Adam Carolla Rails Against Occupy Members: "....Self-Entitled Monsters’"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Sounds about right to me.

I hope your job gets outsourced. I really fucking do.

In this thread..
Over 25: Yup, that's pretty accurate.
Under 25: Nuh uh, he's a stupid head! MOOOOOOOOOOOM!

Jesus Christ. Acquire some critical thinking skills, for the forum's sake.

George Carlin articulated this better than he did.

I agree with him about how children are being raised, but I think that the Occupy movement can't be boiled down to "these kids are entitled douchebags that have nothing better to do than rail against the man".

How about "these kids just want to work and raise modest families in modest households, but there are seven job-seekers for every single job opening in the country, and they end up living with parents or friends because our socio-economic system has completely failed them"? Does that make sense? Or do you want to call these people entitled douchebags because they want a chance to make a living?

Fuck every single person with your attitude. Your ilk should be given one chance to acknowledge the facts; failing that they should be teleported into the sun.
 
You know, one of the reasons I like GAF is that it's the only messageboard I post on where I can come into real, live contact with people whose politics and thinking is so radically different from my own.

But some days having to try to understand that thinking is just so incredibly, incredibly tiring and depressing. Like, how can you be this ignorant about the lives and experiences of so many of the people you share a country with? How can you be this uninformed about the issues that are dragging that same country into a potentially inevitable decline? How can you be so callous, at heart, about the kind of social democracy and inspiring collectivism your country was founded in?
 
Looking it up, I think it was Outliers.

yep. That would be the one.

I've read/heard (audiobook) so many of his books and so many similar books it's all starting to blur together.

Still, he's got the best audiobook voice in the industry IMO :p
 
I seriously can't believe that some people get to the point where they associate wanting a better economy with a sense of entitlement.

Keep setting that bar lower, assholes.
 
Is anyone in this thread claiming that?
I don't know; I haven't read the whole thing. Looking over it again, there are some things I read that I misinterpreted. In particular, bluerei was talking about his accomplishments, and it was getting conflated with his more general claims about what it takes to succeed. All I want to express is that it is constructive to discuss the latter, but it helps no one to try and diminish what he's done for himself.
 
I seriously can't believe that some people get to the point where they associate wanting a better economy with a sense of entitlement.

Keep setting that bar lower, assholes.

That's actually a good point, it's not as if the protestors WANT things to get worse...
 
The entitled asses are the ones sitting on their asses in front of a videocamera or computer screen rather than go out and actually fight for the things they care about. People like you, me and Adam Carolla.

I pass by a group of occupiers everyday, they are there day in and out, in freezing cold weather over thanksgiving even, just to get their point across. That's sacrifice, not entitlement.


And they touch on a deeper issue than they realize. Yes the wealth gap is continuously growing and investment companies abuse every trick they can to the cook the books and make enormous profits, then when it all goes to hell because of their out of control packaging and repacking of worthless loans into products that are completely unrecognizable and leveraging them to 1000x what they are actually worth, they get bailed out by Bush and turn around and give all their executives 100s of millions in bonuses.

But bigger than that, nothing is manufactured in the US anymore. And computers now allow one person to do what it used to take a dozen different people working together twice as long to do.

We are going to reach a point where there are no where near as many jobs out there needing to be done, as there are people ready and willing to do those jobs. We are already on the cusp of this, but it's going to grow worse and worse with time.

What then? The current system would see millions of educated qualified people unemployed and homeless, because there just isn't enough work to go around.
 
The entitled asses are the ones sitting on their asses in front of a videocamera or computer screen rather than go out and actually fight for the things they care about. People like you, me and Adam Carolla.

I pass by a group of occupiers everyday, they are there day in and out, in freezing cold weather over thanksgiving even, just to get their point across. That's sacrifice, not entitlement.


And they touch on a deeper issue than they realize. Yes the wealth gap is continuously growing and investment companies abuse every trick they can to the cook the books and make enormous profits, then when it all goes to hell because of their out of control packaging and repacking of worthless loans into products that are completely unrecognizable and leveraging them to 1000x what they are actually worth, they get bailed out by Bush and turn around and give all their executives 100s of millions in bonuses.

But bigger than that, nothing is manufactured in the US anymore. And computers now allow one person to do what it used to take a dozen different people working together twice as long to do.

