It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Washington's governing elites think we're all morons, a new study says

page: 2
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Easy way is to become an army and fight them face to face... They are human right?? lol.

Even wolf's have to die at some point.




posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: DarkvsLight29
Easy way is to become an army and fight them face to face... They are human right?? lol.

Even wolf's have to die at some point.







Washington's governing elites think we're all morons, a new study says



uh oh...they might have a point.




edit on 3-10-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   
Did anybody notice the Johns Hopkins study did NOT poll the politicians we're so dissatisfied with?
Instead they polled professional bureaucrats, congressional staffers and government think-tanks.
From those folks perspectives, nobody outside their circles knows #t (including the elected officials).
Unfortunately, politicians don't do the thinking when it comes to running the government - they get told what to think by the "professionals".
And if they polled the politicians you can bet the results would be very different!
After all, politicians can be easily replaced if the voters don't like them - bureaucrats... not so much.

ganjoa



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Seeing as this election has come down to trump and hillary. .......can you really deny they are right?



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:19 PM
link   
U

originally posted by: watchitburn
a reply to: bobs_uruncle

Do you have a source for those numbers? I believe you, it definitely would appear to be the case. But, I would be interested in reading that.


It's from a peer review paper I read about three years ago, might have even been five years. Can't remember if it came from Western university, York university or the u of t. If I can find it, I'll scan it for you. I remember the numbers though and I believe the point of the study and paper was that it is a given that critical thinkers had the highest probability of success in business, however, critical thinkers that did not possess a conscience (sociopaths and masking psychopaths) had the highest probability of success in politics and predatory forms of capitalism. Therefore to succeed in the world of power and money, one had to shed conscience and apply intelligence as cunning with no moral compass. It's been a long time since I read the paper.

Cheers - Dave



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

No. The average elite doesn't necessarily start out as "one of us." There are schools you have to go to in order to get the right connections to the elite.

That means you need to get your children into the right prep schools where you are paying often as much as $20,000 to $30,000 or more per year in tuition, and then they need to go to one of the nation's elite colleges, often Ivy League, but not always, where they can make connections to other children of elites.

They don't rub shoulders with the little people.

They then use those connections to immediately land into high powered, high paying jobs working for and with other elites.

How do you think Ronan Farrow got a talk show? How do you think Chelsea Clinton landed such valuable work that she "doesn't have to think about money"?



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

There has always been a ruling class.

They used to be kings, and lords, and dukes, and barons.

Now they are politicians.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
When it gets down to it, do you actually disagree with them?


To a certain extent, but they claim this is by accident. I think it's more by design. They have created the programs and claim to be ignorant of the side effects of their "good intentions" as though the side effects are either separate problems entirely or non-existent.

Excusing the problems by claiming we're too dumb to understand it all is simple deflection. Have they ever tried?

For example, plenty of people pointed out the problems that would come with Obamacare, and instead we were, by admission, tricked into it because we were too stupid to support something that was in our best interests. Now we see the problems, and I have yet to see how any of this was in anyone's best interests unless you are getting a free ride on it.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy

Politicians and their brain trust and herald class ... sorry, media.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

Point taken.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 08:58 PM
link   
I hate to say it but I believe the left side of the aisle tends to follow the "we know best" model moreso than the right. The left's policies tend to favor government bureaucrats making decisions over individuals making them. You saw this with Obamacare. You see it with public education. You see it with tax policy. You see it with all manners of regulations.

Conservatives tend to believe markets and individuals are better positioned to make their own decisions. Of course, this is not always the case though.

This is why liberals always favor redistribution schemes as they allow government to take the decision making away from individuals.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes. It explains the left's fascination with "experts" on every subject and their scorn for anyone who doesn't live their life and die by the "experts."



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes. It explains the left's fascination with "experts" on every subject and their scorn for anyone who doesn't live their life and die by the "experts."


