Topic: In India it's considered highly offensive to use a toilet.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 started this discussion 1 month ago #137,500
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 16 minutes later[^] [v] #1,456,295
That's just their culture, man. For us, not using the toilet is taboo, for them it's the opposite.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 6 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,296
> hey guys here's 2 cents just don't shit in the street please
> look at this guy he doesn't shit in the street apparently
> oh he's too good for street shutting huh? Mr big shot toilet shitter who the fuck do you think you are? You think you're better than us? You think we're nothing huh?! Oh we got something for you buddy just wait
> look at this guy he doesn't shit in the street apparently
> oh he's too good for street shutting huh? Mr big shot toilet shitter who the fuck do you think you are? You think you're better than us? You think we're nothing huh?! Oh we got something for you buddy just wait
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 1 hour later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,298
@1,456,295 (B)
> That's just their culture, man. For us, not using the toilet is taboo, for them it's the opposite.
Road side urine helps the vegetation. Public toilet not at all.
> That's just their culture, man. For us, not using the toilet is taboo, for them it's the opposite.
Road side urine helps the vegetation. Public toilet not at all.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 50 minutes later, 2 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,301
I think Erik has a poop fetish.
Anonymous F joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 1 hour later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,313
Disgusting third world shithole. Fine by me. Let the brain drain continue. It’s funny that we associate Indians with high intelligence but that’s because the West gets all the smart ones who leave behind the retrograde street shitting, non violence obsessed rapists.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,314
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 1 month ago, 40 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,315
You realize that you have more money because you were born in a wealthier country, you’re not actually smarter than people in third world countries. You didn’t invent anything.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,316
And Indians from India aren’t stupid. India is a relatively poor country, but it’s also a large country. When they pull their resources together as a collective, they’ve shown they are capable of great things. India has a space program, they’ve sent a satellite to Mars for $50 million for example. NASA spends billions of dollars to accomplish the same thing.
Anonymous F replied with this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,317
@1,456,313 (F)
> Disgusting third world shithole. Fine by me. Let the brain drain continue. It’s funny that we associate Indians with high intelligence but that’s because the West gets all the smart ones who leave behind the retrograde street shitting, non violence obsessed rapists.
Mob-violence obsessed
> Disgusting third world shithole. Fine by me. Let the brain drain continue. It’s funny that we associate Indians with high intelligence but that’s because the West gets all the smart ones who leave behind the retrograde street shitting, non violence obsessed rapists.
Mob-violence obsessed
Anonymous F double-posted this 1 month ago, 53 seconds later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,318
@1,456,316 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> And Indians from India aren’t stupid. India is a relatively poor country, but it’s also a large country. When they pull their resources together as a collective, they’ve shown they are capable of great things. India has a space program, they’ve sent a satellite to Mars for $50 million for example. NASA spends billions of dollars to accomplish the same thing.
The government is a mess because of awful decisions Nehru made decades ago related to infrastructure and the power grid. It’s also a hell of officialdom that requires fees and bribes.
> And Indians from India aren’t stupid. India is a relatively poor country, but it’s also a large country. When they pull their resources together as a collective, they’ve shown they are capable of great things. India has a space program, they’ve sent a satellite to Mars for $50 million for example. NASA spends billions of dollars to accomplish the same thing.
The government is a mess because of awful decisions Nehru made decades ago related to infrastructure and the power grid. It’s also a hell of officialdom that requires fees and bribes.
Anonymous F triple-posted this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,319
@1,456,314 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> How does being poor make someone unintelligent?
Brain drain. The vast pools of the unintelligent, poor, and stupid get left behind and we get the entrepreneurs, doctors, inventors.
And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
> How does being poor make someone unintelligent?
Brain drain. The vast pools of the unintelligent, poor, and stupid get left behind and we get the entrepreneurs, doctors, inventors.
And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc replied with this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,322
@1,456,318 (F)
I don’t think that’s the reason why. People will blame India and also countries in Africa for being corrupt, but China is an authoritarian state and they’ve been successful at developing. You don’t need good government to develop a country. Of course, having a strong central state helps with modernization, that’s why Japan was able to modernize or also Ethiopia prior to their defeat in World War Two, they were able to hold off European powers because they had central control from their emperor.
I think the real answer is probably a combination of things, but I think you can’t ignore birth rates, China, India, and the continent of Africa all have about 1.4 billion each, Africa has about a hundred million more people but it’s the same difference basically. The difference is China has the lowest birth rates today, then India has higher birth rates than China, and Africa has the highest birth rates in the world. But if you look at their GDP, when China had birth rates similar to what Africa has today, China was poorer than the average sub Saharan African country is today. I think people discount demographics too much.
I don’t think that’s the reason why. People will blame India and also countries in Africa for being corrupt, but China is an authoritarian state and they’ve been successful at developing. You don’t need good government to develop a country. Of course, having a strong central state helps with modernization, that’s why Japan was able to modernize or also Ethiopia prior to their defeat in World War Two, they were able to hold off European powers because they had central control from their emperor.
I think the real answer is probably a combination of things, but I think you can’t ignore birth rates, China, India, and the continent of Africa all have about 1.4 billion each, Africa has about a hundred million more people but it’s the same difference basically. The difference is China has the lowest birth rates today, then India has higher birth rates than China, and Africa has the highest birth rates in the world. But if you look at their GDP, when China had birth rates similar to what Africa has today, China was poorer than the average sub Saharan African country is today. I think people discount demographics too much.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,324
@1,456,319 (F)
> And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
A lot of people are stupid in developed countries.
> And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
A lot of people are stupid in developed countries.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,325
@1,456,322 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
I should clarify: I’m not using some weird technicality when I said when China had high birth rates similar to what sub Saharan Africa has today, they were poorer than African countries are today. They were also poorer than sub Saharan African nations at the time. In the 1960s the GDP per capita of China was beneath the sub Saharan African average. But fundamentally the difference is China always had a high population, but Africa didn’t. Africa was underpopulated for most of history, so even if China didn’t have the one child policy, in any timeline it always would have taken less time for Chinese birth rates to fall because due to diseases like malaria that are more common in tropical climates, Africa’s population was always going to take much longer to expand into what the continent can theoretically support. The Industrial Revolution happened in Europe first because Europe had a higher population than Africa and it was richer because of the colonization of the Americas which was possible because since Europe was more dense, Europeans had more diseases and more resistance to disease than the Native Americans. I know less about India’s case in particular, but I wouldn’t discount them. In the 1960s if you judged the Chinese for being backwards and poor you wouldn’t guess that today they’d be landing rockets vertically and producing smartphones.
I should clarify: I’m not using some weird technicality when I said when China had high birth rates similar to what sub Saharan Africa has today, they were poorer than African countries are today. They were also poorer than sub Saharan African nations at the time. In the 1960s the GDP per capita of China was beneath the sub Saharan African average. But fundamentally the difference is China always had a high population, but Africa didn’t. Africa was underpopulated for most of history, so even if China didn’t have the one child policy, in any timeline it always would have taken less time for Chinese birth rates to fall because due to diseases like malaria that are more common in tropical climates, Africa’s population was always going to take much longer to expand into what the continent can theoretically support. The Industrial Revolution happened in Europe first because Europe had a higher population than Africa and it was richer because of the colonization of the Americas which was possible because since Europe was more dense, Europeans had more diseases and more resistance to disease than the Native Americans. I know less about India’s case in particular, but I wouldn’t discount them. In the 1960s if you judged the Chinese for being backwards and poor you wouldn’t guess that today they’d be landing rockets vertically and producing smartphones.
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 1 month ago, 4 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,327
By the end of the century, Africa and Asia will both be about the same size in terms of population. It’s very likely that the declining birth rates in the west and in Asia combined with the demographic transition Africa will experience at the end of this century when their birth rates fall, and their dependency ratios start allowing for a higher percentage of their people to be active in the work force, that could have major implications for the future distribution of economic power on earth.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quintuple-posted this 1 month ago, 6 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,328
Like basically, if you look up the birth rates for the continent of Africa, India, and China (think of them less as countries and more as populations of 1.4 billion people each roughly), if you look up what Africa’s birth rate is, and you look up when India’s birth rate was what Africa’s is now, then you look up what India’s GDP was that year, then you do the same for China, they’re not necessarily on different trajectories. It’s not impossible or improbable that either India or Africa or both could develop.
(Edited 46 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc sextuple-posted this 1 month ago, 2 minutes later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,329
My assessment is China developed first out of the three groups, but their success will be the shortest due to their demographic collapse because of the legacy of the one child policy. India will develop before Africa, but will eventually surpass China. Africa as a continent will develop last, but when it does it will be much larger than India or China and decline more slowly.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc septuple-posted this 1 month ago, 1 minute later, 4 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,330
Then the US is sort of a wildcard because without immigration they should decline like China, but with it, they can remain prosperous for another century, so it’s sort of whichever way the wind blows.
Erik !saAqdaazn2 (OP) replied with this 1 month ago, 20 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,332
@1,456,322 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,324 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,325 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,327 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,328 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,329 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
What the fuck is wrong with you? This is juat spam that no sane person would take the time to read.
@1,456,324 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,325 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,327 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,328 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@1,456,329 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
@previous (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
What the fuck is wrong with you? This is juat spam that no sane person would take the time to read.
Anonymous C replied with this 1 month ago, 21 minutes later, 5 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,335
@previous (Erik !saAqdaazn2)
He does it in literally every thread. It's his way of bullying this site into submission because no sane person will read his ramblings so he always gets the last word and feels superior. He's really mentally ill
He does it in literally every thread. It's his way of bullying this site into submission because no sane person will read his ramblings so he always gets the last word and feels superior. He's really mentally ill
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 3 hours later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,345
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 32 minutes later, 8 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,347
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 11 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,367
Anonymous K joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 2 hours later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,410
@1,456,324 (Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc)
> > And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
>
> A lot of people are stupid in developed countries.
Absolutely. They are coddled within developed societies. As we see with MAGA, this can be disastrous. Typically, rule of law and established institutions are a counterweight to kleptocratic corruption, through Trump and friends have doggedly brought it to the U.S. as evidenced in ethics disclosures.
> > And a lot of people in the third world are stupid due to cultural and education factors. Go to PNG sometime.
>
> A lot of people are stupid in developed countries.
Absolutely. They are coddled within developed societies. As we see with MAGA, this can be disastrous. Typically, rule of law and established institutions are a counterweight to kleptocratic corruption, through Trump and friends have doggedly brought it to the U.S. as evidenced in ethics disclosures.
Anonymous K double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 1 minute later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,411
@1,456,347 (I)
> I don’t think you understand what brain drain means.
The smart and motivated despair at their governance and move somewhere they can thrive. Emigrant communities of Vietnamese and the Chinese diaspora, a couple decades ago, had a higher GDP than the countries they left. The West gets doctors and entrepreneurs and engineers.
> I don’t think you understand what brain drain means.
The smart and motivated despair at their governance and move somewhere they can thrive. Emigrant communities of Vietnamese and the Chinese diaspora, a couple decades ago, had a higher GDP than the countries they left. The West gets doctors and entrepreneurs and engineers.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 41 seconds later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,412
@1,456,410 (K)
Joe Rogan is kinda right wing, but that said just because somebody’s wrong most of the time doesn’t mean they’re wrong about everything. There’s some stand up bit he did about stupid people where he said, "We’re not smart, we buy stuff from smart people." I think he had a point with that. A lot of dumb people think they’re smart because they have iPhones. They think that because they were born in the society that invented iPhones and because they bought an iPhone that means they are as smart as the people who invented iPhones. That’s what they actually think, that’s their actual thought process.
Joe Rogan is kinda right wing, but that said just because somebody’s wrong most of the time doesn’t mean they’re wrong about everything. There’s some stand up bit he did about stupid people where he said, "We’re not smart, we buy stuff from smart people." I think he had a point with that. A lot of dumb people think they’re smart because they have iPhones. They think that because they were born in the society that invented iPhones and because they bought an iPhone that means they are as smart as the people who invented iPhones. That’s what they actually think, that’s their actual thought process.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc double-posted this 4 weeks ago, 3 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,414
The way racists think is they think, "oh, I’m white and steam engines were invented in England, but the Native Americans didn’t invent steam engines so I must be as smart as the guy who invented the steam engine and Native Americans must be stupid." But that doesn’t make sense because most people never invented anything. Most people aren’t smart enough to ever think of anything new, most people never do it. Most people never even start a company.
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc triple-posted this 4 weeks ago, 2 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,415
If you think about how ridiculous the logic is, because okay, Ancient Rome, they were white people (mostly), Ancient Greece, why didn’t they have steam engines for thousands of years? They knew how to boil water. They had metal. There were geniuses in Ancient Rome and Ancient Greece, there were definitely some very smart people back then, think of Aristotle or something. Aristotle didn’t invent the train. Why didn’t Aristotle think of a train? He was a smart guy. Even if you were way smarter than the average person and you were born in a world without steam engines, you probably wouldn’t think about it. So it doesn’t make sense to attribute the inventions of your society to your own intelligence because even if you were super smart the chances you’d invent something new are still pretty slim. Especially something that influential.
(Edited 25 seconds later.)
Mr. Bloody Lemonade !0JqexkOGBc quadruple-posted this 4 weeks ago, 5 minutes later, 14 hours after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,416
And of course everybody would be like "oh I’d totally think of the steam engine in Ancient Rome" and it’s like yeah, because you know what a steam engine is, you only think that because somebody told you.
Anonymous M joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 1 day later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,627
Shoot them allAnonymous N joined in and replied with this 4 weeks ago, 13 minutes later, 1 day after the original post[^] [v] #1,456,628
Really makes you wonder, why didn't Matt move to India instead of China?