Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
A boyhood hero of mine! Meeting him in person was an absolute thrill. In fact, there was a time in my life when I virtually idolized him. I know, from reading about him for years, that I wasn't alone in this. Thank God he never held elected office, as there was already a substantial "cult of personality" about him! I absolutely attribute a good portion of any writing skill I may have to my having read Buckley's books as a youth, my favorite of which has always been "The Unmaking of a Mayor."
@timeoutforart I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul says, but some things he says are kinda out there, lol. I agree we need to end the longest, most destructive war in our nations history (The drug war, of course), we are wasting money we don't have in Afghanistan and Iraq. But getting rid of the dept of education and the FDA is going just a little too far.
buckly was nothing but a puppet gatekeeper for the zion bastards. he is better off dead. he was a champion of nothing. I saw him do nothing but shill for years. He was a nothing. He would always threaten punks. Classic wussy bully. His daddy doesn't have enough money to save his sorry ass did he. He was rude, ugly as mud and on t.v. because it's his job to look smart and stuffy and do what he was told when he was told. snap of a finger, he asked the england bankers how high on the way up
@sssssjjjj1 Wouldn’t it have been wonderful to have seen Mr. Buckley seated across from him on ‘Firing Line’ to debate the likes of such an erudite, learned, cultured and sophisticated individual who describes someone as “…Classic wussy bully. … He was rude, ugly as mud and on t.v. because it's his job to look smart and stuffy…” What an intellectual challenge that would have been for Mr. Buckley; like killing flies with a howitzer.
Mr. Buckley was the 'man'. Amazing how he could have all of those democrat dunce, socialist, left wing loser, hate America libs shivering in their hush puppies.
William F. Buckley Jr was a joke God gave the right. Unfortunately, they didn't get the punch line. If you want to know what a Buckley, "libertarian" "free capitalist" "Small Government" world, would look like. You dont have to look no further than Somalia for your answer. ANARCHY.
The Right is in sore need of intellectual strength right now. Besides George Will I can't come up with many names belonging in the WFB Jr. class of thoughtful and articulate principled muscle.
There are many intelligent and knowledgeable people on the right, don't misinterpret. But not that many "intellectuals."
Wow, I wish that the so called 'conservatives' of today would be as openly snobby as Buckley was. Seriously man, their PR makes em look like total populists. Hitler too had this populist sheen. Sarah Palin just blows my mind. Not in a good way. She's like Bush with tits. Just a PR puppet the GOP throws up so they can do what they want behind the scenes. Joe Six Packs? Maverick? Sure, and Christians are an oppressed minority here in the states. Anyone want to buy some property in Louisianna?
With all due respect, your comments reveal an extremely dark soul that you might want to examine. Good riddance? What an absolutely despicable comment about someone's death!
Delta and zoticus perfectly represent the "peace loving" folks who adore the likes of Chomsky. The fact is, as evidenced by their comments, their hate for those with whom they disagree ideologically exceeds their love of peace. Buckley was a man that stood for a just peace--not acquiescence in the face of communist purges and fascistic leaders.
When I heard of his death I thought for a split second perhaps there was a god, and then applied something conservatives know little of, Logic and Facts.
I must presume, given your animadversion on Mr. Buckley, that you disagree with his ideology. Am I correct?
Assuming that I am, I wonder to what ideology you subscribe that allows your conscience to harbor joy in the death of another man whose career was centered on the precepts of human freedom and the dignity it fosters?
Further, your insipid generalization that "conservatives know little of Logic and Fats" demonstrates that you know little of Mr. Buckley.
What everyone does know is that he was a CHILD that couldn't get through a single debate without threatening violence on someone: be it the individual he was debating, the moderator, or a cameraman. Moreover, he was wrong about Vietnam, and most likely will have his place of rest urinated on. He was a chickenhawk bitch coward. A cypto-nazi.
I agree 100% with your comments, and I admire and respect your tone as well. Who would enjoy the death of another? I consider myself (mostly) liberal, but there are few people, liberal or conservative, that I admired more than William F. Buckley Jr. He was an itellectual who would examine the facts and was not blinded by pure ideology. I may not have believed that he was right as often as he did :) , but I damn well would listen to what he would have to say. He WILL be missed.
Buckleigh's "career centered on the precepts of human freedom and the dignity it fosters" ?!?
Yes, the freedom,of those who looked like him, to lord it over the world.
Not so the freedom of African Americans whose segregation he supported. Not so the freedom of thousands of Vietnamese and Cambodian peasants whose mass slaughter and mutilation by secret and illegal US carpet bombing Buckleigh supported while leaning back in his chair, pencil twirling, tongue darting, eyes twinkling.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it helps to brace your estimations with facts. To say Buckley was a fool is hardly a representation of the truth. Buckley was not a fool and to say so would be to fly in the face of even his adversary's opinions, who saw him as distinct, political threat. Ostentatious? Yes. A fool? Not hardly. And to say he was disassociated would be to deny the confirmed popularity of his show. A show that has a still unvanquished record for length of time on air.
@soccerjones84 i agree that it would be wrong to call the man a fool. He obviously held some intelligence in order to have accomplished what he did. Still to me he appeared as a man with a wool over his eyes. Some of the things he said made me burst out laughing; but hew speaks with such conviction that you have to admire him for it. my fav debate of his was with noam chomsky, purely classic. it's a shame they don't have things like that on television anymore :(
My understanding is he was a friendly, gracious man who would be the best friend in the world with you, even if you disagreed with him. Certainly a contrast to the nastiness that has happened in this country in the past 10 years.
Haha! More of the old 'loss/gain' thinking, eh? Then, perhaps, we can just let Mr. Buckley rest. Looked up Friedman on Wikipedia - seems I need to learn about him before we could continue. Thanks for all the useful info; even if we didn't change each others minds, I learned alot. And good show, old boy. Between the Friedman theories and the personal examples, you've left me with alot to consider... Hope to cross your path again Curt300!
I think we've come to the point where we wont make any headway until i understand more about the theories of his position. Also he has given me some very convincing personal examples to support the theories against gov assistance. I'm not really convinced. I still think that the poor, and both society and the economy as a whole, would be given a great boost from a change from a min wage to a living wage. But i think I wont be convincing until I understand the other side better. So...
Oh! And i still think your remark about engineers being belittled if low skill workers were given a 'living wage' was awfully cheeky! They're not dogs mate! A slap to you, krispy!
Curt: "The greater the potential profit, the more attractive the enterprise.
'Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No?'
How did you get all the way over there? That is silly. I never said that." So what does it mean to say that attractiveness increases with profit? Seems to mean: I want more, the more I can get, the more interested I am. Well, isn't that greed? Is 'greed is our only value' so far from that sentiment? Are we not a greed driven society? Enron/Tyco?
Profit is an important factor in making economic decisions, but it is not the only factor. I wouldn't want to profit by selling counterfeit medicine, unsafe food, bogus retirement plans, "Saw" movies, etc.
Glad to hear it. But it seems that I would draw a different line for the boundaries between what is morally good and what is morally bad. I see $8 an hour as destructive, not as immed destructive as you examples, yet something akin to strangulation -- a slower economic death. Very difficult to have a good life under those conditions, and equally diff to give your kids a bright future. Again, I think you being able to pull $33 at 19 is the exception rather than the rule.
One of my adopted nephews is (I'm at a loss for a gentle word) cognitively disabled. He works hard, always shows up on time, follows instructions and has a good attitude. He has his own house, a car and a wife.
If you don't make enough money, work like my nephew.
Curt again: And I still dont understand your idea about setting wages... Min wage is not necessary? So McD can pay $4 an hour? Or $1 if they can find some haitian refugees? And labor unions serve what function if wages are simply determined by the market?
Had a look. Not very convincing... Economics is a difficult topic because the economy is such a vast thing that it's difficult for any one person, or even group of people, to get their head around all of it. So I can read that or I can read the Dem's stats for why the min wage is good and necc. Who to believe? And I dont really care about min wage workers, who are mostly students. Even $10 an hour is a shit wage. Would you work for it, for the next 5, 10 years?
When I first worked for my Dad, I made - in 2008 dollars - $4/day. The next summer I made the equivalent of $4 hr, which was much more than I was worth. The following summer I made minimum wage of 7.5 2007 dollars. The next 2+ years I made about 12 2007 dollars an hour and left home. I was 18 and a dropout. My next job came when I was 19. It paid 33+ 2007 dollars per hour.
Would I have worked for $10/hr for 10 years? Not if I could make myself more valuable.
And who makes up the majority of the workers in a minimum wage job Imb?? Young high school and college workers! They aren't paying for a house, kids, food, energy bills etc. So why pay them a "living wage?"
Who makes up the maj of people making $8-12 which is still a very low wage considering living costs in Amer. Poor people. You dont count as a min wage worker if you make like$0.50 over min wage. Those are the people who need a 'living wage' - factory workers, secretaries, security guards, customer service reps, retail workers, bank tellers, machinists, dispatchers... most low skill jobs.
My argument with that is that people aren't stupid and will never accept $4/hour. The markets determine minimum wage adn if a company is stupid enough to pay their employees $4 measly an hour, they will be sued.
People in China make a lot less than that and nobody sues anybody. That's capitalism without intervention. It's not about being smart/stupid, it's about what's available. If all the companies in your town are only offering $4, where else can you turn? Don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone is from the middle class and has parents/an education to fall back on.
China is mainly a Communist nation Imb, not a capitalist nation by any means. The govt. controls much of the economy. I'll say it again, the MARKETS control minimum wage. I don't ever recall minimum wage going backward, do you?
