Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Accent Modification Program

innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 3:37:01 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
No accents are cool, in fact we should invent new accents. The Trans Atlantic accent is a completely invented accent that is a sort of compromise between American and British English. I do think it is cool to learn and practice accents as I am sort of an armature voice impersonator.
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
BennyW
Posts: 698
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 3:37:25 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 3:37:01 AM, BennyW wrote:
No, accents are cool, in fact we should invent new accents. The Trans Atlantic accent is a completely invented accent that is a sort of compromise between American and British English. I do think it is cool to learn and practice accents as I am sort of an armature voice impersonator.
Fixed
You didn't build that-Obama
It's pretty lazy to quote things you disagree with, call it stupid and move on, rather than arguing with the person. -000ike
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 3:38:27 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Wouldn't give up my recieved pronunciation for anything*. If anyone wants to lose their accent I guess its up to them. If I had a Brummie accent I'd probably want to lose it.

*Jetpacks, pet hippos, superpowers, ninja training and dinosaurs are exceptions
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 7:43:53 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Actually I think a lot of regionalism is disappearing. When I was a kid you could say: Ya thirsty? Wanna frap, a tonic, ahw just go to the bubblah. That sentence would make complete sense to me, now I doubt anyone would know what it means.

I do see cars that have a little sticker on it that says "bumpah stickah" Or "The Green Monstah"
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 1:15:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.

Seems like a great idea for England (and, I would assume, everywhere else in Europe). My understanding is that their rigid classism is based on accent. Orwell said the English working class is "branded on their tongue". I always thought that, if I were born in England I would work hard to modify my accent upwardly.

I don't think anything like that exists in the States, except of course with race, which I guess is our version of classism.

Personally, I find a lot of accents very grading. There is something odd about an American who can't seem to pronounce the dental fricative (the th- sound). "Why can't they get that one right?" I think to myself. I doubt most people worry about such things to much though. In America, I don't see the point of accent modification.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 1:19:48 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
As long as it's voluntary, homogenization of accent leads to greater efficiency for everyone.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Indophile
Posts: 1,414
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 1:28:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:19:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
As long as it's voluntary, homogenization of accent leads to greater efficiency for everyone.

In the same way that using the same language, currency, etc. leads to greater efficiency for everyone?

I wonder what would happen to art though....
You will say that I don't really know you
And it will be true.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 1:46:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:15:00 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.

Seems like a great idea for England (and, I would assume, everywhere else in Europe). My understanding is that their rigid classism is based on accent. Orwell said the English working class is "branded on their tongue". I always thought that, if I were born in England I would work hard to modify my accent upwardly.

I don't think anything like that exists in the States, except of course with race, which I guess is our version of classism.

Personally, I find a lot of accents very grading. There is something odd about an American who can't seem to pronounce the dental fricative (the th- sound). "Why can't they get that one right?" I think to myself. I doubt most people worry about such things to much though. In America, I don't see the point of accent modification.

Rigid classism? Mate, its just the same as in America...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 2:44:24 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:46:00 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 7/11/2011 1:15:00 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.

Seems like a great idea for England (and, I would assume, everywhere else in Europe). My understanding is that their rigid classism is based on accent. Orwell said the English working class is "branded on their tongue". I always thought that, if I were born in England I would work hard to modify my accent upwardly.

I don't think anything like that exists in the States, except of course with race, which I guess is our version of classism.

Personally, I find a lot of accents very grading. There is something odd about an American who can't seem to pronounce the dental fricative (the th- sound). "Why can't they get that one right?" I think to myself. I doubt most people worry about such things to much though. In America, I don't see the point of accent modification.

Rigid classism? Mate, its just the same as in America...

Nah, i think it's far less rigid here where class is very heavily dependent (although not entirely) upon income and there is easier access in moving from one class to another than in Europe.
vbaculum
Posts: 1,274
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/11/2011 4:12:19 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:46:00 PM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 7/11/2011 1:15:00 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.

Seems like a great idea for England (and, I would assume, everywhere else in Europe). My understanding is that their rigid classism is based on accent. Orwell said the English working class is "branded on their tongue". I always thought that, if I were born in England I would work hard to modify my accent upwardly.

I don't think anything like that exists in the States, except of course with race, which I guess is our version of classism.

Personally, I find a lot of accents very grading. There is something odd about an American who can't seem to pronounce the dental fricative (the th- sound). "Why can't they get that one right?" I think to myself. I doubt most people worry about such things to much though. In America, I don't see the point of accent modification.

Rigid classism? Mate, its just the same as in America...