We are going to reach a point where there are no where near as many jobs out there needing to be done, as there are people ready and willing to do those jobs. We are already on the cusp of this, but it's going to grow worse and worse with time.

What then? The current system would see millions of educated qualified people unemployed and homeless, because there just isn't enough work to go around.
The point being they don't understand economics? Good for them.

The luddite argument has never been persuasive and I don't think most people believe it.
 
I hope your job gets outsourced. I really fucking do.



Jesus Christ. Acquire some critical thinking skills, for the forum's sake.



How about "these kids just want to work and raise modest families in modest households, but there are seven job-seekers for every single job opening in the country, and they end up living with parents or friends because our socio-economic system has completely failed them"? Does that make sense? Or do you want to call these people entitled douchebags because they want a chance to make a living?

Fuck every single person with your attitude. Your ilk should be given one chance to acknowledge the facts; failing that they should be teleported into the sun.



This.
 
How about "these kids just want to work and raise modest families in modest households, but there are seven job-seekers for every single job opening in the country, and they end up living with parents or friends because our socio-economic system has completely failed them"? Does that make sense? Or do you want to call these people entitled douchebags because they want a chance to make a living?

Fuck every single person with your attitude. Your ilk should be given one chance to acknowledge the facts; failing that they should be teleported into the sun.

Extremely well said and you touched on the real issue here.

We're not quite that bad yet where there are 7x as many educated and qualified people as there are jobs for them, but we are headed in precisely that direction.

And the causes of this are multiple but include globalism and particular advances in computing.

Nowadays, thanks to computers, it takes one person to do in a day some tasks that it used to take 7 people to do working full time for a week to do.

And the more AI and software advances, the more and more that can be done with less and less effort. We are rapidly reaching a point where there is going to be a massive surplus of qualified workers without anywhere close to enough jobs for them.

But on the positive note, everything that needs to be done to keep society running smoothly will be performed by fewer and fewer people working fewer and fewer hours.

We can let the fruits of that labor all go to the rich, or we can slowly transition to communism by fortifying and solidifying our societal safety nets rather than ripping them apart.
 
Spending increases on stupid projects. Doubling down on ineffective programs. Unrealistic price and wage controls, all fueled by tax increases that would never hit scale.

Basically more taxes,spending,waste and corruption.

I agree with you that we shouldn't waste a cent on stupid projects or ineffective programs. I think most of us would prefer efficient government spending. However, I really don't think wasteful spending is what most OWS supporters really want. Maybe the fringe members, but not the group as a whole.
 
The entitled asses are the ones sitting on their asses in front of a videocamera or computer screen rather than go out and actually fight for the things they care about. People like you, me and Adam Carolla.

I pass by a group of occupiers everyday, they are there day in and out, in freezing cold weather over thanksgiving even, just to get their point across. That's sacrifice, not entitlement.


And they touch on a deeper issue than they realize. Yes the wealth gap is continuously growing and investment companies abuse every trick they can to the cook the books and make enormous profits, then when it all goes to hell because of their out of control packaging and repacking of worthless loans into products that are completely unrecognizable and leveraging them to 1000x what they are actually worth, they get bailed out by Bush and turn around and give all their executives 100s of millions in bonuses.

But bigger than that, nothing is manufactured in the US anymore. And computers now allow one person to do what it used to take a dozen different people working together twice as long to do.

We are going to reach a point where there are no where near as many jobs out there needing to be done, as there are people ready and willing to do those jobs. We are already on the cusp of this, but it's going to grow worse and worse with time.

What then? The current system would see millions of educated qualified people unemployed and homeless, because there just isn't enough work to go around.

I agree completely. But there are a lot of people on GAF who won't admit even the possibility that technology is making or ever will make tons of jobs obsolete and really start hurting the job market, even though it's already happening.
 
yep. That would be the one.

I've read/heard (audiobook) so many of his books and so many similar books it's all starting to blur together.

Still, he's got the best audiobook voice in the industry IMO :p
Same here. I've read 3-4 of his books and they're all blended together in my head, but great reads all.
 
Spending increases on stupid projects. Doubling down on ineffective programs. Unrealistic price and wage controls, all fueled by tax increases that would never hit scale.

Basically more taxes,spending,waste and corruption.