Not anymore. Go to Beijing or Shanghai, have a look. Most of the jobs are in private enterprise. The gov does control the economy through regulation, but it's not true that the gov owns all industry and all the workers are in collectives. Markets dont control min wage, the gov does. They base min wage on living costs. Min wage doesnt go backward because they set it to keep pace with inflation. Do you remem a cup of coffee being $4.25 in 1912? Again, markets only set the range of poss wages
My argument with that is that people aren't stupid and will never accept $4/hour. The markets determine minimum wage adn if a company is stupid enough to pay their employees $4 measly an hour, they will be sued.
Imb, I'm not saying that there aren't instances of greed in capitalism, there are and many poeple are greedy, but I can gurantee you that many small businesses aren't big like McDonalds or Subway. Take for instance sole proprietorships, the majority of those are quite small and will never be able to afford a minimum wage of 15-20 dollars. Let people EARN their money. The more an emplyee can do, the greater the wage will be and the more the employee is worth.
krispy: Of course there is greed in capitalism. All of the deadly sins exist in all of us. The genius of capitalism is that greed is put to use to benefit society.
Curt: "The genius of capitalism is that greed is put to use to benefit society." Haha! Genius? So the glorification of a deadly sin is genius?? That's not genius mate, that's horrible. And the point i'm trying to make is that not all of society is benefitted. Probably half is, the other half are wage-slaves. And I really didnt get this: "Guys who know thier jobs and do what they say they are going to do have no trouble pulling down $80+K/year." Really?? That's news to me. Examples?
Is it "horrible" that "greed" motivated Michael Dell to sell me this computer?
While it is true that "not all of society is benefitted", not all of society needs to benefit. Let the other members of society make thier own transactions.
"Examples?"
Owners of little service companies who get out and work hard.
and Krispy: I agree, small biz probably can't afford a $15 min wage. So why can't that be the place where gov puts it's subsidies? Instead of all the different welfare programs that people need because they only earn 9.50 an hour. Seems more efficient to me. And it's a form of workfare, as opposed to welfare. Isn't that what republicans are always clamoring for? And again, it only need to apply to full-time workers. Students can get, say, 10... It also offers incentive to work, unlike welfare
"The government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
My problem with that is govt. control. Let the people control the economy and business. The less government in an economy, the better it is. The U.S. is one of the, if not the greatest examples of that. Yes there are times of economic downturn but all countries no matter what type go through difficult economic times. The U.S. has proven time and time again that the less government regulation, the better.
How has the US proven that less gov regulation is better? Were the Reagan years better? Well, for the wealthy they were, and maybe even for most of the middle class too. But the poor are still poor mate - that never seems to change. And everybody wants to look at it in an individualistic way - that it all comes down to the individual and his/her ability. but i just dont buy it. How well could you have done if your parents were druggies, you went to a shite school that taught nothing, etc.
Do you think that the "wealthy" accounted for both of Reagans landslide victories? If it was only the "wealthy" that benefited from Reagan then why did so many people like him and vote for him? Recall that in 1984 he won every state except Mondale's home state of Minnesota. Did the wealthy really account for that much of the vote? No, most of the vote came from middle class citizens Imb.
Probably had more to do with Reagan's perceived strength in the face of Soviet domination. More a military vote than an economic one. And who did the poor class vote for? Those are the people making near min wage, not the mid class. This is the problem I have with middle/rich class people: they look on the plight of the poor with perfect equanimity
And the real shame is that this thinking is glorified even in the minds of those oppressed. So that an entire culture "Wants to be a Millionaire" regardless of the consequences to others. Remember GDP=13 trill with 130 million workers, so each slice is 100k. If you are getting more than that, then someone else is getting less. If I get a million, then ten other people go to 0. But who cares! I want to be a millionaire!!!
Let me ask you, is it bad that people are millionaiers? Is it bad when people are successful in life? No. It took a lot of hard work and sweat for the vast majority of millionaires and upper class citizens to get where they are today. Now would I like to earn $15-$20/hour, of course I would, but that would drastically force an economical slide if small businesses were FORCED to pay all employees at LEAST that amount. There are promotions in small business as well
Yes, i would say that it is bad that people are millionaires. Because the value of our economy is 13 trill a year, and there are 130 million workers. So when one guy takes out a million, someone else goes way down. Sure people with ability should get more; of course owners of businesses should get more. But why millions? Millions to one, $10 an hour to others? One mill a year is sth like $500 per hour. Are they worth 50 times as much as the worker who puts in the same number of hours a week?
A good is worth the amount it sells for on the free market. Unless I am a stockholder, it is not up to me to decide how much an employee of a private company should be paid.
When I lived in a blue state I had employees. They were paid enough to keep them from going elsewhere but not so much that I made no profit from hiring them. Simultanneously dealing with them and the state government was such a nightmare that I released all of them and moved out of that state. I now work alone. I make less money but I have FAR fewer headaches.
This is why I hate socialism, in a socialists eyes "everyone has to be the same and NO one can be financially independent." It's absolutely rediculous. Personally, I plan to be financially independent and work hard to be fincancially independent so I can pay off my house and other things. Why should I be forced to pay extra taxes because I'm "wealthy" and successful? I EARNED IT! And not all big business owners earn millions either, much of it is net income for the corporation only.
krispy: Huh? I'm not sure that's socialism. Everyone the same, no one independent, etc. Actually, I think everyone uses these words communism/socialism in their own way. Like for example Sweden, Switzerland, England aren't "socialist" countries, but they have many socialist institutions, and I think they run better than the US, at least for the poor and mid class. And I think that all big business owners/execs/major shareholders do actually earn millions - where do you think the profits go??
krispy cont: And that is the thing that really shits me about capitalism. Curt wrote before that the genius of cap is that greed is put to use to benefit society. I disagree. I think greed is bred in a capitalistic society to the point that it really becomes the only value of that society. So you have these Enron/Tyco type idiots who just cheat and steal their way to millions and dont give a shit about the effect they have on others. And health insurance might be an even worse example...
A worse example yet is the shyster lawyer that has a statistician pick an unsophisticated jury then uses lies to fool that jury into extracting obscene amounts of money from physicians and pharmacutical manufacturers who did nothing wrong. That drives up the price of health care thus health insurance.
So you have these John Edwards type idiots who just cheat and steal their way to millions and don't give a shit about the effect they have on others.
We DO NOT divide a fixed-sized pie. When someone goes out and by God BUILDS something, he bakes his own pie. If he worked hard and his equity on his project is $1million, it is new wealth. It didn't cost me a cent. Why should he be forced to give part of it to me?
Curt: Not fixed, but we do divide the same pie. This seems to be the place where we have our fundamental disagreement -- you see things in terms of individuals, I see things wholistically, or in terms of a community. Here's my basic principle: one man alone is nothing. On a desert island, a man, by himself, can make what? A mud hut? A spear? Not much else, certainly not a business. So I think the idea of the 'self-made man' is a myth.
"I see things wholistically, or in terms of a community."
A market is about as "wholistic" as it gets. Milton Friedman wrote a great little book named "Free To Choose". In it he discusses how - by seeking thier own best interests - participants in a free market improve overall conditions far more than an who seek thier own best interests, improve general conditions far more than any benevolent meddler could.
Check that. Make it, "In it he discusses how - by seeking thier own best interests - participants in a free market improve general conditions far more than any benevolent meddler could."
So i dont think its my method that is unfair at all. You put in a 40 hour week, you earn a livable (as opposed to minimal) wage. Seems fair to me. If it means a retail worker gets the same wage as an accountant, then so be it. The account will have better benefits and poss for advancement, not to mention self-respect. And I dont think McD is 'easy', just because it is low skill/responsibility. You're still trading your life (time) for a wage. Shouldn't it be a livable one?
Because its not private. Why cant I then beat my wife and kids? It's a private affair, no business of other peoples...except that those others have judged it to be morally unacceptable. We are not a bunch of loose individuals, we are a society. We can affect each other. Moral principles surpass privacy. And I think paying a person a substandard wage is a moral violation. You have put that person and their family into poverty, which also has neg influences on society as a whole -- like crime
And that transaction is public in another way -- it affects me if I am a PWE, because if that guy takes the job for $2 an hour, I can't hold out for $10. The point I made before about labor supply for low-skill jobs. This is why I don't see that markets set the wage at all. People set the wage by the choices they make: what the employer decides he's willing to give, what the PWE decides he's willing to take.
Why can't an accountants salary be set as the min living wage? Why should the difficulty of the job determine whether one gets a livable wage or not? And I said 15 to 20, 15 probably being the more realistic figure, which big corpors could pay easily and workers at small biz could have their wages subsidized. so the company could pay 10 and the other 5 could come from the gov, which could then reduce/discontin many a welfare program which people only need cause they only make $9 an hour...
Do you really think that a fast food worker deserves as much money as an accountant? Most if not all accountants are college graduates wile most minimum age workers are in college or high school and aren't paying for martgage, energy costs, etc. Do you really think that someone is going to want a career in fast food if they're raising a family at the same time?
And I'll continue, lets say you work 5 days a week for 9 hours a day at $20/hr. Nine hours is a typical full day at work. No need for a calculator, I'll do the math for you. That's $180 a day, $900 a week, $3,600 a month, and $43,200 a year. I know accountants who make that much and their job is 10 times harder than a fast food server Imb. That right there should prove you that it is in fact YOUR method that is unfair. My General Manager makes that much as well and his job is also much harder.
Let me also remind Imb that the VAST majority of workers earning minimum wage are young college and high school students who don't have to raise a family, pay health insurance, pay a mortgage, pay an energy bill, pay for food, etc, and thats a fact. And also, I don't know of anyone who has desired a career job as a waiter or cashier at a fast food resteraunt. And also, just to let you know Imb, I actually work for minimum wage at $7.15/hour and I'm in college.