I can only go on what I hear. When Christopher Hitchens was asked (on cspan I think) if there was classism in American he said ~ "No. Nothing that would be recognizable to a British person".

The concept of class in America is really non-existent. People barely use the word. The expression "Working class" is barely ever heard. Families are typically composed of members who do menial labor for minimum wage to members who hold high paying office jobs. And there are no bariers for someone who wants to move upwards other than hardwork.

This all breaks down when we start talking about minority races. I've often thought that the reason America never became a classist society is because we have racism. England has a tradition of classism and perhaps, as a result, less racism, possibly, on some level, attributable to economic factors.
"If you claim to value nonviolence and you consume animal products, you need to rethink your position on nonviolence." - Gary Francione

THE WORLD IS VEGAN! If you want it
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 5:43:54 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Its just income here too. Accent is nearly purely geographic. (Some people have affectations, but thats their perogative). Getting a title is just about wealth or having some random contribution. We do have the royals but that is so small minor in the grand scheme of thing as to be inconsequential.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 7:43:52 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 3:38:27 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
If I had a Brummie accent I'd probably want to lose it.

SCREW YOU!!! nac :)

I don't have a very strong accent to be fair and what people characterise as a Brummie accent is normally the much broader tones of our neighbours from the Black Country (Wolverhampton, Dudley etc.).

At 7/12/2011 5:43:54 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Its just income here too. Accent is nearly purely geographic. (Some people have affectations, but thats their perogative). Getting a title is just about wealth or having some random contribution. We do have the royals but that is so small minor in the grand scheme of thing as to be inconsequential.

I've got to disagree. Classism still persists very much in England and even though just about everyone in Kent is probably middle class, you must surely be aware of the subtle social barriers that still exist through class.

Sure, accents are regional, but posh people from any area tend not to have them and the middle classes have much less of an accent than the working classes on the whole.

Disregarding the obvious issue of the aristocracy and land-owning families, classism has a lot more to do with occupation than income (although the two are obviously linked). A labouring foreman could well earn more money than a school teacher but is unlikely to be considered the same class.

In my own experience, I've worked a lot of working class jobs and can relate to all kinds of people but there are always subtle clues that affect interactions. I wasn't raised in a wealthy family, but my mum was a doctor and a Cambridge graduate and guys I've worked with who grew up on council estates will pick up on this stuff.

A lot of my girlfriend's friends are upper middle class kids who attended Birmingham Uni after private education and if you put some of them in the same room with certain people I've worked with at warehouse jobs, the class distinctions would be very obvious.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 8:09:55 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 7:43:52 AM, feverish wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:38:27 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
If I had a Brummie accent I'd probably want to lose it.

SCREW YOU!!! nac :)

Sorry =P

I don't have a very strong accent to be fair and what people characterise as a Brummie accent is normally the much broader tones of our neighbours from the Black Country (Wolverhampton, Dudley etc.).

At 7/12/2011 5:43:54 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Its just income here too. Accent is nearly purely geographic. (Some people have affectations, but thats their perogative). Getting a title is just about wealth or having some random contribution. We do have the royals but that is so small minor in the grand scheme of thing as to be inconsequential.

I've got to disagree. Classism still persists very much in England and even though just about everyone in Kent is probably middle class, you must surely be aware of the subtle social barriers that still exist through class.

Of course. But are class indicators different from America is the question.

Sure, accents are regional, but posh people from any area tend not to have them and the middle classes have much less of an accent than the working classes on the whole.

Not sure about that. Probably depends on whether they were educated privately or not (and that is definitely a question of wealth)

Disregarding the obvious issue of the aristocracy and land-owning families, classism has a lot more to do with occupation than income (although the two are obviously linked). A labouring foreman could well earn more money than a school teacher but is unlikely to be considered the same class.

I also disagree there. Anecdote isn't the singular of data, but I know quite a few builders who are considered upper middle class purely because of their wealth. America does have its equivilents to our aristrocrats in their Paris Hiltons.

In my own experience, I've worked a lot of working class jobs and can relate to all kinds of people but there are always subtle clues that affect interactions. I wasn't raised in a wealthy family, but my mum was a doctor and a Cambridge graduate and guys I've worked with who grew up on council estates will pick up on this stuff.

I reckon they might be confusing intelligence with class, and that just stems from the idea that wealthy people are more likely to be intelligent.

A lot of my girlfriend's friends are upper middle class kids who attended Birmingham Uni after private education and if you put some of them in the same room with certain people I've worked with at warehouse jobs, the class distinctions would be very obvious.

