Cummings protégé advocates enforced contraception.

stockhausen said:
Quelle surprise :eek:

Johnson gets all coy when asked a question about the ethical position of one of his "advisers" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The people who think this kind of stuff is at all relevant or reflects the views of Boris Johnson are already voting for Labour, the rest of us don't care
 
Fail thread from the party whose candidates believe that a violent male criminal can serve in the female prison if he says he identifies as a female now
 
stockhausen said:
Quelle surprise :eek:

Johnson gets all coy when asked a question about the ethical position of one of his "advisers" :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

It isn't an ethical position of one of his advisors - its one of his advisors stating some facts - namely black people (or rather African Americans) have lower IQ scores than white Americans... and then drawing some dubious conclusions/failing to be critical of the very notion of IQ testing in the first place. IIRC it was in reply to some post on a blog or something?

Was he being a bit silly/ignorant - yes he was, he's apparently a Psychology MSc grad... in fact worse than that perhaps, not an MSc from UCL's Psychology department but an MSc in "Psychology of Education" from the Institute of Education (also part of UCL these days).

That he's seemingly unaware of the flaws in the measure he's advocating for isn't exactly uncommon - there are plenty of psychologists, HR managers, management consultant types etc.. who will happily make use of things like IQ tests, personality tests etc... in dubious ways.

There are various people on here who've made even dumber claims about say Myers Briggs tests being somehow useful for their company etc... A few years ago there were posters like Castiel and a few others banging on about Mensa in a very cringe worthy thread.

Though of course this guy mentioned race and the press can take his comments out of context so he's going to be the target for the current cancel culture/social media outrage now. Not because he's done anything hateful but simply because he's got some science wrong in some blog post he made years ago. Though yesterday on twitter everyone was virtue signalling about how people should "be kind" etc...
 
To be fair all of the people having kids without assets are a useless slave underclass anyways. If you ask me they should maybe look a license for having children. The requirements should be a minimum amount of money in savings for them at 18, Or an acre of land or a house would suffice but the main thing is giving the child an option other than being a rich mans pawn.


Thats how i see daily life, Indeed if you removed many estates and villages and the people life would be better for everyone thats the cold hard truth because those resource less types tend to have zero breeding or manners. Compare this with rich resource owning country folk and the arguements are clear cut. Do you see rich folk stabbing each other and stealing tractors for example? Nope!
 
Last edited:
Rofflay said:
To be fair all of the people having kids without land are a useless slave underclass anyways. If you ask me they should maybe look a license for having children. The requirements should be a minimum amount of money in savings for them at 18, Or an acre of land or a house would suffice but the main thing is giving the child an option other than being a rich mans pawn.


Thats how i see daily life, Indeed if you removed many estates and villages and the people life would be better for everyone thats the cold hard truth because those resource less types tend to have zero breeding or manners. Compare this with rich resource owning country folk and the arguements are clear cut. Do you see rich folk stabbing each other and stealing tractors for example? Nope!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if this is serious or a joke :confused:
 
Colonel_Klinck said:
I'm not sure if this is serious or a joke :confused:
Click to expand...

Well sometimes i wonder myself. I never had a choice in life and think others should and i meant to say assets not land. But thier having kids these says when they basically rent for life and cannot afford them.


Age 16 shipped off down to the local employer, Job seekers center. While rich folk offer thier kids a general pick your route in life option. Thiers a massive difference in the options available to these kids but it is morally wrong to send them out without something sizeable at 16. Think of the requirements of starting from scratch thiers a lot the truth is debt and modern lending helps mask the issue in society.
 
Rofflay said:
Well sometimes i wonder myself. I never had a choice in life and think others should and i meant to say assets not land. But thier having kids these says when they basically rent for life and cannot afford them.


Age 16 shipped off down to the local employer, Job seekers center. While rich folk offer thier kids a general pick your route in life option. Thiers a massive difference in the options available to these kids but it is morally wrong to send them out without something sizeable at 16. Think of the requirements of starting from scratch thiers a lot the truth is debt and modern lending helps mask the issue in society.
Click to expand...

Whilst I agree families having lots of kids they can’t afford is not fair on the kids, when you start having to pass a test be it financial, intelligence or anything else you’ve entered very dangerous territory. Not something I could ever support.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom