The Angry Violent Right

Moiraine said:
I have 2 2nd cousins who are millennials that have college degrees and work in construction.

I have 2 1st cousins who are a Gen X and boomer with degrees who work in construction. 

I have 2 1st cousins with no degree who are baby boomers who work in construction.

It’a already old seeing you just pulling things out of thin air or a dark area and presenting them as facts without bothering to find out if they actually are. 

Maybe you should try to find data to back up your opinion (that’s all it is) that millennials are underemployed because they only want to work their dream job. Good luck with that. 
Click to expand...
Im in the field- ask ANY contractor how difficult it has been for them to find help in the last 5 years

Every day I hear the same thing- severe shortage of young manpower

REALLY hard getting younger people to show up consistently and on time- this is from 100s of employers I work with

No one in line to take the places of the older skilled tradesmen who are aging out of the workforce

 
Landlord said:
Either provide some data or don't make stupid claims like this. Yeah, some coastal/elite college campuses have gone a bit off the rocker with their non-violent protests and shouting down of conservative voices and non-woke professors/speakers/etc., but that's one relatively small and isolated piece of the puzzle.

We can talk about actual violence, if you want. Actual violence on all sides. ANTIFA, neo-nazis, etc. Or we could talk about protests and ideological wars that aren't violent on both sides as well. Or we could talk about both combined together. But stop using slippery and inaccurate language to paint your conservatively rose-colored perspective as reality. 
Click to expand...
PLENTY of violence from the left and studies showing people there feel its ok to use violence to stop people from talking:

https://qz.com/1082794/one-in-five-us-college-students-says-its-acceptable-to-use-violence-against-an-offensive-speaker/

A Brookings Institution report this week, pulling data from a survey of 1,500 undergraduates at four-year universities across 49 states, found that 19% of students agree with the following statement:


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?



And 44% replied “no” to the following:


Does the First Amendment protect “hate speech”?



(Those 44% are wrong. ”Hate speech,” with some caveats, is legally protected under the US constitution.)

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-berkeley-protest-shapiro-20170914-htmlstory.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/15/ben-shapiro-berkeley-protest-arrests/669071001/

 
OTHusker said:
Im in the field- ask ANY contractor how difficult it has been for them to find help in the last 5 years

Every day I hear the same thing- severe shortage of young manpower

REALLY hard getting younger people to show up consistently and on time- this is from 100s of employers I work with

No one in line to take the places of the older skilled tradesmen who are aging out of the workforce
Click to expand...
You are not wrong about the troubles contractors face hiring qualified young people.

But I do believe you are wrong about the reason.  Young kids aren't lazy and afraid to get dirty.  School districts and parents are mostly to blame (promoting 4 year colleges to kids who have no reason to go) along with the disappearance of union shops that used to celebrate the jobs available, fight for good wages, and provide proper training.  There are a ton of factors we face now that we didn't 40-50 years ago, lazier kids isn't one of them.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
Im in the field- ask ANY contractor how difficult it has been for them to find help in the last 5 years 

Every day I hear the same thing- severe shortage of young manpower

REALLY hard getting younger people to show up consistently and on time- this is from 100s of employers I work with

No one in line to take the places of the older skilled tradesmen who are aging out of the workforce
Click to expand...


Pay more. Provide training. Perpetuate the skills.

Construction used to pay a living wage. Now it's a low-paying churn-through job where they hire & fire people quickly to keep labor costs down. If you can swing a hammer you're hired. If you start making too much, you're gone because they'll find the next guy.

For about the same wage as a construction job in Nebraska, a person can work inside at an air-conditioned call center.  Which do you think they'll choose?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
the vast majority
Click to expand...






OTHusker said:
19% of students agree with the following statement:


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?
Click to expand...






Actually that's only in jest. I was responding to your claim that the vast majority of violence is perpetuated by the left. Your numbers have nothing to do with that assertion. Your numbers aren't even representative of the left. The polling demographic was just 'undergraduate students'.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Landlord said:
Actually that's only in jest. I was responding to your claim that the vast majority of violence is perpetuated by the left. Your numbers have nothing to do with that assertion. Your numbers aren't even representative of the left. The polling demographic was just 'undergraduate students'.
Click to expand...
But all college kids are liberal.  At least if their professors are doing the "brainwashing" right!

 
OTHusker said:
PLENTY of violence from the left and studies showing people there feel its ok to use violence to stop people from talking:

https://qz.com/1082794/one-in-five-us-college-students-says-its-acceptable-to-use-violence-against-an-offensive-speaker/

A Brookings Institution report this week, pulling data from a survey of 1,500 undergraduates at four-year universities across 49 states, found that 19% of students agree with the following statement:


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?



And 44% replied “no” to the following:


Does the First Amendment protect “hate speech”?