You think the they are protesting to have more taxes, spending, waste and corruption?
 
Dude who got rich from an MTV radio show about herpes and a Comedy Central show about boobs is gonna tell you how it really is.
 
I agree completely. But there are a lot of people on GAF who won't admit even the possibility that technology is making or ever will make tons of jobs obsolete and really start hurting the job market, even though it's already happening.

Because the possibility is very moot. A lost job does not necessarily suggest a dying job market. Advancing technology are artificial imperfections in the market. New technology is at it's core new competition, that forces prices down. This causes excess wages to no longer be paid, resulting in short term employment.

This is offset by increases in living standards. Cheaper products, more capability allow for more capital to create more jobs. This is not new. It has been going on since the 1920, maybe before. At this point the argument that technology will lead to some widespread unemployment needs to be proven first before accepted as some steadfast rule of the future.
 
Because the possibility is very mute. A lost job does not necessarily suggest a dying job market. Advancing technology are artificial imperfections in the market. New technology is at it's core new competition, that forces prices down. This causes excess wages to no longer be paid, resulting in short term employment.

This is offset by increases in standard. Cheaper products, more capability allow for more capital to create more jobs. This is not new. It has been going on since the 1920, maybe before. At this point the argument that technology will lead to some widespread unemployment needs to be proven first before accepted as some steadfast rule of the future.

Moot. Different word.
 
People have a national lack of empathy and objectionable understanding when it comes to:

Comparing their life decisions and outcomes based on outside factors.

Comparing other people's life decisions and outcomes based on their own internal flaws.



This is the biggest challenge facing the reality of inequality because the current media continuously shoves this flawed way of thinking in our faces to the point where the very victims of inequality refuse to see it.

Dude who got rich from an MTV radio show about herpes and a Comedy Central show about boobs is gonna tell you how it really is.

"Luck didn't choose whose dicks i had to suck to become successful, I chose myself goddammit."
 
People have a national lack of empathy and objectionable understanding when it comes to:

Comparing their life decisions and outcomes based on outside factors.

Comparing other people's life decisions and outcomes based on their own internal flaws.



This is the biggest challenge facing the reality of inequality because the current media continuously shoves this flawed way of thinking in our faces to the point where the very victims of inequality refuse to see it.



"Luck didn't choose whose dicks i had to suck to become successful, I chose myself goddammit."

Indeed. Many people have heard of the Fundamental Attribution Error and the Self Serving Bias, but few people understand how the impact their own thoughts.
 
I listen to his podcast and I remember the rant. It doesn't really seem controversial to me honestly. But remember Carolla admits to never reading almost like a badge of honor. I like the dude, but I don't take his stuff too seriously.
Yeah, this is about right.
 
http://www.webpronews.com/adam-carolla-apologizes-via-twitter-for-anti-gay-comments-2011-08
On a podcast, Carolla discussed last week’s online petition that called for Sesame Street’s Bert and Ernie to marry. During that discussion, he had some things to say about LGBTs. Here are some of the controversial comments (NSFW):

“When did everybody get fuckin’ lumped in with the gays” When discussing transgender people, “When the fuck did we start giving a shit about these people.” “Now there’s all these variations where it’s like ‘I’m a pre-op trans-gendered trans-neutral trans-fat’ –Shut the fuck up.”
 
Indeed. Many people have heard of the Fundamental Attribution Error and the Self Serving Bias, but few people understand how the impact their own thoughts.

The worst part is when you try to explain it, you're not trying to marginalize the person's success, you're trying to get them take a step back and think before demonizing someone else because of their failures.

Objective empathy and understanding of the complexities that face our society is not conducive to the current political and business models; and this result in the fallacies consistently promoted in the media.
 
They chose based on who would be best for the job, not by throwing a dart at a wall full of all the candidate's pictures. It's not luck, but actions and work by candidates that influence the employer's choice to hire that person.