No disrespect to your fater mate, i just have disrespect for your idea that the bush tax cuts were some kind of god-send. Why would $15 an hour be a dream? For you, as a student working a part-time temp job, i think that 8 or 10 an hour is fine. but after you graduate, are you going to be content to live on $10 or 12 an hour for the next ten or twenty years? With or without a family that's a shit wage, and I think there are many people living on that wage. So why is it dreaming to ask biz to pay
Self-fulfilling ideals? Back to the question of how worth is determined. I'll pay you what you are worth, which is determined how? By much my daddy paid your daddy - i.e. how much education/support you were given from day one - back to the dawn of time. And so the system stands that we always have the master-slave relationship. And also always stands the equanimity with which the well-to-do look on the poor. You never addressed a previous question of mine: why are min wage and unions necessary?
If the invisible hand of the free market sets wages and that's that, then what purpose do labor unions serve? Come on mate: wages are set by a principle in the minds of men which is that of self-aggrandizement. It's a choice, not some cold fact of economics. Before you told me that that's half of it. No, I think that's 99% of it, because if every biz owner has the same idea, then there is simply no other place for the PWE to go.
"And so the system stands that we always have the master-slave relationship."
Nope. Slaves have no choice. Employees do.
"why are min wage and unions necessary?"
When did I say that the minimum wage is necessary? It isn't. I live in what is supposed to be a slave-wage state. Guys who know thier jobs and do what they say they are going to do have no trouble pulling down $80+K/year.
Well, first of all I have no intention what-so-ever in making a career out of my current job as a baker. I plan on becoming a financial advisor and helping people invest their money wisely and use it wisely. I'm not saying earning 15-20 dollars an hour is bad. I'd love to earn that much! but what is bad is FORCING small businesses to to pay employees a certain amount. That leaves them with little room to breathe and leaves almost no room for raises for other more deserving employees.
The Bush tax cuts weren't a "god send," but they did help a number of middle class citizens, like my family for instance. Like I said before, I'm also a landscaper and work for two upper-class families, one a millionaire and the millionaire personally told me he is paying more in taxes now than he was before the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts wren't by any means a "tax cut for the rich" like so many liberals claim. My family is earning more and are not at all "rich"
Fine. What about $8-$12 an hour? Who are the vast majority of people earning that? Fine, part-time employees can get 8, full-time working adults who can't make a decent living are the people i'm worried about, not students. What does the dept of labor say about people at or near the poverty line?
"Yeah, this is the kind of thinking I hate: "If we can't operate in an environment where we can maximize profits then to hell with it! Workers? They can get f**ked! We want profits!" YOU will be screwing workers over if you take profits from big businesses because they won't be able to hire anyone! Are you listening to anything I'm saying? In your mind everyone has to make the same amount of money. Well then where is the individualism??
Why should we have to 'punish' successful biz into doing right by their workers? Maybe it's more a problem with a culture that would find that to be successful. The few profiting at the expense of the many - yes, smashing success. Does not profit = exploitation? The problem with capitalism: wage = cost, not "the goal of organizing and uniting our labor".
I'll try this again, lets say we make minimum wage $20 and socialists like you are thrilled about it. Well then YOU can explain to the millions of workers who lose a job because businesses can't afford to pay them why they were let go. You can explain to them that what you thought you were doing was "fair" and "equal." There are also a number of smaller businesses who pay minimum wage that would instantly be closed if minimum wage was raised to your dreamy amount of $20 as well.
Also for Krispy, who wrote: "So you're saying we should punish successful businesses? If you increase the minimum wage to a "living wage," corporations are not going to want to do business with the U.S. and the economy will fall" Yeah, this is the kind of thinking I hate: "If we can't operate in an environment where we can maximize profits then to hell with it! Workers? They can get f**ked! We want profits!"
and Curt, yet again: "We work for profit. No profit=no incentive to stay in business." Why? Isnt your wage/salary enough? Does there need to be a huge pile of excess cash for you to be interested in undertaking an enterprise? Is greed not a sin? In a capitalistic society, is Jesus not an idiot? We are materialists. We are concerned with profit/loss. Those are the only concepts we use to judge the value of an action. Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No?
Absolutely not. Running a business is a hassle. The stress involved in making payroll is horrible. Being legally liable for more crap than you can imagine just as bad.
"Does there need to be...excess cash...?"
The greater the potential profit, the more attractive the enterprise.
"Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No? "
How did you get all the way over there? That is silly. I never said that.
Krispy: "The two democrat candidates have proposed nearly a trillion dollars in NEW spending. Where are they going to get that money? Oh I don't know...taxpayers..." Sure. And why do they have to propose new spending on social welfare programs? Is that because, oh i don't know, capitalism as a system is a failure wherein greed is the guiding principle and a vast segment of the popu is left in poverty, not able to afford basic med services? That capitalism can only work in tandem with socialism?
After failing in the oil business, even though his father had such close ties with American and Saudi and other Arab oil concerns, W. was GIVEN a healthy share of the Texas Rangers. Amazing that so many working class Americans voted for a man who had failed so often despite so many opportunities in the 'free market'?
Also, let me remind you that it has been 8 years since our last recession and no dinnerbucket, this isn't even near what it was like during the Great Depression at all. You can't compare the unemployment rate, inflation, or poverty now to how it was in the Great Depression. The depression was SO bad the the govt. was forced to take over. Many anylysts wouldn't even call this a recession either. It's all part of a free market my friend. And recession usually don't last long at all.
Moreover, Krispy, the Bush regime [ and we well know who his 'base' is] has presided over an economy that is fast coming apart at the seams [ witness the implosion of the dollar, the death of consumer confidence, extra-ordinary bail outs for craven speculators and other negative indices that compare with those that led to the Great Depression]. Nice work.
Curt300; There is video-tape of a tuxedoed Bush at a fund raiser populated by super-wealthy Pioneer Club types stating exactly THAT. Republicans controlled the White House, Senate and House until early 2007 and even then the Dems slim numerical majority never had the leverage to over-ride a veto. [ They have controlled the house and Senate for well over a decade].
Bush said it plain, Curt to the assembled millionaires ''You ARE my base.' And how could this surprise you? W. is the ultimate spawn of privelege, the grandson of Senator Prescott Bush [ a Yankee elitist par excellence]and the errant son of a former fucking president. And even with these advantages he proceeded to fail repeatedly in the oil business. He is the penultimate Republican princeling....and is destroying his grand-daddys Grand Old Party.
"Bush said...to the... millionaires 'You ARE my base.'"
He was making a wry joke.
Why "penultimate"? That makes no sense to me.
You have been taking this exchange much more seriously than I have. Due to the format, you have presented your views in small parcels. What's your bottom line? Are you for an economy that is organized around the principle "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"? Do entrepreneurs add value, or are they parasitic?
Dinnerbucket, unless I'm mistaken, the economy was doing quite well until recently. allow me to remind you that it was only a few months ago that the DOW hit 14,000 and the stock markets were setting all kinds of new records. People were also working, with unemployment below 4.7% at one point, go check out the Dept. of Labor. It was largely because of the Bush tax cuts. This all happened AFTER the tax cuts. You don't increase taxes in a struggling economy. People won't spend their money.
exactly how were those things caused by the bush tax cuts? they happened after the tax cuts, therefore they happened because of the tax cuts? What did your father did with that 2 grand he got back? Invest and hire more workers?
My father doesn't hire workers, he works UNDER someone else for your information as an engineer, he actually just quit because the environment was terrible. He's starting his own business as a financial advisor and trying to help our family become financially independent. I'd appreciate it if you showed a little more respect to my father as well. He's working very hard to proved for his family of six and again, we aren't "rich" by any means, we are middle class. Grow up.
Also, as a matter of great interest to me, you say your kids aren't worth more than $7 an hour. How is that determined? How is a person's wage determined? You want to know who is made miserable by free-market activity? Read Dickens. I would venture: anyone who has only general skills and who is, therefore, readily replaceable. If everyone is treated well by a free market econ, then why are things like labor unions and minimum wages necessary at all?
"...you say your kids aren't worth more than $7 an hour...How is a person's wage determined?"
If the government doesn't sabatogue unskilled workers' opportunities by putting grease on the lowest rung of the ladder, wages are determined by the free market.
I don't need Dickens to tell me what capitalism looks like. Read F.A.Hayek.
Curt: Wages are determined by the free market? I dont think so. I think the range of feasible wages is determined by the free market. So Mc has a range of possible wages to pay it's employees, say $7 - $45/hour. That's what their revenue can support. If they pay 45, then they have 0 profit. Wages are determined by the owners who see wages as a cost, something to be minimized. That's their thinking. They dont seem to think about the minimal life that their minimized wages afford their workers.
The real way wages seem to be determined is by the labor supply. In fact there are so many unskilled laborers that Mc could probably offer $2/hr and find people to take it. Or $0.25 if they could import Chinese laborers. So the gov has to set a min wage, because the only goal of bottom-line biz men is profit. This is my problem with capitalism - it is good not only at generating wealth, but also at wantonly distributing it - and always in favor of those holding the reigns.
What if no employers offer the PWE anything better? Isn't that the real situation? All employers can offer near-min-wage wages because there is always someone else to come along and fill it? In the end it seems like a choice of the owner class to look on the laboring class with a cold eye and treat them only as instruments of production, not as people trying to make a living
lmb193: "Wages are determined by the owners who see wages as a cost, something to be minimized."
That's half of it. The other factor is under the control of the potential wage earner. If the potential employer doesn't offer enough, the PWE pursues other opportunities.
Curt300: Yes, agreed. For your kids it's fine. But I'm talking about adults with similar to less education than your kids. The thirty year old man who can barely read/write/do arithmetic. These people are in this state because their environment didnt nurture them any better, and as long as the living-cost-to-wage ratio remains at present levels, that will never change. We will always have a poor, might I say discarded class of people whom you and I would cringe to trade places with.
"The thirty year old man who can barely read/write/do arithmetic."
I have hired guys like that. A couple of them worked out great. At first they were not paid much. They worked hard, paid attention and showed up on time. They got good and made good livings. If the minimum wage was $20/hr, I wouldn't have hired either of them.
So what if the gov subsidized their wages? You pay them 12 and the gov pays the other 8? Or some other such balance based on what your biz can afford. Wouldnt that make more sense than all of these welfare programs which people only need because their wages are such shite? Wouldnt that be "workfare" instead of welfare, as republicans are always wanting?
I think it's time we all came to the realization that we, as the proponents of society as is, are the creators of the miserable conditions of others. (and damn this Youtube character counter!!)
They are treated like vermin, worthy of only a meager existence, why? Because that's the role society determined for them, just as it determined to give u a nicer role. You dont choose your parents or your social class. The choices u can make in life are severely limited by the track society puts you on from the beginning. How could a menial laborer ever better himself? From where might come the resources to do that?
To kurt, krispy, daddysq: You all seem to have a very individualistic view of society. As if poor people deserve to be such because of their personal inadequacies; and the opposite, that u deserve more because of your personal ability. But what is an individual? Is an individual simply not a product of society? Is society not our nurturer? What could u achieve without the support of society? And why scoff at others who had no such support?
a larger pie. Wouldn't a redistribution of the present wealth (of which there is already plenty) be a more 'love thy neighbor' type move? This is something I can't understand about the right. They all seem to be Christians, yet they all seem to be I-want-more-and-poor-people-can-get-fucked hardliners. Curious... I thought it was very difficult for a rich man to get into heaven? Yet all Christians seek to be rich. Even have game shows entitled "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" Haha! Not Jesus...
Depends on which examples u choose. England? 429 pounds per week avg wage - upward of $800; free healthcare. Not successful? If u only choose the stupid examples of Russia/China or other 'revolutionary' examples where they tried to go straight from monarchy to communism in one bold leap (as Marx thought impossible), then of couse all u find is failure. Iraq's Baath party was 'socialist'. Words with no meaning. Hussein, Stalin, Mao...lovers of humanity.
The successes in medicine, science, sports or anything are because of man's competitive nature. There is nothing 'evil' about wanting to do better than the next guy. Only liberals find competition to be evil. Let it be known: when 'everybody is the same, when everybody gets the same', NOBODY wants to try to be their best. I traveled throughout China 20 years ago and saw the effects of your 'wealth redistribution, same for all' government. It doesn't work.
There is something 'evil' about wanting to do better than the next guy - it's called not giving a shit about the next guy. I didnt say eliminate competition or even 'everybody gets the same', I just said dont leave anybody in the dust. They are members of society too mate. They may not be as contributing as others and therefore not as deserving, but surely they do deserve better than the meager 'minimum' existence of minimum wage.
China. Good example. I dont think u did see the effects of wealth distribution there, as they have never distributed anything in that country. I lived in China the past seven years and I can tell you that the rich own everything and the poor get nothing; and if they dare to try to do something about it, they end up negotiating with the army. What u saw there was monarchy; what u can find there today are the sprouts of Dickensonian capitalism. There is no 'same for all' in China, never was.
And why should economics be the driving force behind policy anyway? Wouldnt it make more sense to raise the minimum wage to 15 or 20 an hour, which would all but guarantee the elimination of the poor class, rather than trying some kind of Nietzschean more-power-to-the-supermen scheme in the hope (hope or incidental consequence? did they care, or was that just the rhetoric used for justification?) of raising the overall level of the economy so that the poor man gets the same shitty percentage of
Imb193: "Wouldnt it make more sense to raise the minimum wage to 15 or 20 an hour, which would all but guarantee the elimination of the poor class,..."
Brilliant! But why stop at $20/hour? Let's raise it to $50 an hour. Or $100. Those people who aren't worth that - which would include ALL entry-level job seekers - wouldn't have jobs.
Curt300: Stop at 20/hour because that's a reasonable living. $100 per hour is excessive, almost 200k per year. Yet there are many who want even more than that. 15/hour is only 30k per year. You mean to tell me that people who put in a 40 hour week arent worth 30k? In an economy which generates 13 trillion a year, almost 100k per worker? What is the value of a person? $7 an hour? Can one even live in America on that wage? No wonder they turn to dealing drugs...
"What is the value of a person? $7 an hour? Can one even live in America on that wage?"
No, but it is fine as a training wage for my kids. It will put gas in thier cars, provide them with spending money and teach them good life lessons. They aren't worth any more than $7, so - at $20/hr - they wouldn't have jobs.
RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE? Ok, lets say we do that. What kind of people make minimum wage? Mostly young people who work at McDonalds and are high school or college students. McDonalds will have to drastically raise thier prices or fire a number of employees to be able to afford to pay their workers. And if workers are doing so well at McDonalds, whats the point of being, say, an engineer? When you rasie the minimum wage to a "living wage", you belittle people like engineers or accountants
krispy: I don't know where to start with you. The fact that you were able to come to the conclusion that ensuring everyone a livable wage would somehow belittle others seems fantastic to me. An engineer making 60k a year would be belittled if Mcdonalds employees were to earn half his wage?? Or your idea about Mc needing to raise prices/cut jobs. Here's an idea, how about they just reduce their ridiculous profits. What? CEO need a new yacht? And it's not only students working these jobs.
Lol, no no trust me I'm very serious. It's unbelievable with how people believe that we can solve a bunch of problems by simply raising the minimum wage, not to mention it's rediculous as well. They just don't understand how the economy works. Well go figure, they're fiscal socialists. Socialism has proved that it fails and Capitalism has proven to work.
Not so. McD would still return on it's investments even if it paid it's workers 15 or 20 an hour. And, as a min wage, that would apply to all other companies as well, so, yes, investors would lose across the board, regardless of which company they invested in. Or, in other words, wealth would finally 'trickle down', and the poor could be made middle class by only reducing the wealth of the wealthy - but notice that it would only be a reduction, not destruction...
Your dream of $15-$20 as the set minimum wage for everyone is fiscally impossible Imb. You are forcing small business to pay their workers an amount that many of them can't afford. Look at gas stations, they hardly make anything as it is. They make 5-7 CENTS per gallon of gasoline sold, look at sole proprietorships and partnership companies. They will never be able to afford your rediculous minimum wage amounts and millions will LOSE their job
You don't know where to start with me? I don't know where to start with you. So you're saying we should punish successful businesses? If you increase the minimum wage to a "living wage," corporations are not going to want to do business with the U.S. and the economy will fall. They will not be able to afford the labor costs, the number of stores will decine and MORE people will be out of a job. The fact is the VAST majority of workers work for minimum wage. Go look it up in the Dept. of Labor.
dunno. I think it could do alot if it were moved from a 'minimum' to a living wage, say $15. Then you wouldn't have poor people, and you wouldn't have welfare spending (like health care) and I think other plagues on society like low education, children born out of wedlock, violent crime - all things related to low income - would be reduced.
That the increase in wages has to come from somewhere. That somewhere will be from the companies or businesses paying the wages, and they will take it from other workers in the form of layoffs and reliefs - in short, increased unemployment. Your living wage means fewer people make any wage at all.
This has been flagged as spam show
Please visit my channel for the unpopular truth about homosexuality.
A person does not need hatred or any kind of phobia in order to acknowledge important differences between heterosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption and homosexual attraction / behavior / marriage / adoption. Even non-religious people know this.
Homosexual activists, with support from the media, have succeeded at framing themselves as noble victims; it's an effective way to push a social agenda.
lightandbeautiful 3 months ago
A boyhood hero of mine! Meeting him in person was an absolute thrill. In fact, there was a time in my life when I virtually idolized him. I know, from reading about him for years, that I wasn't alone in this. Thank God he never held elected office, as there was already a substantial "cult of personality" about him! I absolutely attribute a good portion of any writing skill I may have to my having read Buckley's books as a youth, my favorite of which has always been "The Unmaking of a Mayor."
hayesman76 7 months ago
The last sane consevative voice!
bradjbourgeois73 8 months ago
@bradjbourgeois73 Um, hello? What do you mean, "the last sane convervative voice?" Are you familiar with Ron Paul? Oh yeah, Ron Paul 2012!
timeoutforart 4 months ago
@timeoutforart I agree with a lot of what Ron Paul says, but some things he says are kinda out there, lol. I agree we need to end the longest, most destructive war in our nations history (The drug war, of course), we are wasting money we don't have in Afghanistan and Iraq. But getting rid of the dept of education and the FDA is going just a little too far.
bradjbourgeois73 4 months ago
Now the next death to celebrate would be George Will....
jusguyz 1 year ago
buckly was nothing but a puppet gatekeeper for the zion bastards. he is better off dead. he was a champion of nothing. I saw him do nothing but shill for years. He was a nothing. He would always threaten punks. Classic wussy bully. His daddy doesn't have enough money to save his sorry ass did he. He was rude, ugly as mud and on t.v. because it's his job to look smart and stuffy and do what he was told when he was told. snap of a finger, he asked the england bankers how high on the way up
sssssjjjj1 1 year ago
@sssssjjjj1 Wouldn’t it have been wonderful to have seen Mr. Buckley seated across from him on ‘Firing Line’ to debate the likes of such an erudite, learned, cultured and sophisticated individual who describes someone as “…Classic wussy bully. … He was rude, ugly as mud and on t.v. because it's his job to look smart and stuffy…” What an intellectual challenge that would have been for Mr. Buckley; like killing flies with a howitzer.
dlgallagher11 4 months ago
Mr. Buckley was the 'man'. Amazing how he could have all of those democrat dunce, socialist, left wing loser, hate America libs shivering in their hush puppies.
dlgallagher11 4 months ago
William F. Buckley Jr was a joke God gave the right. Unfortunately, they didn't get the punch line. If you want to know what a Buckley, "libertarian" "free capitalist" "Small Government" world, would look like. You dont have to look no further than Somalia for your answer. ANARCHY.
specialjr11 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
my day has just gotten so much better now that i know that creap is dead.
sunipeacemaker 2 years ago
You're sick. People that hated this man's positions on political topics still respected the hell out of him.
coryisaugafan 2 years ago
On a lighter note, "Clubbed to death" Rob Dougan is an awesome song.
coryisaugafan 2 years ago
Good night, sweet prince.