I'm not denying class exists. Just that it is based off wealth. They were privately educated - they came from a wealthy background. No different to America. Class is an issue, but in the same way nearly everywhere.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 8:37:19 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 8:09:55 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 7/12/2011 7:43:52 AM, feverish wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:38:27 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
If I had a Brummie accent I'd probably want to lose it.

SCREW YOU!!! nac :)

Sorry =P

I don't have a very strong accent to be fair and what people characterise as a Brummie accent is normally the much broader tones of our neighbours from the Black Country (Wolverhampton, Dudley etc.).

At 7/12/2011 5:43:54 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
Its just income here too. Accent is nearly purely geographic. (Some people have affectations, but thats their perogative). Getting a title is just about wealth or having some random contribution. We do have the royals but that is so small minor in the grand scheme of thing as to be inconsequential.

I've got to disagree. Classism still persists very much in England and even though just about everyone in Kent is probably middle class, you must surely be aware of the subtle social barriers that still exist through class.

Of course. But are class indicators different from America is the question.

Sure, accents are regional, but posh people from any area tend not to have them and the middle classes have much less of an accent than the working classes on the whole.

Not sure about that. Probably depends on whether they were educated privately or not (and that is definitely a question of wealth)

Disregarding the obvious issue of the aristocracy and land-owning families, classism has a lot more to do with occupation than income (although the two are obviously linked). A labouring foreman could well earn more money than a school teacher but is unlikely to be considered the same class.

I also disagree there. Anecdote isn't the singular of data, but I know quite a few builders who are considered upper middle class purely because of their wealth. America does have its equivilents to our aristrocrats in their Paris Hiltons.

In my own experience, I've worked a lot of working class jobs and can relate to all kinds of people but there are always subtle clues that affect interactions. I wasn't raised in a wealthy family, but my mum was a doctor and a Cambridge graduate and guys I've worked with who grew up on council estates will pick up on this stuff.

I reckon they might be confusing intelligence with class, and that just stems from the idea that wealthy people are more likely to be intelligent.

A lot of my girlfriend's friends are upper middle class kids who attended Birmingham Uni after private education and if you put some of them in the same room with certain people I've worked with at warehouse jobs, the class distinctions would be very obvious.

I'm not denying class exists. Just that it is based off wealth. They were privately educated - they came from a wealthy background. No different to America. Class is an issue, but in the same way nearly everywhere.

Paris Hilton is an example of someone who has money but not class. She even has an elite status, but i am still thinking the average person here would not say she has class. Celeb =/= Class Money =/= Class. Good breeding, common decency, and an above average use of knowledge = class.

I heard an argument recently that the biggest differentiator now between people will not be money, but will be information. That there is a transition of what our strata consists of, from money to information and that class will be determined by those who hold the most and use information the best. I should have paid more attention to the argument, because it was pretty fascinating.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 8:41:37 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
We look at most of our aristocracy in the same way inno. Maybe information is better indicator than wealth. I still mantain that there is no classist difference between America and Britain.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 8:52:07 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 8:09:55 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
At 7/12/2011 7:43:52 AM, feverish wrote:

I've got to disagree. Classism still persists very much in England and even though just about everyone in Kent is probably middle class, you must surely be aware of the subtle social barriers that still exist through class.

Of course. But are class indicators different from America is the question.

Well, I'll have to confess my lack of first-hand experience with America, but I do get the impression that it's more just about wealth over there.


Sure, accents are regional, but posh people from any area tend not to have them and the middle classes have much less of an accent than the working classes on the whole.

Not sure about that. Probably depends on whether they were educated privately or not (and that is definitely a question of wealth)

I'm thinking now of people I know who went to the same comprehensive schools but whose accents vary in intensity depending on their family backgrounds.

I also disagree there. Anecdote isn't the singular of data, but I know quite a few builders who are considered upper middle class purely because of their wealth. America does have its equivilents to our aristrocrats in their Paris Hiltons.

Maybe people who own a building firm could be regarded as upper middle class, but I don't think employees would be. Paris Hiltons may be "upper" class in America, where wealth is all but I don't think the British aristocracy would regard her as their social equal, do you?

I reckon they might be confusing intelligence with class, and that just stems from the idea that wealthy people are more likely to be intelligent.

Well, obviously there are different kinds of intelligence, but I don't think it is really my intellect that can make me stand out a little in those situations. Rather it is more superficial and subtle things like vocabulary, certain attitudes and, yes, the relative mildness of my regional accent.

I'm not denying class exists. Just that it is based off wealth. They were privately educated - they came from a wealthy background. No different to America. Class is an issue, but in the same way nearly everywhere.

