68% OF People Who Raid In WoW Are Stupid

Ya know why, it's because he is obviously a hardcore raiding douchebag.  "OH NOES TEH CAZUALZ IS GETTIN MI EPICZ!!!!" fuck off buddy I don't see you designing the game or contributing anything to it.  Plus also he then links raid performance to real life appliacations, which is false cause any dumb monkey hooked into a computer can raid given enough time, obviously people have different priorities than this dumb piece of shit.  God I hate people who make these kinds of forum posts.

One thing that I have noticed:  Those who are most vigorous in their claims of others stupidity are those who are most likely to not be horribly intelligent.  For example:  He uses the term M&S, but doesn't define it until the end.  When people don't understand you, it is usually because you are a bad communicator, not because you are so much more brilliant than them.  Second, the first rule of game design is to make it fun, not to make it fair.  To miss this point shows a clear lack of understanding (that is, intelligence).  Third, those who fancy themselves intellectuals often go through an Ayn Rand phase.  The wiser ones get over it.  Linking to some edgy philosopher does not mean that you have some deep insight into reality that only the privileged few can see.  It makes you more like a toddler, playing with your new toy. 

Almost didn't bite... but meh.

Theoretically the most time-effective way to do an instance is "LFM n people wanting the same". Practically you won't be able to do anything due to the swarm of useless M&S swarming to your group.

Really? Theoretically? According to whose theory? Is this a hypothesis or has it been tested? I would Hypothesize that the most time-effective way to do an instance is to invest time in creating a circle of trusted friends by joining a guild or community that has a common goal, and asking those you already trust to run instances. But from the other rantings of this douche, I find it hard to believe he can make friends easily.

The other fall of goblinism is bigger. As most readers noticed I'm a big supporter of ideas similar to Ayn Rand's. Too bad it doesn't really work in the real life, despite no logical faults are included.

So you're a big supporter of ideas that you admit yourself don't work? What are you a moron?

I found the reason it cannot work in WoW. Maybe we should get all the IMF people play WoW and they don't screw up more developing countries.

Ah simplistic cause and effect. How I love thee.

The fundamental question is: "why can't WoW be a fair game, like baseball. I mean "fair" as the rules are set, and the field is even. The outcome of a baseball match depend only on your "skill", your ability to run, catch and hit. If you are worse than the other, you'll lose.

And WoW isn't this way? Different players play by different rules? I wasn't aware there was a way I could have an easy mode button other than being a faillock in early BC. And what does being a fair game have to do with Objectivism? If anything Objectivism doesn't care one whit about fairness only about personal gain. You want an Objectivist game? Go play Ultima Online when it first came out. Or I hear that new game Darkfall is pretty much a slaughterhouse.

Many people claim about nerfs that "it's just a game, why not?". Baseball is also a game. Other computer games are also games, yet they are more fair and consequently are considerably harder. If you die, you'll get death penalty. That ranges from "round over" to XP loss. The tasks cannot be performed by scripted bots. Other games are far less popular than WoW.

I'm gonna venture a guess that WoW's popularity has more going for it than simply the fact that there is no XP loss when you die.

WoW is already easy, not penalizing losing (no death penalty), or actually rewarding losing (honor and badges for lost PvP match).

Anyone who claims that dying to four horsemen and having to rez, then fly back and run all the fucking way back through military quarter isn't a penalty can suck my cock. How's that for intellectualism? Also that 14 gold repair cost evertime I die (probably more for tanks) is nothing to sneeze at. Rewarding participating in a game. The horror.

But it's not enough. WoW is nerfed again and again, making content and items easier to get by every patch. Why? The commenters were all correct on my Welfare Epics posts, that without it, large playerbase would leave.

They're nerfing raid encounters so more people can get into them so that when they release the next level of instance people can actually play it. In the original WoW they didn't do this and like 4 guys and their mom saw Naxxaramas. The argument that if they weren't good enough to get there, then they shouldn't have seen it is assinine. It's a game. What the hell do you care what someone else gets to see or not? How in ANY WAY does it take away from your own enjoyment of running the instance?

There are fair games, like Half-life counterstrike or even Blizzard's Starcraft. My zergling is just as good as yours, and you get no welfare-ultralisk if you are half as strong as me in the midgame. There is no instant-get max-level research building for the "casual player" (who plays 40+ hours/week BTW). So fair games can exist, just much less popular.

You're not going to complain about Half-life Counterstrike for having no death penalty? What the hell is the argument here? First it's pro-ayn randian, now it's supporting of half-life's enforced sameness? If anything Half-Life is the most un-objectivist game listed here as it doesn't allow someone to improve over time and repeatedly 'taxes' everyone back into similiarity with the start of each new match. Rand would support a game where someone's efforts are earned and kept, with levels, and items, not one where every 15 minutes everything is taken away from you and put back into a communal pot....or one where nothing is even gi

Commenters use to write "you must give welfare to the real world poor or they revolt". I found it silly and used to handle it with "make sure the cops have enough ammo". I meant it literally.

So you're fascist then? Starving people riot for food, and your answer is to shoot them? Nice.

My guess was that the RL M&S who are too skilless to do any jobs, are a little minority, like 10%. Let the cops handle them, they won't be missed.

So you propose to just kill the 10% of the population that you say are too skillless to do any jobs. Rather than train them or anything, just shoot them when they riot for food. Hell why not throw them in concentration camps. Morons and Slackers. Just kill em all. Heaven forbit you consider the fact that maybe some of them ARE skilled enough for work, but there isn't work to be found partially because the free market system you love so much relies on scarcity.

Not anymore. I see now, that they are many more.

Lets just kill them too! I mean seriously 10%, 20%...what's the big whoop. You were ready to gun down 30 million Americans, why not 60 million? Does that cross the line?

Remember the wowprogress data on Ulduar raiding? It said, 32% did Siege of Ulduar. 32% of the playerbase did Siege of Ulduar? No, 17150 guilds, approximately 680K people did Siege of Ulduar in the US and EU. That's less than 10% of the playerbase. 32% of those guilds who ever bothered raiding did that. OK, it's a game, let's say that everyone else are PvP-ers and RP-ers, and 6 hours/week casuals. Let's believe it and stick to 32%.

No I think at this point we've proven you're not allowed to do math. Also from your link....

It says "The Siege of Ulduar (H): 16999 (31.92%)". From this, the 100% is 53255 guilds. If we assume 35 people/guild we get 1.8M people as 100%. We know that 11M people play WoW. The site just tracks EU and US servers, but it's still around 7M. The solution is that they don't track non-raiding social guilds. So 1% should be read as "1% of those who even attempted to raid". If you have an achievement and want to know how rare is it in the whole playerbase, divide the listed number by 3.

Why assume 35 people per guild? What about multiple characters? A guy with 10 characters counts into those percentages. A guild with 35 players with 10 characters each in a guild shows as 350 people in those numbers, and if only 10 of them raid, then it would say that only 1 in 35 of them raided the Siege of Ulduar. When really it was more like 1 in 3.5. This math assumes a certain number of poeple per guild, with only 1 character, and the total number which we also don't know, to come up with a meaningless percentage. Bogus.

68% of the people who wanted to raid failed to clear the first 4 bosses of Ulduar in the easiest modes. What else can we call these people than M&S?

Uh....Ok why do the other 68% of people who all of a sudden want to raid? If someone has jumped in on an OS PUG to check it out does that mean they want to raid? If they mostly play with a few friends, or their son and did that are they all of a sudden Morons and Slackers? People in smaller casual guilds? People who are newer and still running Naxx? People who just PVP but helped a buddy out? People who have killed FL, Razorscale, and XT, and even cleared the Antechamber or a boss or two in it, but never got in on an Ignis kill yet becuase it's usually bypassed to work on the keepers? I dunno....I guess you're right, they must all just be Morons and Slackers.

OK, they are M&S. So what? The "so what" is the "goodbye free-market". If we form a free-market economy, a fair game, these M&S will fail the same way as they failed to get out of light bomb. They will take and give subprime loans, buy stocks of companies having subprime loans, give their money to banks that will use it to handle out even more subprime loans. And they are very-very surprised when it goes down and all start whining: "we are innocent victims, save us Mr President, QQ"

*shakes head* Goodbye free-market? I have to parse this statement....

If (form(free market economy)){

if(Morons&Slackers.getOutOfLightbomb = 0){

Morons&Slackers.status = fail

Morons&Slackers.trade(subprimeloans)

Morons&Slackers.stockpurchase(subprimeloancompany)

if(Morons&Slackers.deposit(cash,in bank)){

bank.trade(subprimeloans)

}

Morons&Slackers.whine("we are innocent victims, save us Mr President, QQ")

}

}

So your argument is to not form a free market economy? Or are we back to just putting the Morons and Slackers, of your choosing, into a concentration camp and turning them into candles?

Blizzard can give the M&S nerfs. Blizzard can give the M&S welfare epics. It's just a keypress for them. The real world cannot be nerfed and the real world welfare needs to be supported by taxing the non-M&S.

Ok so in the game, by what you're saying here, Blizzard can make a game that people are paying them for and find too difficult, easier, and give them items that are easier to get to make them enjoy their playtime more, and continue to choose to play Blizzard's game, rather than quit the game and move onto another one, per free-market rules, and it doesn't actually affect you in any direct way, as it's just a keypress for them.

And of course taxes bad. Helping people bad. Buy bullets for cops to shoot poor people with. Gotcha.

The success of the completely unfair, M&S catering, always-nerfed WoW over Starcraft, EVE, Darkfall is the ultimate proof that most people are just too stupid for a free-market system

By your own admission though M&S catering doesn't directly affect you so how is it not fair, particularly if the benefits for one are benefits for all? It's not like the casual is getting benefits the hardcore doesn't get. The hardcore gets them too. It just makes it easier for people to enjoy a game. How is this in anyway a refutation of a free-market system? How is the fact that people forget to move out of 10 yard range for lightbomb an indication that they therefore can never be qualified to figure out which is the best mortgage for them to purchase? How is it that if someone can't manage to heal themselves fast enough when they get thrown in the hot pocket of ignis, that they therefore are utterly unqualified to make a stock purchase? How in any way does the ability to raid in Ulduar affect any other ability of the person?

 All the economic books start with something like "the economic actors are following only their own interest". In the real world it's not true for 70-80% of the population. They are just too dumb to recognize their interests. After all, which is harder:

to properly approximate the changes of the interest rates in the next 25 year before signing a mortgage contract, finding out how our paying power will change during this period (coming from the average changes in the industry you are in, your approximated health changes, the number of competing employees coming to the same field, the recession/boom rates of the whole economy and your ability to compete with peers)

standing out of a big, bright red fire while DBM shouts "run away!"

I know people who the first would be harder, and I know people who the second would be harder. Some poeple don't 'think fast' but they 'think well' and those people tend to be the people I'd listen to for mortgage advice, not the guy who scans the paperwork and says "oh pick this one, go. call them, now...do it. quick...sign the paperwork....before the cops shoot you for being stupid!"

To put it another way, if I enjoy playing basketball even though I suck at it, and a great player (not playing WITH me just watching me) were to see me and tell me I sucked, how should I react? What if I miss a free throw and he calls me a moron? I drag ass on a breakout play because I'm out of shape and he calls me a slacker. I make a shitty pass, and he says that I'm too dumb to live, the cops should just shoot me, and my inability to play basketball also obviously means that I can't comprehend a mortgage structure, or make financial decisions in a free market system. Would that guy be making any sense? Or does he sound like a total douchebag who has no fucking clue about anything?

The problem with the different "free-market" philosophies is not that they are elitist. They should be. If all monkeys would be mediocre, we'd still be on the trees.

The problem is not that the useless M&S would starve. They wouldn't be missed.