The Right is in sore need of intellectual strength right now. Besides George Will I can't come up with many names belonging in the WFB Jr. class of thoughtful and articulate principled muscle.
There are many intelligent and knowledgeable people on the right, don't misinterpret. But not that many "intellectuals."
FurryAR 2 years ago
May he rest in peace.
bebeinpa 3 years ago
Wow, I wish that the so called 'conservatives' of today would be as openly snobby as Buckley was. Seriously man, their PR makes em look like total populists. Hitler too had this populist sheen. Sarah Palin just blows my mind. Not in a good way. She's like Bush with tits. Just a PR puppet the GOP throws up so they can do what they want behind the scenes. Joe Six Packs? Maverick? Sure, and Christians are an oppressed minority here in the states. Anyone want to buy some property in Louisianna?
shumich 3 years ago
Good riddance. Cypto-nazis dying don't draw a single tear from me. He was a neo-con chickenhawk coward. Good riddance, you tool.
E
DeltaSigChi4 3 years ago
DeltaSigChi
With all due respect, your comments reveal an extremely dark soul that you might want to examine. Good riddance? What an absolutely despicable comment about someone's death!
pfg999 3 years ago
Delta and zoticus perfectly represent the "peace loving" folks who adore the likes of Chomsky. The fact is, as evidenced by their comments, their hate for those with whom they disagree ideologically exceeds their love of peace. Buckley was a man that stood for a just peace--not acquiescence in the face of communist purges and fascistic leaders.
ciejoh 3 years ago
You can't even spell the insult you stole from Gore Vidal. You are a tool - what's worse - a toolbox
meiitbe 3 years ago
How was he a 'Neo-Con'. He was very old-con IMHO.
What is your amazing insight based on?
OneBigRetard 2 years ago
Correction: My last post was addressed to zoticus1.
ciejoh 3 years ago
When I heard of his death I thought for a split second perhaps there was a god, and then applied something conservatives know little of, Logic and Facts.
zoticus1 3 years ago
selby06,
I must presume, given your animadversion on Mr. Buckley, that you disagree with his ideology. Am I correct?
Assuming that I am, I wonder to what ideology you subscribe that allows your conscience to harbor joy in the death of another man whose career was centered on the precepts of human freedom and the dignity it fosters?
Further, your insipid generalization that "conservatives know little of Logic and Fats" demonstrates that you know little of Mr. Buckley.
ciejoh 3 years ago
What everyone does know is that he was a CHILD that couldn't get through a single debate without threatening violence on someone: be it the individual he was debating, the moderator, or a cameraman. Moreover, he was wrong about Vietnam, and most likely will have his place of rest urinated on. He was a chickenhawk bitch coward. A cypto-nazi.
E
DeltaSigChi4 3 years ago
ciejoh
I agree 100% with your comments, and I admire and respect your tone as well. Who would enjoy the death of another? I consider myself (mostly) liberal, but there are few people, liberal or conservative, that I admired more than William F. Buckley Jr. He was an itellectual who would examine the facts and was not blinded by pure ideology. I may not have believed that he was right as often as he did :) , but I damn well would listen to what he would have to say. He WILL be missed.
pfg999 3 years ago
Buckleigh's "career centered on the precepts of human freedom and the dignity it fosters" ?!?
Yes, the freedom,of those who looked like him, to lord it over the world.
Not so the freedom of African Americans whose segregation he supported. Not so the freedom of thousands of Vietnamese and Cambodian peasants whose mass slaughter and mutilation by secret and illegal US carpet bombing Buckleigh supported while leaning back in his chair, pencil twirling, tongue darting, eyes twinkling.
fctchk 2 years ago
AP. Agnostic Proletarians ... worldwide!
selby06 3 years ago
Buckley was a good man, in tradition with the family plan.:-)
guyNbluejeans 3 years ago
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but it helps to brace your estimations with facts. To say Buckley was a fool is hardly a representation of the truth. Buckley was not a fool and to say so would be to fly in the face of even his adversary's opinions, who saw him as distinct, political threat. Ostentatious? Yes. A fool? Not hardly. And to say he was disassociated would be to deny the confirmed popularity of his show. A show that has a still unvanquished record for length of time on air.
soccerjones84 3 years ago 7
@soccerjones84 to call buckley a fool is in of itself foolish. don't even bother arguing.
johnbourbon 1 year ago
@soccerjones84 i agree that it would be wrong to call the man a fool. He obviously held some intelligence in order to have accomplished what he did. Still to me he appeared as a man with a wool over his eyes. Some of the things he said made me burst out laughing; but hew speaks with such conviction that you have to admire him for it. my fav debate of his was with noam chomsky, purely classic. it's a shame they don't have things like that on television anymore :(
Leila02124 10 months ago
To make it clear: I would be one of those folks that would disagree with him overall.
residentfan2 3 years ago
My understanding is he was a friendly, gracious man who would be the best friend in the world with you, even if you disagreed with him. Certainly a contrast to the nastiness that has happened in this country in the past 10 years.
residentfan2 3 years ago 4
buckley was an american treasure.
cruzander 3 years ago 11
Shame on you, samfuller, for denigrating a late hero. You deserve ridicule, you little shit.
Croscros72 3 years ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
a closed minded fool
samfuller 3 years ago
He was a respected foe...A bit naieve,disassociated,arrogant...he will be missed!!!
dogdoom 3 years ago
Conservativism...right? No. Never.
kihadat 3 years ago
trickle down this pal
ETECHJOEs 3 years ago
Search youtube for [ milton friedman greed ]. In the "More From" and "Related Videos" links, Friedman answers many of the questions asked by lmb193.
Curt300 3 years ago
imb: There is no new feedback or participants on this thread. If it is not being read, it is not worth my time.
Curt300 3 years ago
Haha! More of the old 'loss/gain' thinking, eh? Then, perhaps, we can just let Mr. Buckley rest. Looked up Friedman on Wikipedia - seems I need to learn about him before we could continue. Thanks for all the useful info; even if we didn't change each others minds, I learned alot. And good show, old boy. Between the Friedman theories and the personal examples, you've left me with alot to consider... Hope to cross your path again Curt300!
lmb193 3 years ago
Did I miss something? lol.
krispy916 3 years ago
I think we've come to the point where we wont make any headway until i understand more about the theories of his position. Also he has given me some very convincing personal examples to support the theories against gov assistance. I'm not really convinced. I still think that the poor, and both society and the economy as a whole, would be given a great boost from a change from a min wage to a living wage. But i think I wont be convincing until I understand the other side better. So...
lmb193 3 years ago
Oh! And i still think your remark about engineers being belittled if low skill workers were given a 'living wage' was awfully cheeky! They're not dogs mate! A slap to you, krispy!
lmb193 3 years ago
eh possibly, but i was just trying to make a point.
krispy916 3 years ago
lmb193: I am pleased that our policy disagreements did not cause our discussion to become disagreeable. Thanks for your civility.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt: "The greater the potential profit, the more attractive the enterprise.
'Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No?'
How did you get all the way over there? That is silly. I never said that." So what does it mean to say that attractiveness increases with profit? Seems to mean: I want more, the more I can get, the more interested I am. Well, isn't that greed? Is 'greed is our only value' so far from that sentiment? Are we not a greed driven society? Enron/Tyco?
lmb193 3 years ago
Profit is an important factor in making economic decisions, but it is not the only factor. I wouldn't want to profit by selling counterfeit medicine, unsafe food, bogus retirement plans, "Saw" movies, etc.
Curt300 3 years ago
Glad to hear it. But it seems that I would draw a different line for the boundaries between what is morally good and what is morally bad. I see $8 an hour as destructive, not as immed destructive as you examples, yet something akin to strangulation -- a slower economic death. Very difficult to have a good life under those conditions, and equally diff to give your kids a bright future. Again, I think you being able to pull $33 at 19 is the exception rather than the rule.
lmb193 3 years ago
One of my adopted nephews is (I'm at a loss for a gentle word) cognitively disabled. He works hard, always shows up on time, follows instructions and has a good attitude. He has his own house, a car and a wife.
If you don't make enough money, work like my nephew.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt again: And I still dont understand your idea about setting wages... Min wage is not necessary? So McD can pay $4 an hour? Or $1 if they can find some haitian refugees? And labor unions serve what function if wages are simply determined by the market?
lmb193 3 years ago
Do a web search for [ NCPA Study #190 Why the Minimum Wage Law Causes Unemployment ].
Curt300 3 years ago
Had a look. Not very convincing... Economics is a difficult topic because the economy is such a vast thing that it's difficult for any one person, or even group of people, to get their head around all of it. So I can read that or I can read the Dem's stats for why the min wage is good and necc. Who to believe? And I dont really care about min wage workers, who are mostly students. Even $10 an hour is a shit wage. Would you work for it, for the next 5, 10 years?
lmb193 3 years ago
When I first worked for my Dad, I made - in 2008 dollars - $4/day. The next summer I made the equivalent of $4 hr, which was much more than I was worth. The following summer I made minimum wage of 7.5 2007 dollars. The next 2+ years I made about 12 2007 dollars an hour and left home. I was 18 and a dropout. My next job came when I was 19. It paid 33+ 2007 dollars per hour.
Would I have worked for $10/hr for 10 years? Not if I could make myself more valuable.
Curt300 3 years ago
And who makes up the majority of the workers in a minimum wage job Imb?? Young high school and college workers! They aren't paying for a house, kids, food, energy bills etc. So why pay them a "living wage?"
krispy916 3 years ago
Who makes up the maj of people making $8-12 which is still a very low wage considering living costs in Amer. Poor people. You dont count as a min wage worker if you make like$0.50 over min wage. Those are the people who need a 'living wage' - factory workers, secretaries, security guards, customer service reps, retail workers, bank tellers, machinists, dispatchers... most low skill jobs.
lmb193 3 years ago
My argument with that is that people aren't stupid and will never accept $4/hour. The markets determine minimum wage adn if a company is stupid enough to pay their employees $4 measly an hour, they will be sued.
krispy916 3 years ago
People in China make a lot less than that and nobody sues anybody. That's capitalism without intervention. It's not about being smart/stupid, it's about what's available. If all the companies in your town are only offering $4, where else can you turn? Don't make the mistake of thinking that everyone is from the middle class and has parents/an education to fall back on.
lmb193 3 years ago
China is mainly a Communist nation Imb, not a capitalist nation by any means. The govt. controls much of the economy. I'll say it again, the MARKETS control minimum wage. I don't ever recall minimum wage going backward, do you?
krispy916 3 years ago
Not anymore. Go to Beijing or Shanghai, have a look. Most of the jobs are in private enterprise. The gov does control the economy through regulation, but it's not true that the gov owns all industry and all the workers are in collectives. Markets dont control min wage, the gov does. They base min wage on living costs. Min wage doesnt go backward because they set it to keep pace with inflation. Do you remem a cup of coffee being $4.25 in 1912? Again, markets only set the range of poss wages
lmb193 3 years ago
My argument with that is that people aren't stupid and will never accept $4/hour. The markets determine minimum wage adn if a company is stupid enough to pay their employees $4 measly an hour, they will be sued.
krispy916 3 years ago
Imb, I'm not saying that there aren't instances of greed in capitalism, there are and many poeple are greedy, but I can gurantee you that many small businesses aren't big like McDonalds or Subway. Take for instance sole proprietorships, the majority of those are quite small and will never be able to afford a minimum wage of 15-20 dollars. Let people EARN their money. The more an emplyee can do, the greater the wage will be and the more the employee is worth.
krispy916 3 years ago
krispy: Of course there is greed in capitalism. All of the deadly sins exist in all of us. The genius of capitalism is that greed is put to use to benefit society.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt: "The genius of capitalism is that greed is put to use to benefit society." Haha! Genius? So the glorification of a deadly sin is genius?? That's not genius mate, that's horrible. And the point i'm trying to make is that not all of society is benefitted. Probably half is, the other half are wage-slaves. And I really didnt get this: "Guys who know thier jobs and do what they say they are going to do have no trouble pulling down $80+K/year." Really?? That's news to me. Examples?
lmb193 3 years ago
Is it "horrible" that "greed" motivated Michael Dell to sell me this computer?
While it is true that "not all of society is benefitted", not all of society needs to benefit. Let the other members of society make thier own transactions.
"Examples?"
Owners of little service companies who get out and work hard.
Curt300 3 years ago
and Krispy: I agree, small biz probably can't afford a $15 min wage. So why can't that be the place where gov puts it's subsidies? Instead of all the different welfare programs that people need because they only earn 9.50 an hour. Seems more efficient to me. And it's a form of workfare, as opposed to welfare. Isn't that what republicans are always clamoring for? And again, it only need to apply to full-time workers. Students can get, say, 10... It also offers incentive to work, unlike welfare
lmb193 3 years ago
"The government's view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it."
"The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'"
both quotes by Ronald Reagan
Curt300 3 years ago
My problem with that is govt. control. Let the people control the economy and business. The less government in an economy, the better it is. The U.S. is one of the, if not the greatest examples of that. Yes there are times of economic downturn but all countries no matter what type go through difficult economic times. The U.S. has proven time and time again that the less government regulation, the better.
TheSnowBEASTlovers 3 years ago
How has the US proven that less gov regulation is better? Were the Reagan years better? Well, for the wealthy they were, and maybe even for most of the middle class too. But the poor are still poor mate - that never seems to change. And everybody wants to look at it in an individualistic way - that it all comes down to the individual and his/her ability. but i just dont buy it. How well could you have done if your parents were druggies, you went to a shite school that taught nothing, etc.
lmb193 3 years ago
Do you think that the "wealthy" accounted for both of Reagans landslide victories? If it was only the "wealthy" that benefited from Reagan then why did so many people like him and vote for him? Recall that in 1984 he won every state except Mondale's home state of Minnesota. Did the wealthy really account for that much of the vote? No, most of the vote came from middle class citizens Imb.
krispy916 3 years ago
Probably had more to do with Reagan's perceived strength in the face of Soviet domination. More a military vote than an economic one. And who did the poor class vote for? Those are the people making near min wage, not the mid class. This is the problem I have with middle/rich class people: they look on the plight of the poor with perfect equanimity
lmb193 3 years ago
"How well could you have done if your parents were druggies, you went to a shite school that taught nothing, etc."
Not too badly, so far.
Curt300 3 years ago
And the real shame is that this thinking is glorified even in the minds of those oppressed. So that an entire culture "Wants to be a Millionaire" regardless of the consequences to others. Remember GDP=13 trill with 130 million workers, so each slice is 100k. If you are getting more than that, then someone else is getting less. If I get a million, then ten other people go to 0. But who cares! I want to be a millionaire!!!
lmb193 3 years ago
Let me ask you, is it bad that people are millionaiers? Is it bad when people are successful in life? No. It took a lot of hard work and sweat for the vast majority of millionaires and upper class citizens to get where they are today. Now would I like to earn $15-$20/hour, of course I would, but that would drastically force an economical slide if small businesses were FORCED to pay all employees at LEAST that amount. There are promotions in small business as well
krispy916 3 years ago
Yes, i would say that it is bad that people are millionaires. Because the value of our economy is 13 trill a year, and there are 130 million workers. So when one guy takes out a million, someone else goes way down. Sure people with ability should get more; of course owners of businesses should get more. But why millions? Millions to one, $10 an hour to others? One mill a year is sth like $500 per hour. Are they worth 50 times as much as the worker who puts in the same number of hours a week?
lmb193 3 years ago
A good is worth the amount it sells for on the free market. Unless I am a stockholder, it is not up to me to decide how much an employee of a private company should be paid.
Nope, none of my business.
Curt300 3 years ago
Huh? You have a company. How did you determine your employees wages?
lmb193 3 years ago
When I lived in a blue state I had employees. They were paid enough to keep them from going elsewhere but not so much that I made no profit from hiring them. Simultanneously dealing with them and the state government was such a nightmare that I released all of them and moved out of that state. I now work alone. I make less money but I have FAR fewer headaches.
Curt300 3 years ago
This is why I hate socialism, in a socialists eyes "everyone has to be the same and NO one can be financially independent." It's absolutely rediculous. Personally, I plan to be financially independent and work hard to be fincancially independent so I can pay off my house and other things. Why should I be forced to pay extra taxes because I'm "wealthy" and successful? I EARNED IT! And not all big business owners earn millions either, much of it is net income for the corporation only.
krispy916 3 years ago
krispy: Huh? I'm not sure that's socialism. Everyone the same, no one independent, etc. Actually, I think everyone uses these words communism/socialism in their own way. Like for example Sweden, Switzerland, England aren't "socialist" countries, but they have many socialist institutions, and I think they run better than the US, at least for the poor and mid class. And I think that all big business owners/execs/major shareholders do actually earn millions - where do you think the profits go??
lmb193 3 years ago
krispy cont: And that is the thing that really shits me about capitalism. Curt wrote before that the genius of cap is that greed is put to use to benefit society. I disagree. I think greed is bred in a capitalistic society to the point that it really becomes the only value of that society. So you have these Enron/Tyco type idiots who just cheat and steal their way to millions and dont give a shit about the effect they have on others. And health insurance might be an even worse example...
lmb193 3 years ago
A worse example yet is the shyster lawyer that has a statistician pick an unsophisticated jury then uses lies to fool that jury into extracting obscene amounts of money from physicians and pharmacutical manufacturers who did nothing wrong. That drives up the price of health care thus health insurance.
So you have these John Edwards type idiots who just cheat and steal their way to millions and don't give a shit about the effect they have on others.
John Edwards.
Curt300 3 years ago
We DO NOT divide a fixed-sized pie. When someone goes out and by God BUILDS something, he bakes his own pie. If he worked hard and his equity on his project is $1million, it is new wealth. It didn't cost me a cent. Why should he be forced to give part of it to me?
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt: Not fixed, but we do divide the same pie. This seems to be the place where we have our fundamental disagreement -- you see things in terms of individuals, I see things wholistically, or in terms of a community. Here's my basic principle: one man alone is nothing. On a desert island, a man, by himself, can make what? A mud hut? A spear? Not much else, certainly not a business. So I think the idea of the 'self-made man' is a myth.
lmb193 3 years ago
"I see things wholistically, or in terms of a community."
A market is about as "wholistic" as it gets. Milton Friedman wrote a great little book named "Free To Choose". In it he discusses how - by seeking thier own best interests - participants in a free market improve overall conditions far more than an who seek thier own best interests, improve general conditions far more than any benevolent meddler could.
That was phrased poorly. I'm low on time.
Curt300 3 years ago
Check that. Make it, "In it he discusses how - by seeking thier own best interests - participants in a free market improve general conditions far more than any benevolent meddler could."
Curt300 3 years ago
So i dont think its my method that is unfair at all. You put in a 40 hour week, you earn a livable (as opposed to minimal) wage. Seems fair to me. If it means a retail worker gets the same wage as an accountant, then so be it. The account will have better benefits and poss for advancement, not to mention self-respect. And I dont think McD is 'easy', just because it is low skill/responsibility. You're still trading your life (time) for a wage. Shouldn't it be a livable one?
lmb193 3 years ago
"Seems fair to me."
Fair? Why must a private transaction - to which you are not a party - meet your idea of fairness?
Curt300 3 years ago
Because its not private. Why cant I then beat my wife and kids? It's a private affair, no business of other peoples...except that those others have judged it to be morally unacceptable. We are not a bunch of loose individuals, we are a society. We can affect each other. Moral principles surpass privacy. And I think paying a person a substandard wage is a moral violation. You have put that person and their family into poverty, which also has neg influences on society as a whole -- like crime
lmb193 3 years ago
And that transaction is public in another way -- it affects me if I am a PWE, because if that guy takes the job for $2 an hour, I can't hold out for $10. The point I made before about labor supply for low-skill jobs. This is why I don't see that markets set the wage at all. People set the wage by the choices they make: what the employer decides he's willing to give, what the PWE decides he's willing to take.
lmb193 3 years ago
Why can't an accountants salary be set as the min living wage? Why should the difficulty of the job determine whether one gets a livable wage or not? And I said 15 to 20, 15 probably being the more realistic figure, which big corpors could pay easily and workers at small biz could have their wages subsidized. so the company could pay 10 and the other 5 could come from the gov, which could then reduce/discontin many a welfare program which people only need cause they only make $9 an hour...
lmb193 3 years ago
Do you really think that a fast food worker deserves as much money as an accountant? Most if not all accountants are college graduates wile most minimum age workers are in college or high school and aren't paying for martgage, energy costs, etc. Do you really think that someone is going to want a career in fast food if they're raising a family at the same time?
krispy916 3 years ago
And I'll continue, lets say you work 5 days a week for 9 hours a day at $20/hr. Nine hours is a typical full day at work. No need for a calculator, I'll do the math for you. That's $180 a day, $900 a week, $3,600 a month, and $43,200 a year. I know accountants who make that much and their job is 10 times harder than a fast food server Imb. That right there should prove you that it is in fact YOUR method that is unfair. My General Manager makes that much as well and his job is also much harder.
krispy916 3 years ago
Let me also remind Imb that the VAST majority of workers earning minimum wage are young college and high school students who don't have to raise a family, pay health insurance, pay a mortgage, pay an energy bill, pay for food, etc, and thats a fact. And also, I don't know of anyone who has desired a career job as a waiter or cashier at a fast food resteraunt. And also, just to let you know Imb, I actually work for minimum wage at $7.15/hour and I'm in college.
krispy916 3 years ago
No disrespect to your fater mate, i just have disrespect for your idea that the bush tax cuts were some kind of god-send. Why would $15 an hour be a dream? For you, as a student working a part-time temp job, i think that 8 or 10 an hour is fine. but after you graduate, are you going to be content to live on $10 or 12 an hour for the next ten or twenty years? With or without a family that's a shit wage, and I think there are many people living on that wage. So why is it dreaming to ask biz to pay
lmb193 3 years ago
"So why is it dreaming to ask biz to pay (?)"
As long as there is no coersion, go ahead and ask. The answer is, "I pay people what they are worth. If they want more, let them be worth more."
Curt300 3 years ago
Self-fulfilling ideals? Back to the question of how worth is determined. I'll pay you what you are worth, which is determined how? By much my daddy paid your daddy - i.e. how much education/support you were given from day one - back to the dawn of time. And so the system stands that we always have the master-slave relationship. And also always stands the equanimity with which the well-to-do look on the poor. You never addressed a previous question of mine: why are min wage and unions necessary?
lmb193 3 years ago
If the invisible hand of the free market sets wages and that's that, then what purpose do labor unions serve? Come on mate: wages are set by a principle in the minds of men which is that of self-aggrandizement. It's a choice, not some cold fact of economics. Before you told me that that's half of it. No, I think that's 99% of it, because if every biz owner has the same idea, then there is simply no other place for the PWE to go.
lmb193 3 years ago
"And so the system stands that we always have the master-slave relationship."
Nope. Slaves have no choice. Employees do.
"why are min wage and unions necessary?"
When did I say that the minimum wage is necessary? It isn't. I live in what is supposed to be a slave-wage state. Guys who know thier jobs and do what they say they are going to do have no trouble pulling down $80+K/year.
Take some initiative.
Curt300 3 years ago
Well, first of all I have no intention what-so-ever in making a career out of my current job as a baker. I plan on becoming a financial advisor and helping people invest their money wisely and use it wisely. I'm not saying earning 15-20 dollars an hour is bad. I'd love to earn that much! but what is bad is FORCING small businesses to to pay employees a certain amount. That leaves them with little room to breathe and leaves almost no room for raises for other more deserving employees.
krispy916 3 years ago
The Bush tax cuts weren't a "god send," but they did help a number of middle class citizens, like my family for instance. Like I said before, I'm also a landscaper and work for two upper-class families, one a millionaire and the millionaire personally told me he is paying more in taxes now than he was before the Bush tax cuts. The Bush tax cuts wren't by any means a "tax cut for the rich" like so many liberals claim. My family is earning more and are not at all "rich"
krispy916 3 years ago
Fine. What about $8-$12 an hour? Who are the vast majority of people earning that? Fine, part-time employees can get 8, full-time working adults who can't make a decent living are the people i'm worried about, not students. What does the dept of labor say about people at or near the poverty line?
lmb193 3 years ago
"Yeah, this is the kind of thinking I hate: "If we can't operate in an environment where we can maximize profits then to hell with it! Workers? They can get f**ked! We want profits!" YOU will be screwing workers over if you take profits from big businesses because they won't be able to hire anyone! Are you listening to anything I'm saying? In your mind everyone has to make the same amount of money. Well then where is the individualism??
krispy916 3 years ago
Why should we have to 'punish' successful biz into doing right by their workers? Maybe it's more a problem with a culture that would find that to be successful. The few profiting at the expense of the many - yes, smashing success. Does not profit = exploitation? The problem with capitalism: wage = cost, not "the goal of organizing and uniting our labor".
lmb193 3 years ago
I'll try this again, lets say we make minimum wage $20 and socialists like you are thrilled about it. Well then YOU can explain to the millions of workers who lose a job because businesses can't afford to pay them why they were let go. You can explain to them that what you thought you were doing was "fair" and "equal." There are also a number of smaller businesses who pay minimum wage that would instantly be closed if minimum wage was raised to your dreamy amount of $20 as well.
krispy916 3 years ago
Also for Krispy, who wrote: "So you're saying we should punish successful businesses? If you increase the minimum wage to a "living wage," corporations are not going to want to do business with the U.S. and the economy will fall" Yeah, this is the kind of thinking I hate: "If we can't operate in an environment where we can maximize profits then to hell with it! Workers? They can get f**ked! We want profits!"
lmb193 3 years ago
lmb193: If a business does not make a profit, the business will not be able to employ workers.
No profit = no workers.
Curt300 3 years ago
Why?
lmb193 3 years ago
If he doesn't make a profit the business owner will have no incentive to stay in business.
We work for profit. No profit=no incentive to stay in business.
Curt300 3 years ago
and Curt, yet again: "We work for profit. No profit=no incentive to stay in business." Why? Isnt your wage/salary enough? Does there need to be a huge pile of excess cash for you to be interested in undertaking an enterprise? Is greed not a sin? In a capitalistic society, is Jesus not an idiot? We are materialists. We are concerned with profit/loss. Those are the only concepts we use to judge the value of an action. Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No?
lmb193 3 years ago
"Isnt your wage/salary enough?"
Absolutely not. Running a business is a hassle. The stress involved in making payroll is horrible. Being legally liable for more crap than you can imagine just as bad.
"Does there need to be...excess cash...?"
The greater the potential profit, the more attractive the enterprise.
"Profit is our only incentive because greed is our only value. Yes/No? "
How did you get all the way over there? That is silly. I never said that.
(Continued)
Curt300 3 years ago
Krispy: "The two democrat candidates have proposed nearly a trillion dollars in NEW spending. Where are they going to get that money? Oh I don't know...taxpayers..." Sure. And why do they have to propose new spending on social welfare programs? Is that because, oh i don't know, capitalism as a system is a failure wherein greed is the guiding principle and a vast segment of the popu is left in poverty, not able to afford basic med services? That capitalism can only work in tandem with socialism?
lmb193 3 years ago
After failing in the oil business, even though his father had such close ties with American and Saudi and other Arab oil concerns, W. was GIVEN a healthy share of the Texas Rangers. Amazing that so many working class Americans voted for a man who had failed so often despite so many opportunities in the 'free market'?
dinnerbucket9 3 years ago
It is not so amazing when you consider the alternative: Al Gore.
