Was it Buffy where the rich people society fed sacrifices to a snake demon for luck? That was a great episode.
My main issue is with the Bailout King part I suppose, although the other problems annoy me also. That’s indicative of their beliefs about the poor and the government. Sort of like what Romney did in that 49% speech that was leaked.
Its clear they didn’t think it was tame, hence the violent threats and later attempted bribery to keep it quiet. Its not like they feared retaliation from above for a PR gaffe, since its all top level people. So they must have a reason for being so upset.
I was referencing Conan the Barbarian (the movie, not the short stories), but yeah, there was a Buffy episode like that too. Or maybe it was Angel, I forget which.
In any case, I absolutely agree that the activities reported were in poor taste and quite possibly reflective of some questionable attitudes. But I’m hesitant to draw strong conclusions from this sort of reporting, mainly because of base rate neglect: this doesn’t tell us what the average Wall Street honcho gets up to when they’re at home. It doesn’t even tell us the average for that party. You get what you see: a general impression and a short list of lowlights. The impression doesn’t surprise me much (one doesn’t sneak into a fraternity party with a camera if one wants to paint it in a favorable light), and the examples aren’t much better: I’ve been to plenty of parties with behavior as bad or worse. For example, there’s the one anime con I’ve been to (once and nevermore)...
Well, I’m certainly aware of actual fraternity parties with drag being used to humiliate, hell our soccer team tried to make the freshman, and sophomores because when we were freshmen there was a newly created ban, dress in traditionally female clothes. And of course general misogyny and homophobia.
But you’ve been to a lot of parties where one of the main activities was to denigrate the gullible poor/voting public wrt shady financial stuff?
As far as the average guy’s beliefs and behavior, it kinda does. In such societies the behavior of the top level says a lot about the social norms. I mean its not as good as a peer review study or a survey maybe, but fat chance getting evidence of that caliber in an legal manner.
But you’ve been to a lot of parties where one of the main activities was to denigrate the gullible poor/voting public wrt shady financial stuff?
Was it not clear from the example that I meant bad behavior in a broader sense?
I could go into details, but they’d be irrelevant; the point is that you can paint an unflattering picture of many, many subculture events if you’re so inclined, especially if there’s drinking involved. All e.g. the “Bailout King” episode tells us is that some people at this specific party interpret as an outgroup people who’re politically critical of the finance sector. Yeah, and… ? Subcultures generate us-vs.-them behavior and weird insider rituals; it’s what they do.
You keep saying paint a bad picture. That usually means unfair spin. I’m not sure that’s the case here.
As far as your assertion about the Bailout King song, I disagree. Certainly if we were looking at 100% solid objective evidence then what you suggested is all we can conclude. I don’t know about you, but I don’t make decisions only on a 100% chance of truth.
Subculture wise, I don’t give a shit what some random anime con subculture does. I care quite a bit, and I believe quite reasonably, about the behavior of a group who controls a significant portion of the US and Global economy.
Much like the supreme court, I apply strict scrutiny, although in a more colloquial sense, to issues with broader social significance.
Certainly if we were looking at 100% solid objective evidence then what you suggested is all we can conclude. I don’t know about you, but I don’t make decisions only on a 100% chance of truth.
This would be evidence for the attitudes our reporter is attributing to his subjects… if the reporting was unbiased, not in the sense of “lacking an ulterior motive” but in the sense of “proportionately likely to report each option”. (Technically individual data points are still evidence, but potentially much weaker; aggregated ones can in some circumstances be negative evidence.) Given the reporting slant and indeed the fact that we’re discussing journalism, however, I don’t believe we can rely on the provided interpretation of events. I’m willing to take the article as strong evidence that the events themselves did occur—we’re not talking tabloid journalism here—but that’s all.
More generally, I think it’s unreasonable to expect perfectly restrained private behavior—and that is what we’re talking here, if you accept that upper-echelon Wall Street social circles constitute a subculture—from people regardless of their wealth or power. Their behavior as regards the disposition of that wealth and power is socially significant, as to a lesser extent is their public facade. What they do behind closed doors doesn’t concern me.
Its not their lack of restraint that is at issue, its what belief they demonstrate themselves to hold with this particular lack of restraint. Given the events that proceeded this story, wrt the financial sector, its seems quite likely that these beliefs demonstrated in private are in fact the ones they truly hold and which they act upon. After all the original story was about the fate of newbie financial professionals post-Crash. Maybe you could discount this behavior in the time before the Crash, but we have clear and well known evidence of the results of the actions of these people, and then we see them partying and laughing about how they avoided any significant consquences.