It is clearly very much intertwined with wealth, I wouldn't and haven't attempted to deny this, but I do believe it goes a lot deeper than that. A minority of people who attend private schools get there on scholarships and may not come from wealthy families, they (especially if their private school is a boarding school) will probably pick up some of the same affectations (accent or lack of it being among the most obvious) as their wealthier peers and be seen as middle or upper class on account of it.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 9:03:43 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I am struggling to see where you are creating a point of differentiation between America and Britain. I won't argue anything specific you said as to a varying degree, there isn't much disagreement between us. I obviously simplified it by saying it is purely wealth, but the same goes for America.
Someone who hangs around a load of wealthy people in America, goes to their parties and learns their various habits and natures is equally analogous to the person who went to a private school on a scholarship - both will be regarded as upper middle class, or upper class or whatever it is.
Perhaps in addition to wealth, it is the association of wealth which makes a difference. Ie if you act in such a way which might make people think you came from a wealthier background it changes class perception.
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 9:17:50 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 9:03:43 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
I am struggling to see where you are creating a point of differentiation between America and Britain. I won't argue anything specific you said as to a varying degree, there isn't much disagreement between us. I obviously simplified it by saying it is purely wealth, but the same goes for America.
Someone who hangs around a load of wealthy people in America, goes to their parties and learns their various habits and natures is equally analogous to the person who went to a private school on a scholarship - both will be regarded as upper middle class, or upper class or whatever it is.
Perhaps in addition to wealth, it is the association of wealth which makes a difference. Ie if you act in such a way which might make people think you came from a wealthier background it changes class perception.

It's quite possible that i am operating on stereotypes where in England if you are born in the right family you are then in a class without benefit of any merit earned, and income may have existed at some point, but is irrelevant to the status of the family's history and status. I also had thought that there was a certain glass ceiling that was less penetrable without the proper background. This would be for the elite highest of society.

In America we have something like that but the rules are a little different, and we call it the senate.
Thaddeus
Posts: 6,985
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 9:36:48 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I would say that the glass ceiling exists to the extent that it is difficult for any poor person to become rich anywhere. Family is nearly totally meaningless. Both my parents came from very poor background (in Liverpool and South Africa). I attended a particular private school where one would expect very high levels of classism. No-one gave a crap about anyone's background. In fact very few people had any family background at all (and they were foreign anyway...). Never in my entire life has my family's background or anyone I know's background been relevent.
As sure as anything classism did exist. I know a few people who would pick fights with chavs on regular basis. But because they wore burberry and White adidas tracksuit bottoms and would throw beer cans at us, not because they had the wrong background (hell, most of them had a similar background to us)
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 9:39:57 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 9:36:48 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
I would say that the glass ceiling exists to the extent that it is difficult for any poor person to become rich anywhere. Family is nearly totally meaningless. Both my parents came from very poor background (in Liverpool and South Africa). I attended a particular private school where one would expect very high levels of classism. No-one gave a crap about anyone's background. In fact very few people had any family background at all (and they were foreign anyway...). Never in my entire life has my family's background or anyone I know's background been relevent.
As sure as anything classism did exist. I know a few people who would pick fights with chavs on regular basis. But because they wore burberry and White adidas tracksuit bottoms and would throw beer cans at us, not because they had the wrong background (hell, most of them had a similar background to us)

Well, i appreciate the clarification, I've clearly been overly influenced by Materpiece Theater and Charles Dickens.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 10:24:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I grew up in Brooklyn, NY and attended high school in Staten Island, NY (which in my opinion is undoubtedly the burrough with THEE thickest NY accent... trust me). However my parents are professionals working in Manhattan, and growing up they always encouraged me to speak "properly" as they said it would make me sound uneducated in the business world if I spoke like the people I was surrounded by. Growing up I always scoffed at my peers for their accents even though I know I have a subtle one. I definitely speak in a New York dialect (for instance I say ar-ange instead of or-ange), but I try to somewhat avoid talking like like the stereotype. Anyone who Skypes with me can come to their own conclusions :P
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 10:48:39 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 8:37:19 AM, innomen wrote:

I heard an argument recently that the biggest differentiator now between people will not be money, but will be information. That there is a transition of what our strata consists of, from money to information and that class will be determined by those who hold the most and use information the best. I should have paid more attention to the argument, because it was pretty fascinating.

