"Poor state" Kentucky will likely have a ton of money to spend next season, too.

Son_Of_Saul said:

Ah, Denmark. Good ole Denmark. A country of 6 million homogeneous people where 87% of the population have descended from the same group of people for the last 12,000 years. Are we sure that much of their success doesn't extend from overwhelming common cultural values, some of the strictest immigration laws in the world, a homogenous population structure, and a general lack of an urban class cluster bomb that extends back to the Gilded Age?

I've always found comparisons to the Nordic countries and their economic/social systems to be the equivalent of someone comparing the teaching successes of a teacher (Nordic country system advocates) who runs a homeschool co-op with 6 kids from an affluent family structure giving condescending tips to an urban US teacher (US educational reality) who has a packed-out class with 36 students, half of whom have special education accommodations, while doing it as one teacher without even a paraprofessional to assist them.

Yes there are things we can learn from countries like Denmark, but from an institutional level, it's like comparing that homeschool co-op to the urban class and saying, "we can do that too if we just try harder and create better policies."

No we can't. Not until the desire for "urban renewal" is preceded with an American society that stops making excuses for inequality and starts prioritizing domestic accountability in terms of how we raise our children. Even if we had an entire culutural shift in terms of maximizing these priorities, I still think it would take two to three generations to cleanse our society of the old "who will save me" mindset that plagues the urban areas.

It doesn't look like we as a society are very interested in any of that. In fact, "the academy", and whatever is left of its soul, has made it their mission to crucify individuals like Booker T. Washington over the last 60 years merely because he prioritized self-accomplishment. Little wonder that urban education and poverty have maintained a bottom of the barrel status in that same span.

So since our supposed "leading academic minds" continue to drink the policy-as-salvation Kool-Aid instead of pushing all their chips in on individual work as the core principle of self advancement, I think we're cooked at the moment. Systems aren't going to change whether little Johnny goes to bed before 1 AM on a school night or whether or not he's eating a steady diet of Takis, french fries and Mountain Dew. That comes down to value priorities, and the urban value system is largely inadequate.

Click to expand...

See also: Japan, Canada, Australia, China, France, UK, South Korea as countries with a lower Gini coefficient (measures income inequality). https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/gini-coefficient-wb?survey_comparability=no_spells

The US scores relatively poorly. The "work hard and pull yourself up by your bootstraps" came from the 19th century as a sarcastic joke about an impossible task. We all live and work within some type of system, and that system should work for the most amount of people possible if our goal increase the well-being of many over a few. Individual work and social systems are not incompatible. In many countries, social systems actually help them become more independent and give them the confidence to work hard, relying less on others.

For example, in the US people often live with their parents into their early 20's and move back in with their children later in life. This places a huge burden on individuals on both ends of this to have to take care of those we love leaving not much room for an authentic relationship with them. Many countries flip this through social systems. These systems intentionally free individuals from structured dependency on family members and employers. Universal Healthcare and free education can be viewed as creating a launchpad for personal liberty instead of a "nanny state". Having lived in Denmark I can confirm. I lived in their system and it's fantastic compared to the US. Yes, they pay high taxes. But by the time you account for what Americans pay into employer based programs and our lacking social systems, it's actually closer than you'd think. Yet they have higher level's of transparency, removing unnecessary layers of underwriters and companies seeking to make a profit off your well-being. And these other countries do this while having a higher economic freedom than the US. There's a lot we can learn.

None of this is to say that these other countries have everything figured out. There are very good counter points, as you mentioned. But I think people overall in the US have a very closed mind to social systems. Powerful people in the US with money and influence have run programs for years in rural areas to encourage the masses to think social systems are freedom takers, and not freedom givers. This has left Americans very ignorant to other ways of life. Now, many times a rural American sees a different way of doing things, they simply parrot what they've been told. I encourage people to travel if they can, and remain open minded about other ways of living than straight up capitalism. Personally, I love capitalism. It is partly responsible for the biggest uplift of people out of poverty in the world and has created countless amazing technologies. But I can also appreciate that there are social systems that when combined with capitalism create a balance that is best for the largest number of people, instead of the few that are already rich and powerful.

Wunky said:

When he was hired I said we need an FF within four years, mainly because Cal left a mess. Felt like that was reasonable and still do. If he does it in three, I’ll be very impressed. If he can’t do it in four, then I think it’s time to look elsewhere, and no hard feelings. The resources will never be a problem at UK.

Click to expand...

The tournament is so random. I think no matter how good a team is, it’s impossible to guarantee a run to a certain round.

To me a dominant regular season and consistently very good regular seasons is a better indicator of a coaches ability. If you keep doing that, youll consistently put your team in the best possible position for post season success (read: 1 seed. see Bill Self, John Calipari, Tony Bennett)

Lots of mediocre to bad coaches have made the final four. Kevin Ollie even won the damn thing.

TFCat11 said:

Pretty good war chest, but still well below the likes of Duke. Arkansas, Illinois, Texas, and maybe a couple of others. But right now, I’m just excited to watch the team Pope just assembled, because on paper, it’s a 3rd weekend level team, with an E8 being the floor.

Click to expand...

With Mitchell we have a better team on paper than Arkansas. They are over dependent on freshman once again.

Major_Tom said:

. Personally, I love capitalism. It is partly responsible for the biggest uplift of people out of poverty in the world and has created countless amazing technologies. But I can also appreciate that there are social systems that when combined with capitalism create a balance that is best for the largest number of people, instead of the few that are already rich and powerful.

Click to expand...

ok great, from your earlier post it seemed you were anti-capitalism. I agree with a lot of your points. My family and I immigrated to the US in the 80s and to me the biggest issues I’ve seen since living here is the lack of anti-trust enforcement and so many oligopolies in the recent decades, but also a lot of opacity in where our taxes are going. For example the amount of money that is given to public schools in the last 3 decades with seemingly nothing to show for it. We are not holding our politicians accountable on where the money is going. I think that stems from what I feel is the biggest problem in American politics - a two party system. Can you think of any aspect of life where only two entities were in power that was beneficial? I just can’t.

Johnnie Africa said:

ok great, from your earlier post it seemed you were anti-capitalism. I agree with a lot of your points. My family and I immigrated to the US in the 80s and to me the biggest issues I’ve seen since living here is the lack of anti-trust enforcement and so many oligopolies in the recent decades, but also a lot of opacity in where our taxes are going. For example the amount of money that is given to public schools in the last 3 decades with seemingly nothing to show for it. We are not holding our politicians accountable on where the money is going. I think that stems from what I feel is the biggest problem in American politics - a two party system. Can you think of any aspect of life where only two entities were in power that was beneficial? I just can’t.

Click to expand...

I agree. And no, I am not anti-capitalism.

Paraphrasing historian Timothy Snyder (writer of The Road to Unfreedom and On Tyranny), the rich and powerful thrive on cycles of division and absolutes. Historically, these absolutes are used to control the masses through two useful contrasting methods: "Politics of Eternity" (PoE) and "Politics of Inevitability" (PoI).

PoE: The belief that history moves in a straight, upward line toward a better future, and that progress (such as private ownership and capitalism automatically leading to a flourishing democracy, or public ownership and communism automatically leading to classless utopia) is guaranteed regardless of human action. When this fails, people are shocked and open to a new mindset.

PoI: A worldview where the future is cancelled, and time instead loops in a repeating, cyclical pattern of perceived national victimhood and threat. No one in our group is responsible and "the enemy is coming," reducing politics to a constant defense of an idealized, mythical past leading to nationalism and a denial of reality.

Either is a vast oversimplification of the real world and allows people in large numbers to be manipulated. When one doesn't work, if you have enough power, simply switch to the other. Both are useful narratives to control large groups of people unwilling or untaught to think for themselves.

Major_Tom said:

I agree. And no, I am not anti-capitalism.

Paraphrasing historian Timothy Snyder (writer of The Road to Unfreedom and On Tyranny), the rich and powerful thrive on cycles of division and absolutes. Historically, these absolutes are used to control the masses through two useful contrasting methods: "Politics of Eternity" (PoE) and "Politics of Inevitability" (PoI).

PoE: The belief that history moves in a straight, upward line toward a better future, and that progress (such as private ownership and capitalism automatically leading to a flourishing democracy, or public ownership and communism automatically leading to classless utopia) is guaranteed regardless of human action. When this fails, people are shocked and open to a new mindset.

PoI: A worldview where the future is cancelled, and time instead loops in a repeating, cyclical pattern of perceived national victimhood and threat. No one in our group is responsible and "the enemy is coming," reducing politics to a constant defense of an idealized, mythical past leading to nationalism and a denial of reality.

Either is a vast oversimplification of the real world and allows people in large numbers to be manipulated. When one doesn't work, if you have enough power, simply switch to the other. Both are useful narratives to control large groups of people unwilling or untaught to think for themselves.

Click to expand...

Have you ever read The Rational Optimist? Very good and thorough read of basically the history (and downfall) of societies. Essentially human find a way until a government gets to big and tries to control and retain power, leading to it’s eventual fall. Highly recommend.