They choose by qualification, work history, and how you appear in an interview. Do people who come off slightly less well in interviews not deserve a good job if they're just as skilled and hard working?
Are the one's who got selected over other equally qualified candidates simply because they hit it off with the interviewer more derseving?
"you went to UCLA as well? Hahah, awesome, remember that inside joke?"
 
http://www.webpronews.com/adam-carolla-apologizes-via-twitter-for-anti-gay-comments-2011-08

On a podcast, Carolla discussed last week’s online petition that called for Sesame Street’s Bert and Ernie to marry. During that discussion, he had some things to say about LGBTs. Here are some of the controversial comments (NSFW):

“When did everybody get fuckin’ lumped in with the gays” When discussing transgender people, “When the fuck did we start giving a shit about these people.”

What a worthless fucking human being.
 
Adam Carolla is seriously an intellectual midget when it comes to anything politics related. Couldn't give less of a shit about what he thinks of the Occupy movement. This coming from someone who, well, used to listen to his podcast and loved him on Loveline way back in the day. He should stick to bitching about traffic lights, ranchera music and the latest episode of The View.


Ding ding. Go back to the Car Show on Speed (oh, wait, did that bomb?) Carolla. No one cares what you think about the movement.
 
The worst part is when you try to explain it, you're not trying to marginalize the person's success, you're trying to get them take a step back and think before demonizing someone else because of their failures.

Objective empathy and understanding of the complexities that face our society is not conducive to the current political and business models; and this result in the fallacies consistently promoted in the media.

Absolutely. That's not to say that there aren't lazy jobseekers out there, or that there are some who don't really qualify for the term, but there are millions of people simply looking for a chance at pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. It's kind of hard to do when those straps have been chopped up and sold as commodities, shipped overseas and repackaged in a country where a living wage is dollars a day and resold here at a premium.

To be successful, it seems to me you need two of the following; hard work, luck, starting capital, great guidance at a young enough age, natural talent, proper networking and/or a willingness to do whatever it takes, regardless of the morality or effect on others. Even still, if you have all of those and your background is in a career field that had died, or been outsourced since your start, we'd have to include precognition, ageless-ness, mystical ability to move anywhere at the snap of a finger and/or hope your children are old enough to fend for themselves.

Bottom line - when people are saying "if you're successful, luck had a part to do with it," they're not denigrating your hustle, your sweat, your struggles. They're letting you know that there are millions of people right now with that same drive who aren't where you are. Have some basic empathy - labeling them as lazy and telling them to "pull themselves up" or "get a job" shows an amazing lack of that basic human quality. It's almost sociopathic.
 
So the "everyone is a winner" mentality is the cause of Occupy Wall Street? Ugh he sounds like some Fox News asshole blaming liberals and lack of God as the cause of the world's problems.
 
Absolutely. That's not to say that there aren't lazy jobseekers out there, or that there are some who don't really qualify for the term, burn there are millions of people simply looking for a chance at pulling themselves up by their bootstraps. It's kind of hard to do when those straps have been chopped up and sold as commodities, shipped overseas and repackaged in a country where a living wage is dollars a day and resold here at a premium.

To be successful, it seems to me you need two of the following; hard work, luck, starting capital, great guidance at a young enough age, natural talent, proper networking and a willingness to do whatever it takes, regardless of the morality or affect on others. Even still, if you have all of those and your background is in a career field that had died, or been outsourced since your start, we'd have to include precognition, ageless-ness, mystical ability to move anywhere at the snap of a finger and hope your children are old enough to fend for themselves.

Bottom line - when people are saying "if you're successful, luck had a part to do with it," they're not denigrating your hustle, your sweat, your struggles. They're letting you know that there are millions of people rig now with that same drive who aren't where you are. Have some basic empathy - labeling them as lazy and telling them to "pull themselves up" or "get a job" shows an amazing lack of that basic human quality. It's almost sociopathic.


You'd think this would be the stuff millions of conservatives learn in church on Sundays =/
 
I'd love to comment on his rant but i'm not any more informed than Adam Carolla was. I too only have the image planted upon me by the media. That image being only 20 something hipsters with art degrees protesting against the man about tuition rates and wealth inequality until they get a callback from an employer.
 
I hope your job gets outsourced. I really fucking do.



Jesus Christ. Acquire some critical thinking skills, for the forum's sake.



How about "these kids just want to work and raise modest families in modest households, but there are seven job-seekers for every single job opening in the country, and they end up living with parents or friends because our socio-economic system has completely failed them"? Does that make sense? Or do you want to call these people entitled douchebags because they want a chance to make a living?

