The Liberal Gun Club Forum

Stolen shamelessly from Jim to share here. I couldn't help myself.

https://qz.com/967554/the-five-universa ... stupidity/

Stupid people, Carlo M. Cipolla explained, share several identifying traits: they are abundant, they are irrational, and they cause problems for others without apparent benefit to themselves, thereby lowering society’s total well-being. There are no defenses against stupidity, argued the Italian-born professor, who died in 2000. The only way a society can avoid being crushed by the burden of its idiots is if the non-stupid work even harder to offset the losses of their stupid brethren.

No wonder I'm so tired...

SR

Running of the bulls at Pamplona, perfect example of stupidity. The article reminded me a bit of The Peter Principle.

No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by, Cipolla wrote, you are invariably lowballing the total.

I remember one particular employee in the past, he was well educated and had a master's degree from a good university, but totally lacking in common sense. His wife ran everything.

I've met stupid doctors and laborers, lawyers and professors, housewives and businessmen.

How many ways can you LOUDLY announce you're a stupid person than putting on a red MAGA hat, a swastika, or white hood?
Voting for every politician who promises to lower your taxes even though he/she has failed to do so in the past, repeatedly? Buying into bullshit over fact?
The harm this does to others without benefiting oneself is myriad.

Interestingly enough, the last presidential election did give us an unexpected benefit. For the first time in history, we have a chance of overcoming the first law. We know that at least 40% of the population are stupid.

Wurble wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:56 am Interestingly enough, the last presidential election did give us an unexpected benefit. For the first time in history, we have a chance of overcoming the first law. We know that at least 40% of the population are stupid.

Just remember:

No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by, Cipolla wrote, you are invariably lowballing the total.

shinzen wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 11:12 am

Wurble wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:56 am Interestingly enough, the last presidential election did give us an unexpected benefit. For the first time in history, we have a chance of overcoming the first law. We know that at least 40% of the population are stupid.

Just remember:

No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by, Cipolla wrote, you are invariably lowballing the total.

We’re really in trouble. I think one can easily add another twenty to that forty....and still invariably lowballing....

The problem with stupid is that not all the stupid are stupid on the same thing. That means there are probably very few, if any, not stupid people. It also means lots of stupid all the time randomly appearing. Yep, we’re done.

I've got plenty of stupid, generally out of ignorance on the topic or stubbornness. I'm usually able to recognize when the stupid is flowing through me, though. Usually.

I am going to piss off a lot of people here who wouldn't vote for Hillary because of all her flaws despite it being blatantly obvious from his first speech in 2015 that the Orange shit-stain would be a catastrophic calamity for the nation and the world, which he, of course, is. They hurt others without benefiting themselves. What's that the definition of, again?

Oh, I voted for Hillary (Sanders in the primary). I may be stupid and stubborn, but I have my limits!

featureless wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 12:59 pm Oh, I voted for Hillary (Sanders in the primary). I may be stupid and stubborn, but I have my limits!

Same.

I'm of the opinion that we are in the current mess because "they" know they can give US a choice of Shit Candidate vs Shitty Candidate and you guys will vote for it anyway.....crazy/insanity is doing that over, and over again and expecting a different out come.

I'm not voting for a cheating, lying, Establishment Democrat because she isn't A Republican or Donald Trump. Donald Trump didn't win - The Democrats lost their base and the resultant votes because they were ridiculously arrogant and got beat for it. Millions of former Democrats won't vote for future Democrats because of what they pulled in 2016. Hopefully you guys who will vote Democrat "no matter what" will gain enough steam in 2020 to get what you want.

Good luck. I'll vote 3rd party again or not at all given the exact same situation in 2016 and I'll bet millions of other potential Democrats will do the same thing.

VooDoo

My hypocrisy knows no bounds, but I voted for HRC because I foresaw the damage Puke would do to the SCOTUS & POTUS and Nation - the world didn't click in at the time, but not surprised, just unexpected how ignorant the Dick would be on a world view. Didn't take a genius to vote for HRC, just common sense. Keeping DJT out of office was paramount to all else. I'm gonna say it - "I told you so!!"

Wino wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 3:21 pm My hypocrisy knows no bounds, but I voted for HRC because I foresaw the damage Puke would do to the SCOTUS & POTUS and Nation - the world didn't click in at the time, but not surprised, just unexpected how ignorant the Dick would be on a world view. Didn't take a genius to vote for HRC, just common sense. Keeping DJT out of office was paramount to all else. I'm gonna say it - "I told you so!!"

Exactly!

A lot of us voted HRC who at least had a chance of winning compared to third party candidates in 2016. I've voted third party in elections that weren't close as a protest vote against the top two candidates on the ballot. Nevada is the only intelligent state with "none of these candidates" (none of the above) on their ballots.

Rule number 6: you are in the stupid group more often than you realize.

Eris wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 7:40 pm Rule number 6: you are in the stupid group more often than you realize.

Corollary to Rule 6: If you don't know if you're in the stupid group, you are!

highdesert wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:21 pm A lot of us voted HRC who at least had a chance of winning compared to third party candidates in 2016. I've voted third party in elections that weren't close as a protest vote against the top two candidates on the ballot. Nevada is the only intelligent state with "none of these candidates" (none of the above) on their ballots.

Actually one can still do none of the above in any state. Just leave the candidate spot empty for that position. Anyone really doing the math will realize the total number of people voting and the numbers cast for each position.

sikacz wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 9:47 pm

highdesert wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 5:21 pm A lot of us voted HRC who at least had a chance of winning compared to third party candidates in 2016. I've voted third party in elections that weren't close as a protest vote against the top two candidates on the ballot. Nevada is the only intelligent state with "none of these candidates" (none of the above) on their ballots.

Actually one can still do none of the above in any state. Just leave the candidate spot empty for that position. Anyone really doing the math will realize the total number of people voting and the numbers cast for each position.

True, but "none of the above" shows the real intention and not that someone unintentionally or intentionally skipped an office. And sometimes the ballot design causes people to skip offices.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/None_of_These_Candidates

Wurble wrote: Sat Jan 05, 2019 10:56 am Interestingly enough, the last presidential election did give us an unexpected benefit. For the first time in history, we have a chance of overcoming the first law. We know that at least 40% of the population are stupid.

40% of the population are below average ...


I am sure there is a high school math teacher out there who is crying with that statement.

Actually, 49.99%, and 49.99% above average, and .01% are average.