Was it Buffy where the rich people society fed sacrifices to a snake demon for luck? That was a great episode.
My main issue is with the Bailout King part I suppose, although the other problems annoy me also. That’s indicative of their beliefs about the poor and the government. Sort of like what Romney did in that 49% speech that was leaked.
Its clear they didn’t think it was tame, hence the violent threats and later attempted bribery to keep it quiet. Its not like they feared retaliation from above for a PR gaffe, since its all top level people. So they must have a reason for being so upset.
I was referencing Conan the Barbarian (the movie, not the short stories), but yeah, there was a Buffy episode like that too. Or maybe it was Angel, I forget which.
In any case, I absolutely agree that the activities reported were in poor taste and quite possibly reflective of some questionable attitudes. But I’m hesitant to draw strong conclusions from this sort of reporting, mainly because of base rate neglect: this doesn’t tell us what the average Wall Street honcho gets up to when they’re at home. It doesn’t even tell us the average for that party. You get what you see: a general impression and a short list of lowlights. The impression doesn’t surprise me much (one doesn’t sneak into a fraternity party with a camera if one wants to paint it in a favorable light), and the examples aren’t much better: I’ve been to plenty of parties with behavior as bad or worse. For example, there’s the one anime con I’ve been to (once and nevermore)...
Well, I’m certainly aware of actual fraternity parties with drag being used to humiliate, hell our soccer team tried to make the freshman, and sophomores because when we were freshmen there was a newly created ban, dress in traditionally female clothes. And of course general misogyny and homophobia.
But you’ve been to a lot of parties where one of the main activities was to denigrate the gullible poor/voting public wrt shady financial stuff?
As far as the average guy’s beliefs and behavior, it kinda does. In such societies the behavior of the top level says a lot about the social norms. I mean its not as good as a peer review study or a survey maybe, but fat chance getting evidence of that caliber in an legal manner.
Was it not clear from the example that I meant bad behavior in a broader sense?
I could go into details, but they’d be irrelevant; the point is that you can paint an unflattering picture of many, many subculture events if you’re so inclined, especially if there’s drinking involved. All e.g. the “Bailout King” episode tells us is that some people at this specific party interpret as an outgroup people who’re politically critical of the finance sector. Yeah, and… ? Subcultures generate us-vs.-them behavior and weird insider rituals; it’s what they do.
You keep saying paint a bad picture. That usually means unfair spin. I’m not sure that’s the case here.
As far as your assertion about the Bailout King song, I disagree. Certainly if we were looking at 100% solid objective evidence then what you suggested is all we can conclude. I don’t know about you, but I don’t make decisions only on a 100% chance of truth.
Subculture wise, I don’t give a shit what some random anime con subculture does. I care quite a bit, and I believe quite reasonably, about the behavior of a group who controls a significant portion of the US and Global economy.
Much like the supreme court, I apply strict scrutiny, although in a more colloquial sense, to issues with broader social significance.
This would be evidence for the attitudes our reporter is attributing to his subjects… if the reporting was unbiased, not in the sense of “lacking an ulterior motive” but in the sense of “proportionately likely to report each option”. (Technically individual data points are still evidence, but potentially much weaker; aggregated ones can in some circumstances be negative evidence.) Given the reporting slant and indeed the fact that we’re discussing journalism, however, I don’t believe we can rely on the provided interpretation of events. I’m willing to take the article as strong evidence that the events themselves did occur—we’re not talking tabloid journalism here—but that’s all.
More generally, I think it’s unreasonable to expect perfectly restrained private behavior—and that is what we’re talking here, if you accept that upper-echelon Wall Street social circles constitute a subculture—from people regardless of their wealth or power. Their behavior as regards the disposition of that wealth and power is socially significant, as to a lesser extent is their public facade. What they do behind closed doors doesn’t concern me.
Its not their lack of restraint that is at issue, its what belief they demonstrate themselves to hold with this particular lack of restraint. Given the events that proceeded this story, wrt the financial sector, its seems quite likely that these beliefs demonstrated in private are in fact the ones they truly hold and which they act upon. After all the original story was about the fate of newbie financial professionals post-Crash. Maybe you could discount this behavior in the time before the Crash, but we have clear and well known evidence of the results of the actions of these people, and then we see them partying and laughing about how they avoided any significant consquences.