Fuck every single person with your attitude. Your ilk should be given one chance to acknowledge the facts; failing that they should be teleported into the sun.
Needs to be repeated.
 
So has anyone really changed their mind over this? I keep hearing "Yeah! The conservatives are frustrated, thus the OWS is working!" But really all I see is liberals getting more liberal and conservatives getting more conservative. If anything the OWS is a reinforcer of pre-existing ideas, not a new message.
 
This kind of shit is why I stopped listening to his podcast over a year ago. He's just too far removed from reality. Just because you can re-tell stories of pop warner football from 35 years ago doesn't mean you're still connected to the common man, alright?

I agree with the whole "participation medal" thing, but there's no connection between that and OWS. That's NOT what its about and if he took 10 minutes out of his day of patting himself on the back for never reading, he might figure that out.

Summary: Fuck that guy.
 
Corolla is the entitled one and really doesn't give a fuck about anyone else but himself.

Also his 4.4 sprinter analogy is incorrect. It doesn't detail any variables besides just one thing: "how much they practice".

When in reality there are a hundred variables that make a difference towards ones 40 speed....and those variables if specified would begin to compare to what OWS is saying. In OWS the slow/fattest guy can easily be neither or, but still does not obtain that 4.4 40 speed due to other variables besides "busting ass".
 
Extremely well said and you touched on the real issue here.

We're not quite that bad yet where there are 7x as many educated and qualified people as there are jobs for them, but we are headed in precisely that direction.

And the causes of this are multiple but include globalism and particular advances in computing.

Nowadays, thanks to computers, it takes one person to do in a day some tasks that it used to take 7 people to do working full time for a week to do.

And the more AI and software advances, the more and more that can be done with less and less effort. We are rapidly reaching a point where there is going to be a massive surplus of qualified workers without anywhere close to enough jobs for them.

But on the positive note, everything that needs to be done to keep society running smoothly will be performed by fewer and fewer people working fewer and fewer hours.

We can let the fruits of that labor all go to the rich, or we can slowly transition to communism by fortifying and solidifying our societal safety nets rather than ripping them apart.

Wow. Finally someone who thinks like I do on the topic. See the thread link below for something I wrote up on this issue about a month ago:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=451501
 
I agree completely. But there are a lot of people on GAF who won't admit even the possibility that technology is making or ever will make tons of jobs obsolete and really start hurting the job market, even though it's already happening.

Philosophically, I believe that technology will ultimately drive new kinds of jobs that require a new kind of skilled labor. It pretty much always has. It's ok that some jobs are made obsolete, because invariably there will be something else to take it's place. I think that the problem is that we don't have enough new things right now.

I wonder if there was such an outcry when automobile manufacturing started to make horse-drawn carriages obsolete? Or when air travel started taking passenger business away from the railroads? The established industries undoubtedly lost jobs while the new industries gained them. I wonder if there were people resistant to those changes? I wonder what they did?
 
The point being they don't understand economics? Good for them.

The luddite argument has never been persuasive and I don't think most people believe it.

Who understands economics? You and the professional supply siders that support policies that enrich a tiny minority at the expense of the many? I'd venture that someone being pissed off at the disappearing middle class and out on the street protesting knows a hell a lot more about economics than some entitled douchebag that believes regulation is the devil because Milton Friedman told him it is.
 
The worst part is when you try to explain it, you're not trying to marginalize the person's success, you're trying to get them take a step back and think before demonizing someone else because of their failures.

Objective empathy and understanding of the complexities that face our society is not conducive to the current political and business models; and this result in the fallacies consistently promoted in the media.

Yup.


What a fucking scumbag.
 
Philosophically, I believe that technology will ultimately drive new kinds of jobs that require a new kind of skilled labor. It pretty much always has. It's ok that some jobs are made obsolete, because invariably there will be something else to take it's place. I think that the problem is that we don't have enough new things right now.

I wonder if there was such an outcry when automobile manufacturing started to make horse-drawn carriages obsolete? Or when air travel started taking passenger business away from the railroads? The established industries undoubtedly lost jobs while the new industries gained them. I wonder if there were people resistant to those changes? I wonder what they did?