Please tell me where you found that. I'm going to call major bullsh!t on that one. Connections to powerful people and even moderate size wealth is necessary to become rich. If you want to become rich, you need to become an entrepreneur. In order to do this, you need to align yourself with venture capitalists and those who have connections and the big bucks. You need to come up with a great idea and get others to invest in your idea. I'm sure venture capitalists receive many pitches for great business ideas, however they likely don't have time to listen to all of them. The main way to distinguish yourself is to have connections. It's no coincidence that those who are billionaires went to presitge colleges, even if they never completed college.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
innomen
Posts: 10,052
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 11:02:06 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 10:48:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 7/12/2011 8:37:19 AM, innomen wrote:

I heard an argument recently that the biggest differentiator now between people will not be money, but will be information. That there is a transition of what our strata consists of, from money to information and that class will be determined by those who hold the most and use information the best. I should have paid more attention to the argument, because it was pretty fascinating.

Please tell me where you found that. I'm going to call major bullsh!t on that one. Connections to powerful people and even moderate size wealth is necessary to become rich. If you want to become rich, you need to become an entrepreneur. In order to do this, you need to align yourself with venture capitalists and those who have connections and the big bucks. You need to come up with a great idea and get others to invest in your idea. I'm sure venture capitalists receive many pitches for great business ideas, however they likely don't have time to listen to all of them. The main way to distinguish yourself is to have connections. It's no coincidence that those who are billionaires went to presitge colleges, even if they never completed college.

I don't think you understand what the argument was, nor did i probably present it well. The argument was that money would be less of a determination of class than information would be. As for connections, i have no idea what you are trying to say. Anyone with some collateral can go into a bank and get a loan. I know a lot of people who made it to the top without all these connections you speak of.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/12/2011 3:42:57 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 11:02:06 AM, innomen wrote:
At 7/12/2011 10:48:39 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 7/12/2011 8:37:19 AM, innomen wrote:

I heard an argument recently that the biggest differentiator now between people will not be money, but will be information. That there is a transition of what our strata consists of, from money to information and that class will be determined by those who hold the most and use information the best. I should have paid more attention to the argument, because it was pretty fascinating.

Please tell me where you found that. I'm going to call major bullsh!t on that one. Connections to powerful people and even moderate size wealth is necessary to become rich. If you want to become rich, you need to become an entrepreneur. In order to do this, you need to align yourself with venture capitalists and those who have connections and the big bucks. You need to come up with a great idea and get others to invest in your idea. I'm sure venture capitalists receive many pitches for great business ideas, however they likely don't have time to listen to all of them. The main way to distinguish yourself is to have connections. It's no coincidence that those who are billionaires went to presitge colleges, even if they never completed college.

I don't think you understand what the argument was, nor did i probably present it well. The argument was that money would be less of a determination of class than information would be. As for connections, i have no idea what you are trying to say. Anyone with some collateral can go into a bank and get a loan. I know a lot of people who made it to the top without all these connections you speak of.

I see what your saying. However what even deterimines 'class' anyways? One can just as easily say that the ones with the 'hottest bodies' are those with the high class. Classes are only really based on what society thinks is class anyways.

Yea, and you need the collateral to back it up. So you can either save money (taken years) or find wealthy investors. Don't get me wrong, you can get decent money off of starting a business with your own collateral, but you still unlikely won't get wealth. Like the super rich.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 3:39:47 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:28:59 PM, Indophile wrote:
At 7/11/2011 1:19:48 PM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
As long as it's voluntary, homogenization of accent leads to greater efficiency for everyone.

In the same way that using the same language, currency, etc. leads to greater efficiency for everyone?
Yes

I wonder what would happen to art though....
Nothing. If your art is ruined by a lack of funny accents around you your art probably sucked anyway

Good thing efficiency isn't necessarily anything to strive for in and of itself
Other things equal, assuming it's efficiency in achieving something good (in this case communication), it is worth striving for.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 8:25:56 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/12/2011 9:03:43 AM, Thaddeus wrote:
I am struggling to see where you are creating a point of differentiation between America and Britain. I won't argue anything specific you said as to a varying degree, there isn't much disagreement between us. I obviously simplified it by saying it is purely wealth, but the same goes for America.

Okay, yeah I don't have anything to back up this impression I have about the difference between the two countries, so I guess I should stop asserting it.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/13/2011 1:05:59 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 7/11/2011 1:15:00 PM, vbaculum wrote:
At 7/11/2011 3:17:55 AM, innomen wrote:
Some schools in the Boston/New England area are now offering to people a program where they can learn to lose their accent. There was a time when I hated our accent(s) up here, but now I have come to find it quaint.

Koopin makes fun of how I speak when we skype, and I consider myself pretty tame in my New England accent compared to some that I know.

So is this something that's a good thing? Homogenizing the way we speak? I know the Brits have dozens of accents on their little island.

Seems like a great idea for England (and, I would assume, everywhere else in Europe). My understanding is that their rigid classism is based on accent.

What? We don't have any such thing. Does your knowledge of England come only from Sherlock Holmes?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.