Of course, we won't get into how not only do the know best, but whatever policy schemes they come up with only apply to the plebes and not the elites.

You can't have school choice, but I get to send my kid to private school.

You must have Obamacare, but I have my own doctors and insurance.

You can't have guns, but I get my own security detail.

Etc, etc...



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes. It explains the left's fascination with "experts" on every subject and their scorn for anyone who doesn't live their life and die by the "experts."

Before we get all partisan between left & Right remember there is enough idiocy to sling on both ways, right-wing think tanks are a dime a dozen.
edit on 3-10-2016 by Spider879 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 09:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes. It explains the left's fascination with "experts" on every subject and their scorn for anyone who doesn't live their life and die by the "experts."

Before we get all partisan between left & Right remember there is enough idiocy to sling on both ways, right-wing think tanks are a dime a dozen.


Think tanks aren't the issue. The issue is that the policy prescriptions coming from think tanks that favor government bureaucracies over individual decision making. Yes, the right has think tanks. However, I think you will find most of the policies put forth are usually reducing government bureaucracy and regulation over individuals whereas on the left the think tanks push for more.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 09:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Edumakated

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Edumakated

Yes. It explains the left's fascination with "experts" on every subject and their scorn for anyone who doesn't live their life and die by the "experts."

Before we get all partisan between left & Right remember there is enough idiocy to sling on both ways, right-wing think tanks are a dime a dozen.


Think tanks aren't the issue. The issue is that the policy prescriptions coming from think tanks that favor government bureaucracies over individual decision making. Yes, the right has think tanks. However, I think you will find most of the policies put forth are usually reducing government bureaucracy and regulation over individuals whereas on the left the think tanks push for more.

Yes that is the trend on certain issues, many would strip any watch dog body from food to finance , turn around and make laws pertaining to who you can and cannot marry, the right of choice or even birth control, or what plants you may not ingest without gov approval.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 10:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I don't want to stop someone from having birth control, but I don't want to pay for it. Why is it my responsibility? And let's get one thing straight - abortion is not, and never should be, classed as or thought of as birth control. It is something else entirely.

The government should not be in teh business of defining marriage. That delves into church realms. Like it or not, even if you don't think of marriage as religious, marriage is a sacred ceremony in pretty much every religion known to man. For the government to regulate who can marry whom in such a way that redefines the base actors in marriage (any two people instead of man and woman), it abrogates the right of religion to decide this. This creates conflict with the Constitution.

What government can do is decide who it will decide the contract and legalities that it tacked on to marriage. It could decouple those from traditional religious marriages and offer them to groups of people on any basis it saw fit. Instead, it decided to take the power to define marriage upon itself for all. This decided the question in a typically left-wing, experts know best for everyone kind of way.

As far as drugs and marijuana, I don't think I'm getting an honest argument from either side when it comes to this one. Often, weed advocates claim that it does everything short of pay off the national although it will do that too if we tax it at 150% because everyone will be just happy to toke all day. Oh, and it's completely harmless with absolutely zero, ZERO negative side effects at all. NONE! NONE!!



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 10:17 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

You may have a nuanced approach to such issues, but law makers with aid of "experts" aka think thanks,will make or try to make laws to affect the above , so back to my original point there is nuff stuff to sling back and forth.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 10:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
a reply to: ketsuko

You may have a nuanced approach to such issues, but law makers with aid of "experts" aka think thanks,will make or try to make laws to affect the above , so back to my original point there is nuff stuff to sling back and forth.


See, here's the problem ... nuanced approach is one that allows people freedom to decide for themselves. Too many folks, especially the elites are convinced they are smart enough to do all this thinking for us because we're dumb. Isn't that the whole point of this thread?

Why give us nuance? We're too stupid to handle it. We will clearly make the wrong choices.



posted on Oct, 3 2016 @ 10:27 PM
link   
Well to be fair, a good percentage of people really are morons. I can't say I entirely disagree with them.



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join