Gotcha. Fail at light bomb = starve to death in real life, or get shot by cops, and not be missed.

The problem is that in the current level of education and the cultural value of learning, the useful/useless boundary is simply too high. You cannot discard 20-30% of the population and you cannot let other 40-50% live in low wages. They won't accept it and they are just too many to handle by cops.

So your solution isn't to increase the cultural value of learning, and the level of education in the country, but to just give the cops more bullets? The problem is that you can't turn 20-30% of the population into candles, and keep the other 40-50% living in slums without clean water, clean air, a possible future for their children, safe streets, running water....without them rising up and overwhealming the cops?

Well shit we should just nuke our own cities then. Fuckers are destroying us!

PS: if you think this will change me into a socialist, you couldn't be more wrong.

I think you're so incapable of understand what socialism is, that anyone who were to try to change you into one would get a serious headache.

M&S means Morons and Slackers

Hi Glue! My name is Rubber.

Meh, I had to put in my opinion.

Theoretically the most time-effective way to do an instance is "LFM n people wanting the same". Practically you won't be able to do anything due to the swarm of useless M&S swarming to your group.

Really? Theoretically? According to whose theory? Is this a hypothesis or has it been tested? I would Hypothesize that the most time-effective way to do an instance is to invest time in creating a circle of trusted friends by joining a guild or community that has a common goal, and asking those you already trust to run instances. But from the other rantings of this douche, I find it hard to believe he can make friends easily.

The other fall of goblinism is bigger. As most readers noticed I'm a big supporter of ideas similar to Ayn Rand's. Too bad it doesn't really work in the real life, despite no logical faults are included.

So you're a big supporter of ideas that you admit yourself don't work? What are you a moron?

It doesn't work because the work does not rely on so few people to move it.  There is in fact, too great a number of people catching the slack for others.  Ayn Rand's example was anecdotal and slightly hyperbole with the speed at which society collapses without its driving forces.  It is not the logic that fails, it is the premise from which it starts that is different.

I found the reason it cannot work in WoW. Maybe we should get all the IMF people play WoW and they don't screw up more developing countries.

Ah simplistic cause and effect. How I love thee.

Completely extraneous and useless reference to IMF inserted here.  Politics =/= economics in the world that the author was talking about 1 sentence earier.

The fundamental question is: "why can't WoW be a fair game, like baseball. I mean "fair" as the rules are set, and the field is even. The outcome of a baseball match depend only on your "skill", your ability to run, catch and hit. If you are worse than the other, you'll lose.

And WoW isn't this way? Different players play by different rules? I wasn't aware there was a way I could have an easy mode button other than being a faillock in early BC. And what does being a fair game have to do with Objectivism? If anything Objectivism doesn't care one whit about fairness only about personal gain. You want an Objectivist game? Go play Ultima Online when it first came out. Or I hear that new game Darkfall is pretty much a slaughterhouse.

This is a complicated idea to defend or criticize, since you both can't isolate the issue you wan t to talk about.  If we're discussing the issue of "fairness," I can only venture to guess that the author complains about the things implemented and controlled by Blizzard; ie class balance first and foremost.  Objectivism is relative here because the forum trolls have distorted the perception of Blizzard designers, who had previously achieved a modeled balance, and abandoned the values and opinions they reached themeselves.  They in turn are making changes for the satisfaction and sole benefit of others.  A truly Objectivist game would not abandon their own conclusions so quickly.

Many people claim about nerfs that "it's just a game, why not?". Baseball is also a game. Other computer games are also games, yet they are more fair and consequently are considerably harder. If you die, you'll get death penalty. That ranges from "round over" to XP loss. The tasks cannot be performed by scripted bots. Other games are far less popular than WoW.

I'm gonna venture a guess that WoW's popularity has more going for it than simply the fact that there is no XP loss when you die.

True.  God bless the People's State of China... (a fine example of socialist ideals held under a communist regime).

WoW is already easy, not penalizing losing (no death penalty), or actually rewarding losing (honor and badges for lost PvP match).

Anyone who claims that dying to four horsemen and having to rez, then fly back and run all the fucking way back through military quarter isn't a penalty can suck my cock. How's that for intellectualism? Also that 14 gold repair cost evertime I die (probably more for tanks) is nothing to sneeze at. Rewarding participating in a game. The horror.

Penalties are relative to each person, much less to each game.  I think his example is that other games penalize death in a greater manner. And what is 14g to the person that has 50k?

But it's not enough. WoW is nerfed again and again, making content and items easier to get by every patch. Why? The commenters were all correct on my Welfare Epics posts, that without it, large playerbase would leave.

They're nerfing raid encounters so more people can get into them so that when they release the next level of instance people can actually play it. In the original WoW they didn't do this and like 4 guys and their mom saw Naxxaramas. The argument that if they weren't good enough to get there, then they shouldn't have seen it is assinine. It's a game. What the hell do you care what someone else gets to see or not? How in ANY WAY does it take away from your own enjoyment of running the instance?

The cost of the implementation of the patch has to be justified which comes down into the retention of subscriptions or the additions of new acquisitions.  In a way, having more people see the material validates these costs at a purely financial level.  Oppositely, the value which has degraded due to this is that of the epics, which used to mean something more than it does currently, whether in performance or reverence.

There are fair games, like Half-life counterstrike or even Blizzard's Starcraft. My zergling is just as good as yours, and you get no welfare-ultralisk if you are half as strong as me in the midgame. There is no instant-get max-level research building for the "casual player" (who plays 40+ hours/week BTW). So fair games can exist, just much less popular.

You're not going to complain about Half-life Counterstrike for having no death penalty? What the hell is the argument here? First it's pro-ayn randian, now it's supporting of half-life's enforced sameness? If anything Half-Life is the most un-objectivist game listed here as it doesn't allow someone to improve over time and repeatedly 'taxes' everyone back into similiarity with the start of each new match. Rand would support a game where someone's efforts are earned and kept, with levels, and items, not one where every 15 minutes everything is taken away from you and put back into a communal pot....or one where nothing is even gi

All examples here are wrong because they're based on a false premise:  Starcraft is THE most popular game world-wide.  Also, Rand would hold the improvement by which you play the game a reward of its own regardless of the efforts earned and kept.

Commenters use to write "you must give welfare to the real world poor or they revolt". I found it silly and used to handle it with "make sure the cops have enough ammo". I meant it literally.

So you're fascist then? Starving people riot for food, and your answer is to shoot them? Nice.

Bullets would be a waste of valuable metals.  Gas is far cheaper and more efficient.

My guess was that the RL M&S who are too skilless to do any jobs, are a little minority, like 10%. Let the cops handle them, they won't be missed.

So you propose to just kill the 10% of the population that you say are too skillless to do any jobs. Rather than train them or anything, just shoot them when they riot for food. Hell why not throw them in concentration camps. Morons and Slackers. Just kill em all. Heaven forbit you consider the fact that maybe some of them ARE skilled enough for work, but there isn't work to be found partially because the free market system you love so much relies on scarcity.

Whose responsibility is it to train them, when it is they that want the jobs?  Beyond that - if you see a scarcity, you therefore see a need.  They could create their own jobs by addressing that need.

Not anymore. I see now, that they are many more.

Lets just kill them too! I mean seriously 10%, 20%...what's the big whoop. You were ready to gun down 30 million Americans, why not 60 million? Does that cross the line?

Agreed! Maybe 30%!

Remember the wowprogress data on Ulduar raiding? It said, 32% did Siege of Ulduar. 32% of the playerbase did Siege of Ulduar? No, 17150 guilds, approximately 680K people did Siege of Ulduar in the US and EU. That's less than 10% of the playerbase. 32% of those guilds who ever bothered raiding did that. OK, it's a game, let's say that everyone else are PvP-ers and RP-ers, and 6 hours/week casuals. Let's believe it and stick to 32%.

No I think at this point we've proven you're not allowed to do math. Also from your link....

Meaningless stats.

It says "The Siege of Ulduar (H): 16999 (31.92%)". From this, the 100% is 53255 guilds. If we assume 35 people/guild we get 1.8M people as 100%. We know that 11M people play WoW. The site just tracks EU and US servers, but it's still around 7M. The solution is that they don't track non-raiding social guilds. So 1% should be read as "1% of those who even attempted to raid". If you have an achievement and want to know how rare is it in the whole playerbase, divide the listed number by 3.

Why assume 35 people per guild? What about multiple characters? A guy with 10 characters counts into those percentages. A guild with 35 players with 10 characters each in a guild shows as 350 people in those numbers, and if only 10 of them raid, then it would say that only 1 in 35 of them raided the Siege of Ulduar. When really it was more like 1 in 3.5. This math assumes a certain number of poeple per guild, with only 1 character, and the total number which we also don't know, to come up with a meaningless percentage. Bogus.

But those of us that have 4 alts in a guild almost clearing Ulduar that actually only raid on 1 toon make it look like the other 3 can clear it too!  We inflate this average just by being associated with success!  I think the "leading economic indicies" make this mistake too... they never count businesses that fail.  Therefore, by only looking at the successes, we make the good stats artificially high.

68% of the people who wanted to raid failed to clear the first 4 bosses of Ulduar in the easiest modes. What else can we call these people than M&S?

Uh....Ok why do the other 68% of people who all of a sudden want to raid? If someone has jumped in on an OS PUG to check it out does that mean they want to raid? If they mostly play with a few friends, or their son and did that are they all of a sudden Morons and Slackers? People in smaller casual guilds? People who are newer and still running Naxx? People who just PVP but helped a buddy out? People who have killed FL, Razorscale, and XT, and even cleared the Antechamber or a boss or two in it, but never got in on an Ignis kill yet becuase it's usually bypassed to work on the keepers? I dunno....I guess you're right, they must all just be Morons and Slackers.

Based on bad stats all around.  No comment.

OK, they are M&S. So what? The "so what" is the "goodbye free-market". If we form a free-market economy, a fair game, these M&S will fail the same way as they failed to get out of light bomb. They will take and give subprime loans, buy stocks of companies having subprime loans, give their money to banks that will use it to handle out even more subprime loans. And they are very-very surprised when it goes down and all start whining: "we are innocent victims, save us Mr President, QQ"

*shakes head* Goodbye free-market? I have to parse this statement....

If (form(free market economy)){

if(Morons&Slackers.getOutOfLightbomb = 0){

Morons&Slackers.status = fail

Morons&Slackers.trade(subprimeloans)

Morons&Slackers.stockpurchase(subprimeloancompany)

if(Morons&Slackers.deposit(cash,in bank)){

bank.trade(subprimeloans)

}

Morons&Slackers.whine("we are innocent victims, save us Mr President, QQ")

}

}

So your argument is to not form a free market economy? Or are we back to just putting the Morons and Slackers, of your choosing, into a concentration camp and turning them into candles?

We're obviously not in a free market economy when we bail out the losers, and the author is arguing against the free market we LACK, not against the free market itself.  Free markets rely as much on bankruptcy as they do success. 

Blizzard can give the M&S nerfs. Blizzard can give the M&S welfare epics. It's just a keypress for them. The real world cannot be nerfed and the real world welfare needs to be supported by taxing the non-M&S.

Ok so in the game, by what you're saying here, Blizzard can make a game that people are paying them for and find too difficult, easier, and give them items that are easier to get to make them enjoy their playtime more, and continue to choose to play Blizzard's game, rather than quit the game and move onto another one, per free-market rules, and it doesn't actually affect you in any direct way, as it's just a keypress for them.

And of course taxes bad. Helping people bad. Buy bullets for cops to shoot poor people with. Gotcha.

Gas.