I think it is somewhat true that new jobs will pop up in new industries. But your examples are very starkly different from examples nowadays. Moving from railroad to air is innovation on the product. It gets people where they want to go faster. It's the same with horse drawn carriages to automobiles. The real innovation is that the product is faster and better. But both of these new industries still requires a heavy amount of people to manufacture and keep things up.

What people are talking about in the future and what's starting now isn't innovation on the product anymore. As an example things like red box don't really improve the end product at all. Your movie isn't better. The innovation there is on the other side. The innovation is less man power than a blockbuster, and cheaper prices. The innovation of something like online shopping that's become so big is cheaper prices and ease of use, but it leads to a few eliminated jobs in the retail sector.

And the really scaring thing looming on the horizon is things like the robots that are set to replace Foxconn employees. As has been pointed out before on this forum and elsewhere that means not only are jobs moving off shores, they're not even going to be going to real people. How can you compete with that? And again, there is no new industry that will be making new jobs popping up from that innovation. They're going to be making the same iPods and iPads and what have you. The problem now is that we're making a lot of changes in our workforce, and a lot of people see some consequences to that. Sure in the next few years we're not going to be in a place where the regular grunt worker is obsolete, but it'll slowly get there, and if we're not building our country in such a way that we can prepare for that, then I really fear for the future. You can't wait for things like this to happen before you move forward. The writing is on the wall.
 
What a crock of shit. Does he have his head buried in the sand, and is he ignoring the fact that a huge number of the protestors ARE successful, have their own businesses, are highly educated or over 30? Honestly these kind of people seem so far removed.

They are so out of touch with reality, essentially making stuff up a huge chunk of the time and ignoring the truth, hell, ignoring the very reasoning the people protesting are actually giving.

Unreal. Can't believe so many people have such an ignorant and misinformed view of such things. But I suppose that's what happens when you have a Fox News generation bred on a constant barrage of agenda filled sensatialist right wing propaganda.
Beautiful and succinct.
 
Who understands economics? You and the professional supply siders that support policies that enrich a tiny minority at the expense of the many? I'd venture that someone being pissed off at the disappearing middle class and out on the street protesting knows a hell a lot more about economics than some entitled douchebag that believes regulation is the devil because Milton Friedman told him it is.

I think about this a lot. So often I see one extreme or the other in discussions like this.
On one hand we have people who feel that it is the responsibility of the individual for their social and economic condition. On the other hand we have people who feel that it is the government's responsibility to protect and provide, and keep the playing field level.

Surely the answer is somewhere in the middle. In modern times there is certainly a list of now-notable people who took very little and turned it into much, so to me it proves that sometimes all it takes is a good idea and the drive to succeed and you can do well. There is also a list of people who used old money to manipulate a system they and previous generations have designed to keep siphoning money away from others, thereby exacerbating a system of inequality.

I'd like to see us support an environment where innovation is encouraged and the average citizen still has an opportunity to fulfill their dreams. But we shouldn't allow the disenfranchised to be trampled on in the process.
 
The problem with Carolla's rant is that he is recognizing something that has existed for decades, but is wrongly trying to assign it to a certain generation. This self-entitlement and gross display of envy has existed among a certain segment of our population for quite a long time.
 
Philosophically, I believe that technology will ultimately drive new kinds of jobs that require a new kind of skilled labor. It pretty much always has. It's ok that some jobs are made obsolete, because invariably there will be something else to take it's place. I think that the problem is that we don't have enough new things right now.

I wonder if there was such an outcry when automobile manufacturing started to make horse-drawn carriages obsolete? Or when air travel started taking passenger business away from the railroads? The established industries undoubtedly lost jobs while the new industries gained them. I wonder if there were people resistant to those changes? I wonder what they did?

You're talking about switching from one type of industrial manufacturing to another type of industrial manufacturing. It's a completely different situation.

One only has to look at a worker productivity vs. average wage chart for the last 40 years to understand that America is going to have some problems.
 
I'll be glad to join the anti-Occupy movement as soon as they all agree on having one single complaint about the Occupy movement.

This is pretty dumb, Fuse. People are saying occupy should move beyond simple occupation.

Letting people know what you want and why you want it is a good step in being recognized and, eventually, having those goals met.

I'm pretty sure there's no anti-occupy movement, either. There are people of critical of occupy as it is unfocused, a drain on municipalities, and disruptive to a lot of people who would otherwise be sympathetic to the cause.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom