve.
Total equality would be the obvious step forward, but it's pretty hard to think of it as possible. I guess we would need to fully manipulate genes as a starting point.
Take note on how all this progress and human happiness was/is OPPOSED by religion. The Enlightenment was opposed tooth and nail by the church. Had it not happened (had the church won...) we'd be living in Christian Taliban-land now. D.A., J.D. NYC
Wait a second, are you saying that modern western values and laws are not entirely thanks to Christianity? (I hear that a lot these days)
Some portion of any population will always prefer Savonarolan cults to the possibilities offered by progress.
It's comments like this that make me disengage from all forms debate on the internet : spontaneous, insubstantial, ego-driven, and pointless. What reaction exactly do you expect your statement to induce?
Come on man, you can do better than this.
@@its_eis If you discount either the validity or the relevance of the admittedly very generalized observation you are free to offer counter-arguments. Disengagement is also an option.
@@its_eis C R I N G E
@@its_eis same. It's empty headed, false-dichotomy bullshit
explicit commitment
I love how any movement that isn't establishment is "populism".
Kkkk
@@jerniceoliveira6113 bbbb
By definition, populism refers to movements from the populous, so of course it’s the exactly correct use of the word. You have to remember he’s first a linguist.
@@chemquests So when exactly does popular support count as "from the populous" and where exactly do movement with popular support come from if not the populus?
@@hooligan9794 just using the dictionary definition as a starting point www.dictionary.com/browse/populism it’s about who’s interests are being represented, the elite or the common people. On some issues there may not be a clean division, but frequently there are economic issues where opinions differ along these categories. The presumption in your initial comment seemed to question whether populist ideas are inherently anti-establishment; it seems in cases where common sentiment supports established policy we tend not to bother with the distinction of calling it a populist policy. Perhaps the term only applies when the conflict exists.
51:16 :) Lol
ugh i want to be god of this world.
i wanna be like a dolphin or something or maybe a killer whale or maybe a killer whale with a gun on each side which fire dolphins whose mouths are filled with bees so whenever it barks it shoots bees
If the host could stop moaning into his mic, that’d be great.
OH MY GOD!! He tries to start from "so-called" first principles and makes a theory of how the work should operated. Don't fall for this witch doctor: there have been many before him and many more will follow. He is not worth listening to.
Popular left wing leaders are just popular left wing leaders. Popular right wing leaders are populist leaders.
I think Steven's political biases are showing.
Probably but they’re both populist
@@chemquests The word populist essentially has no useful meaning