What is wrong with it.

[CC27]

Tootbsb (79 posts)

What is wrong with it.
If a monkey hoarded more bananas than it could eat, while most of the other monkeys starved, scientists would study that monkey to see what is wrong with it. When humans exhibit this same behavior, we put them on the cover of Forbes magazine.

erronis (18,604 posts)
3. Yup. Read some Frans de Waal to find out how they treat a fellow who cheats them

It ain't pretty. Even Mussolini fared better.

SCantiGOP (14,410 posts)
4. They wouldn't just study that one monkey

They would be looking to see if this could cause the extinction of the whole group, or even the whole species.
When there are people counting their wealth in billions of dollars while other people live on the street with shopping carts, something is seriously wrong.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220192494

WTF is wrong with you idiots? FFS.

[jukin]

Leeches and moochers justifying leeching and mooching. Very badly if I may add.

[BannedFromDU]

WTF is wrong with you idiots? FFS.

     Now suppose about half the monkeys draw a sharp distinction between the hoarding monkeys based on some gesture the hoarding monkeys made. That gesture (has to be a gesture, since monkeys can't speak) completely excuses and even justifies the hoarding behavior, and in fact does nothing but create more animosity toward the hoarding monkeys who did not make the same gesture.

     As an object example, put Michelle 0bama in the role of a hoarding monkey (hard, I know, but do your best to imagine Michelle 0bama as a monkey. Try really hard.).  She has estates in at least three places, each more lavish than anything any of her sycophants has, yet she is their idea of complete and absolute perfection. Why is her hoarding ok, but a Republican's isn't?

     Two things: 1) this proves that monkeys are more rational and consistent than Democrats (which we already knew), and 2) I am very sorry for making any of you work SO hard to imagine Michelle 0bama as a monkey, as it is really taxing to do so. 

[Texacon]

Choices.

Life throws them at you every single day.  99% of what happens to you is based on the choices you make.  Most of those living on the street are doing so voluntarily.  You are not going to get them to change their ways as long as you keep giving them free stuff. 

KC

[SVPete]

Unlike monkeys, the "rich" people hated and envied by LPC Noob Tootbsb can rightly tell LPC Noob Tootbsb that their wealth is none of his/her business and to F#$% OFF!

[CollectivismMustDie]

Today, I ran across a word for these people that I had not seen before: Dramacrats.

It sure is fitting.

[BannedFromDU]

Today, I ran across a word for these people that I had not seen before: Dramacrats.

It sure is fitting.

     Well said.

[Old n Grumpy]

     As an object example, put Michelle 0bama in the role of a hoarding monkey (hard, I know, but do your best to imagine Michelle 0bama as a monkey. Try really hard.).  She has estates in at least three places, each more lavish than anything any of her sycophants has, yet she is their idea of complete and absolute perfection. Why is her hoarding ok, but a Republican's isn't?

Another example is their favorite socialist Bernie who I understand has millions and at least three mansions.
Is he willing to share his millions and mansions with others less fortunate hell no

[SVPete]

Another example is their favorite socialist Bernie who I understand has millions and at least three mansions.
Is he willing to share his millions and mansions with others less fortunate hell no

There's a reason The Bern and AOC are railing against billionaires and not against millionaires as well.

[DLR Pyro]

Another example is their favorite socialist Bernie who I understand has millions and at least three mansions.
Is he willing to share his millions and mansions with others less fortunate hell no

no because bernie is (D)ifferent

[BamaMoose]

This trope has become popular with the lefties ever since some sociologist threw it out there years ago.  The problem with this line of thinking is that it doesn't exist in the animal kingdom.  In species that tend to form groups (i.e. lions, canines) there's a hierarchy in who eats first.  The strongest get the first shot at any kill and what's left is portioned out in descending order of the hierarchy until the weakest member of the group gets whatever is left.  When the weakest no longer provides any usefulness to the group they're driven off and left to die.  Survival of the fittest.  In species that are more solitary (i.e. bears) they are only focused on themselves and their offspring.  And once the offspring are capable of surviving independently, they are booted out into the wild to take care of themselves.  Polar bears aren't killing seals and dragging them back to their dens for their 30-year-old (in bear years) kids to eat because the kids are playing video games and too lazy to hunt for themselves.  So, the proper response isn't to question why a monkey would do what it took to make sure it survived, but why were the other monkeys incapable of taking care of their own needs.  But that level of logic confuses them, because they want to believe that somehow some random, rich person is responsible for their lack of financial success.

[ADsOutburst]

Sanders is the type of person who campaigns against the establishment and how they've turned their backs on working Americans, then bows out of the race and endorses Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden.

If he talks like a grifter, acts like a grifter, sounds like a grifter...

[Ralph Wiggum]

Today, I ran across a word for these people that I had not seen before: Dramacrats.

It sure is fitting.

That's wonderful! I often use the term "emotional hemophiliacs" to describe them.

[Airwolf]

I find it interesting how the Left hates Trump and Musk and some other Billionaires but they just love Bezo's and Warren Buffett and Mark Cuban to the sky and back. I guess you have to be just as demented as they are or they will hate you.

[SVPete]

Having observed several entrepreneur millionaires - from a significant distance, not up close and personal - they had at some very early point transitioned away from wealth accumulation back to enjoying their creating and operating/managing (product, service, whatever). I wonder whether Trump ever was into wealth accumulation for its own sake (for arm-candy attraction, yes, in his younger years). Musk, very obviously, made that transition decades ago. He's the quintessential idea-man design engineer (which probably contributed to his multiple divorces).

Needless to say, Progs' perception of reality cannot accept a millionaire or billionaire being motivated by something other than greed.