In which I agree with David FriedmanDecember 18, 2012 Tim WorstallEconomics9 CommentsYes, you should read this. \”Here\’s that shit you needed. Now fuck off.\” That isn\’t quite the bit that David thought so good but…. previousThat Compass Statement InterpretednextSo we\’ve got to stay in the EU because of the Yanks? 9 thoughts on “In which I agree with David Friedman” So Much for Subtlety December 19, 2012 at 12:05 am It is a bit of a worry that David Wong only talks about the need to grow up, improve yourself and contribute to society in terms of getting laid. But well worth saying. The West has seen a flight from adulthood. Especially among men. Largely, I have to admit, because being an adult male is not rewarded as it used to be. But still, at some point people have to grow up, stop being parasites on their parents (and these days all of society) and do what men do everywhere else – stop complaining, get a damn job and support your family. So Much for Subtlety December 19, 2012 at 12:46 am “Here’s that shit you needed. Now fuck off.” By the way isn’t that wrong because the whole premise of the article is that boys ought to say “Here’s that shit you needed. Now fuck me.”? mike power December 19, 2012 at 1:20 am A video of a bearded, long haired guy wiggling his genitals elicits this from Wong: “Everyone who watched that video instantly became a little happier, although not all for the same reasons. Can you do that for people? Why not? What’s stopping you from strapping on your proverbial thong and cape and taking to your proverbial stage and flapping your proverbial penis at people? That guy knows the secret to winning at human life” Jeez, a guy shaking his cock and screaming about butt-fucking makes EVERYONE a little happier. Well, it didn’t work for me. Apparently doing something (anything) is better than doing nothing. Yeah, right. I guess by that criteria the guy in Newtown, Connecticut must have been a “winner”. “What’s stopping you from strapping on your proverbial thong and cape and taking to your proverbial stage and flapping your proverbial penis at people?” Erm, let me think. Self respect? Not wanting to prove to the world that I’m a completer tosser? It’s why I don’t do karaoke too. Ian B December 19, 2012 at 2:28 am I think the use of the speech from Glengarry Glen Ross is interesting, because it doesn’t illustrate the point the article appears in its way to be trying to make. It doesn’t illustrate providing what others need, which is what free markets are supposed to be about. I may be a little more attuned to this than usual, because I’ve been on one of my irregular wanders around the Feminism/MRM-O-Sphere, but the gist of the speech is reinforcement of the masculist system- it’s about being a “loser”. About having “brass balls”. And it’s about proving you aren’t a loser, and have brass balls, by conning other people into buying things they otherwise didn’t want. Which is the exact opposite of them coming to you for what you can give them. So, okay, within the company power structure it is. It’s about the workers providing to the wanker boss what he wants. But within the broader market context it isn’t; as such it just reinforces the image of capitalism as exploitative, taking money off people by tricking them into buying shit. Which is no doubt why good old “liberal” Hollywood made the movie. It is an indictment of capitalists. So basically, Friedman appears to have missed the point, and so it’s kind of funny that he finds the speech inspirational. It’s a parody. The Stigler December 19, 2012 at 3:12 am It is a bit of a worry that David Wong only talks about the need to grow up, improve yourself and contribute to society in terms of getting laid. But well worth saying. I’m not convinced it makes much difference in terms of getting laid. Who got more tail? Brad Pitt or Bill Gates? Being handsome makes a very large difference to things. Ian B December 19, 2012 at 3:22 am Okay, so it’s David Wong then. Why is it David Friedman in Tim’s post title? I’m confused. So Much For Subtlety December 19, 2012 at 3:42 am The Stigler – “I’m not convinced it makes much difference in terms of getting laid. Who got more tail? Brad Pitt or Bill Gates? Being handsome makes a very large difference to things.” We obviously need a large inter-disciplinary, inter-cultural multi-task-force-led research study of this problem. How about we apply to the EU for some heavy duty funding and I’ll take the Bangkok end of the research project? In fairness Brad Pitt has done some sh!t with his life. The question ought to be how much tail has Brad Pitt’s less famous brother got? Even that doesn’t work because he can always say he is Brad Pitt’s brother. So perhaps the best comparison is how many women has Larry Ellison slept with compared to one of his cubicle drones. Although that may be cheating a little. I think it is fair to say that Bill Gates wouldn’t have slept with a lot of girls if he wasn’t a billionaire. Tim Newman December 19, 2012 at 9:25 am That’s a really good post, and the link to the Last Psychiatrist’s post on hipsters on welfare is worth following too. Of course, there is a certain amount of smugness to be enjoyed when you’re an engineer reading an article emphasizing the importance of being able to actually do something useful and contribute… Serf December 19, 2012 at 12:56 pm Once upon a time, even the heroes of the left agreed with this: “Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country” Unfortunately he missed out an important point. The world is full of people who have reached the summit of their lousy potential and are dedicated to keeping the rest of the world down. Being useful is a necessary but not sufficient first step. you also have to be conniving and not naive. Illegitimi non carborundum Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.