(Those 44% are wrong. ”Hate speech,” with some caveats, is legally protected under the US constitution.)

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-berkeley-protest-shapiro-20170914-htmlstory.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/15/ben-shapiro-berkeley-protest-arrests/669071001/
Click to expand...






It’s impossible to have an honest discussion with you because you purposely obfuscate the data (when you actually use it). You left out an important detail from your little comment “plenty of violence from the left” and “people there feel its ok to use violence.”

The 19% is all students. Not left or Democrat students. And you conveniently left out the fact that they broke it down by political affiliation.

22% of Republicans vs 20% of Democrats.


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?







 


 


Political Affiliation


Type of College


Gender




 


All


Dem


Rep


Ind


Public


Private


Female


Male






Agree


19


20


22


16


18


21


10


30




Disagree


81


80


78


84


82


79


90


70






 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
PLENTY of violence from the left and studies showing people there feel its ok to use violence to stop people from talking:

https://qz.com/1082794/one-in-five-us-college-students-says-its-acceptable-to-use-violence-against-an-offensive-speaker/

A Brookings Institution report this week, pulling data from a survey of 1,500 undergraduates at four-year universities across 49 states, found that 19% of students agree with the following statement:


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?



And 44% replied “no” to the following:


Does the First Amendment protect “hate speech”?



(Those 44% are wrong. ”Hate speech,” with some caveats, is legally protected under the US constitution.)

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-berkeley-protest-shapiro-20170914-htmlstory.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/15/ben-shapiro-berkeley-protest-arrests/669071001/
Click to expand...


So... to you, "from the left" means "university students."  Right?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
OTHusker said:
PLENTY of violence from the left and studies showing people there feel its ok to use violence to stop people from talking:

https://qz.com/1082794/one-in-five-us-college-students-says-its-acceptable-to-use-violence-against-an-offensive-speaker/

A Brookings Institution report this week, pulling data from a survey of 1,500 undergraduates at four-year universities across 49 states, found that 19% of students agree with the following statement:


A student group opposed to the speaker uses violence to prevent the speaker from speaking. Do you agree or disagree that the student group’s actions are acceptable?



And 44% replied “no” to the following:


Does the First Amendment protect “hate speech”?



(Those 44% are wrong. ”Hate speech,” with some caveats, is legally protected under the US constitution.)

https://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-berkeley-protest-shapiro-20170914-htmlstory.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2017/09/15/ben-shapiro-berkeley-protest-arrests/669071001/
Click to expand...
Other posters have already debunked your claims, but I'll pile on by pointing out that you moved the goalposts. Here's your post @Landlord was replying to:

OTHusker said:
The vast majority of people we see today having violent protests and death threats against speakers- seem to be from the left and on college campuses against conservatives like Ben Shapiro and Laura Ingraham. Almost all of those speakers being banned or threatened seem to be conservatives. Very shameful anti american stuff. 
Click to expand...
So even if your claims weren't debunked, you're still moving the goalposts from "having violent protests and death threats" to "agreeing with statements about violent protests".

 
I met a liberal millenial once who worked 70 hours a week laying bricks and hanging drywall. He was a beast, outworking everybody on his crew by 2x. He was always 15 minutes early and left 20 minutes late and he never missed a shift. I heard he was from a naturally strong family though so that might make a difference.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm a fairly liberal (non-democrat) millenial who works for myself more or less 10:30a-9:30p at least 6 days a week. I'm never off. It's not construction, but it's unreal hustle.

 
RedDenver said:
Hopefully, they apprehend and try the attacker. But since the attacker isn't known yet, how can the conservative media immediately know he's liberal?

Here's the story from Newsweek: https://www.newsweek.com/conservative-student-assaulted-uc-berkeley-while-recruiting-other-1340057
Click to expand...
Well

it was a conservative group recruiting conservatives

one could assume that the person assaulting the conservative recruiter and calling them the b and c words and  didn’t like what was going on was probably on the other side of the spectrum

you are at cal Berkeley where violence against free speech and conservatives has been going on for years 

Let’s be honest here

just imagine if someone with a MAGA hat had beat up someone who was recruiting kids for blm or some other liberal group

it would have been headline news from coast to coast

talk shows would have been all over it

politicians would have been using the incident to grab headlines 

didn’t something like that happen recently? Didn’t that just happen ???

somewhere wasn’t someone that was supposedly wearing a MAGA hat beat up some liberal fella and then it got a bunch of publicity ? Didn’t that supposed attack generate a bunch of front page outrage nationally? 

instead  with this case with the shoe on the other foot, most of us including myself had never  heard about it 

no talk shows or interviews from the big networks

no politicians making hay

no 24x7 news stories

no calls to action

instead- crickets 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top