The success of the completely unfair, M&S catering, always-nerfed WoW over Starcraft, EVE, Darkfall is the ultimate proof that most people are just too stupid for a free-market system

By your own admission though M&S catering doesn't directly affect you so how is it not fair, particularly if the benefits for one are benefits for all? It's not like the casual is getting benefits the hardcore doesn't get. The hardcore gets them too. It just makes it easier for people to enjoy a game. How is this in anyway a refutation of a free-market system? How is the fact that people forget to move out of 10 yard range for lightbomb an indication that they therefore can never be qualified to figure out which is the best mortgage for them to purchase? How is it that if someone can't manage to heal themselves fast enough when they get thrown in the hot pocket of ignis, that they therefore are utterly unqualified to make a stock purchase? How in any way does the ability to raid in Ulduar affect any other ability of the person?

At this point, I don't think anyone has proven anything through these poor arguments.  Crossed analogies, mixed metaphors, supercilious similies - the learned man's enemies.

 All the economic books start with something like "the economic actors are following only their own interest". In the real world it's not true for 70-80% of the population. They are just too dumb to recognize their interests. After all, which is harder:

to properly approximate the changes of the interest rates in the next 25 year before signing a mortgage contract, finding out how our paying power will change during this period (coming from the average changes in the industry you are in, your approximated health changes, the number of competing employees coming to the same field, the recession/boom rates of the whole economy and your ability to compete with peers)

standing out of a big, bright red fire while DBM shouts "run away!"

I know people who the first would be harder, and I know people who the second would be harder. Some poeple don't 'think fast' but they 'think well' and those people tend to be the people I'd listen to for mortgage advice, not the guy who scans the paperwork and says "oh pick this one, go. call them, now...do it. quick...sign the paperwork....before the cops shoot you for being stupid!"

To put it another way, if I enjoy playing basketball even though I suck at it, and a great player (not playing WITH me just watching me) were to see me and tell me I sucked, how should I react? What if I miss a free throw and he calls me a moron? I drag ass on a breakout play because I'm out of shape and he calls me a slacker. I make a shitty pass, and he says that I'm too dumb to live, the cops should just shoot me, and my inability to play basketball also obviously means that I can't comprehend a mortgage structure, or make financial decisions in a free market system. Would that guy be making any sense? Or does he sound like a total douchebag who has no fucking clue about anything?

The problem with the different "free-market" philosophies is not that they are elitist. They should be. If all monkeys would be mediocre, we'd still be on the trees.

The problem is not that the useless M&S would starve. They wouldn't be missed.

Gotcha. Fail at light bomb = starve to death in real life, or get shot by cops, and not be missed.

The problem is that in the current level of education and the cultural value of learning, the useful/useless boundary is simply too high. You cannot discard 20-30% of the population and you cannot let other 40-50% live in low wages. They won't accept it and they are just too many to handle by cops.

So your solution isn't to increase the cultural value of learning, and the level of education in the country, but to just give the cops more bullets? The problem is that you can't turn 20-30% of the population into candles, and keep the other 40-50% living in slums without clean water, clean air, a possible future for their children, safe streets, running water....without them rising up and overwhealming the cops?

Well shit we should just nuke our own cities then. Fuckers are destroying us!

PS: if you think this will change me into a socialist, you couldn't be more wrong.

I think you're so incapable of understand what socialism is, that anyone who were to try to change you into one would get a serious headache.

M&S means Morons and Slackers

Hi Glue! My name is Rubber.

Ultimately, it is remarkable that the author could notice the situation though he lacked the ability to express it.  By taking the easy stance of attacking his poor logic instead of trying to understand the observation, the facts are reminded to us by means of the public discussion boards.  Those squeaky wheels do indeed get the grease, though they have not earned it and leaving the payment to the expense of another.  Call them M&S, moochers, looters, QQers or whatever - those that learn and work on their knowledge of their class appreciate it more; their appreciation is their reward and it cannot be taken from them.  On the bright side, these low wage populations will eventually turn on each other and take care of themselves just like they have in Detroit, Harlem, Montgomery, Compton.  No bombs are necessary.

Cry more.