I never voted for Bush. I voted against Gore and Kerry. The next choice is even worse.
Curt300 3 years ago
Also, let me remind you that it has been 8 years since our last recession and no dinnerbucket, this isn't even near what it was like during the Great Depression at all. You can't compare the unemployment rate, inflation, or poverty now to how it was in the Great Depression. The depression was SO bad the the govt. was forced to take over. Many anylysts wouldn't even call this a recession either. It's all part of a free market my friend. And recession usually don't last long at all.
krispy916 3 years ago
Moreover, Krispy, the Bush regime [ and we well know who his 'base' is] has presided over an economy that is fast coming apart at the seams [ witness the implosion of the dollar, the death of consumer confidence, extra-ordinary bail outs for craven speculators and other negative indices that compare with those that led to the Great Depression]. Nice work.
dinnerbucket9 3 years ago
db9: Yep, Bush let the Democrats spend all they wanted.
By the way, who is his 'base'?
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt300; There is video-tape of a tuxedoed Bush at a fund raiser populated by super-wealthy Pioneer Club types stating exactly THAT. Republicans controlled the White House, Senate and House until early 2007 and even then the Dems slim numerical majority never had the leverage to over-ride a veto. [ They have controlled the house and Senate for well over a decade].
dinnerbucket9 3 years ago
And when I say 'they' I mean the Republicans.
dinnerbucket9 3 years ago
db9: "super-wealthy Pioneer Club types stating exactly THAT."
Exactly what?
Curt300 3 years ago
Bush said it plain, Curt to the assembled millionaires ''You ARE my base.' And how could this surprise you? W. is the ultimate spawn of privelege, the grandson of Senator Prescott Bush [ a Yankee elitist par excellence]and the errant son of a former fucking president. And even with these advantages he proceeded to fail repeatedly in the oil business. He is the penultimate Republican princeling....and is destroying his grand-daddys Grand Old Party.
dinnerbucket9 3 years ago
"Bush said...to the... millionaires 'You ARE my base.'"
He was making a wry joke.
Why "penultimate"? That makes no sense to me.
You have been taking this exchange much more seriously than I have. Due to the format, you have presented your views in small parcels. What's your bottom line? Are you for an economy that is organized around the principle "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs"? Do entrepreneurs add value, or are they parasitic?
Curt300 3 years ago
Dinnerbucket, unless I'm mistaken, the economy was doing quite well until recently. allow me to remind you that it was only a few months ago that the DOW hit 14,000 and the stock markets were setting all kinds of new records. People were also working, with unemployment below 4.7% at one point, go check out the Dept. of Labor. It was largely because of the Bush tax cuts. This all happened AFTER the tax cuts. You don't increase taxes in a struggling economy. People won't spend their money.
krispy916 3 years ago
exactly how were those things caused by the bush tax cuts? they happened after the tax cuts, therefore they happened because of the tax cuts? What did your father did with that 2 grand he got back? Invest and hire more workers?
lmb193 3 years ago
My father doesn't hire workers, he works UNDER someone else for your information as an engineer, he actually just quit because the environment was terrible. He's starting his own business as a financial advisor and trying to help our family become financially independent. I'd appreciate it if you showed a little more respect to my father as well. He's working very hard to proved for his family of six and again, we aren't "rich" by any means, we are middle class. Grow up.
krispy916 3 years ago
Also, as a matter of great interest to me, you say your kids aren't worth more than $7 an hour. How is that determined? How is a person's wage determined? You want to know who is made miserable by free-market activity? Read Dickens. I would venture: anyone who has only general skills and who is, therefore, readily replaceable. If everyone is treated well by a free market econ, then why are things like labor unions and minimum wages necessary at all?
lmb193 3 years ago
"...you say your kids aren't worth more than $7 an hour...How is a person's wage determined?"
If the government doesn't sabatogue unskilled workers' opportunities by putting grease on the lowest rung of the ladder, wages are determined by the free market.
I don't need Dickens to tell me what capitalism looks like. Read F.A.Hayek.
Curt300 3 years ago
Make that "sabotage". Sorry.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt: Wages are determined by the free market? I dont think so. I think the range of feasible wages is determined by the free market. So Mc has a range of possible wages to pay it's employees, say $7 - $45/hour. That's what their revenue can support. If they pay 45, then they have 0 profit. Wages are determined by the owners who see wages as a cost, something to be minimized. That's their thinking. They dont seem to think about the minimal life that their minimized wages afford their workers.
lmb193 3 years ago
The real way wages seem to be determined is by the labor supply. In fact there are so many unskilled laborers that Mc could probably offer $2/hr and find people to take it. Or $0.25 if they could import Chinese laborers. So the gov has to set a min wage, because the only goal of bottom-line biz men is profit. This is my problem with capitalism - it is good not only at generating wealth, but also at wantonly distributing it - and always in favor of those holding the reigns.
lmb193 3 years ago
lmb193: "...there are so many unskilled laborers..."
What's the current unemployment figure? 4.75%?
Curt300 3 years ago
What if no employers offer the PWE anything better? Isn't that the real situation? All employers can offer near-min-wage wages because there is always someone else to come along and fill it? In the end it seems like a choice of the owner class to look on the laboring class with a cold eye and treat them only as instruments of production, not as people trying to make a living
lmb193 3 years ago
4.75? Is that the interesting statistic? How much of the population is scraping by on $12 an hour? Probably more than 5%...
lmb193 3 years ago
lmb193: "Wages are determined by the owners who see wages as a cost, something to be minimized."
That's half of it. The other factor is under the control of the potential wage earner. If the potential employer doesn't offer enough, the PWE pursues other opportunities.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt300: Yes, agreed. For your kids it's fine. But I'm talking about adults with similar to less education than your kids. The thirty year old man who can barely read/write/do arithmetic. These people are in this state because their environment didnt nurture them any better, and as long as the living-cost-to-wage ratio remains at present levels, that will never change. We will always have a poor, might I say discarded class of people whom you and I would cringe to trade places with.
lmb193 3 years ago
"The thirty year old man who can barely read/write/do arithmetic."
I have hired guys like that. A couple of them worked out great. At first they were not paid much. They worked hard, paid attention and showed up on time. They got good and made good livings. If the minimum wage was $20/hr, I wouldn't have hired either of them.
Curt300 3 years ago
So what if the gov subsidized their wages? You pay them 12 and the gov pays the other 8? Or some other such balance based on what your biz can afford. Wouldnt that make more sense than all of these welfare programs which people only need because their wages are such shite? Wouldnt that be "workfare" instead of welfare, as republicans are always wanting?
lmb193 3 years ago
I think it's time we all came to the realization that we, as the proponents of society as is, are the creators of the miserable conditions of others. (and damn this Youtube character counter!!)
lmb193 3 years ago
"...we... are the creators of the miserable conditions of others."
Who is made miserable by my free-market economic activity?
Curt300 3 years ago
They are treated like vermin, worthy of only a meager existence, why? Because that's the role society determined for them, just as it determined to give u a nicer role. You dont choose your parents or your social class. The choices u can make in life are severely limited by the track society puts you on from the beginning. How could a menial laborer ever better himself? From where might come the resources to do that?
lmb193 3 years ago
"They are...worthy of only a meager existence...(b)ecause that's the role society determined for them,..."
If this menial laborer works hard and plays "heads up" he will do fine.
Curt300 3 years ago
To kurt, krispy, daddysq: You all seem to have a very individualistic view of society. As if poor people deserve to be such because of their personal inadequacies; and the opposite, that u deserve more because of your personal ability. But what is an individual? Is an individual simply not a product of society? Is society not our nurturer? What could u achieve without the support of society? And why scoff at others who had no such support?
lmb193 3 years ago
a larger pie. Wouldn't a redistribution of the present wealth (of which there is already plenty) be a more 'love thy neighbor' type move? This is something I can't understand about the right. They all seem to be Christians, yet they all seem to be I-want-more-and-poor-people-can-get-fucked hardliners. Curious... I thought it was very difficult for a rich man to get into heaven? Yet all Christians seek to be rich. Even have game shows entitled "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" Haha! Not Jesus...
lmb193 3 years ago
lmb193: "Wouldn't a redistribution of the present wealth (of which there is already plenty) be a more 'love thy neighbor' type move?"
Yeah, Socialism has been such a smashing success elsewhere.
Curt300 3 years ago
Depends on which examples u choose. England? 429 pounds per week avg wage - upward of $800; free healthcare. Not successful? If u only choose the stupid examples of Russia/China or other 'revolutionary' examples where they tried to go straight from monarchy to communism in one bold leap (as Marx thought impossible), then of couse all u find is failure. Iraq's Baath party was 'socialist'. Words with no meaning. Hussein, Stalin, Mao...lovers of humanity.
lmb193 3 years ago
The successes in medicine, science, sports or anything are because of man's competitive nature. There is nothing 'evil' about wanting to do better than the next guy. Only liberals find competition to be evil. Let it be known: when 'everybody is the same, when everybody gets the same', NOBODY wants to try to be their best. I traveled throughout China 20 years ago and saw the effects of your 'wealth redistribution, same for all' government. It doesn't work.
daddysquirrel 3 years ago
There is something 'evil' about wanting to do better than the next guy - it's called not giving a shit about the next guy. I didnt say eliminate competition or even 'everybody gets the same', I just said dont leave anybody in the dust. They are members of society too mate. They may not be as contributing as others and therefore not as deserving, but surely they do deserve better than the meager 'minimum' existence of minimum wage.
lmb193 3 years ago
China. Good example. I dont think u did see the effects of wealth distribution there, as they have never distributed anything in that country. I lived in China the past seven years and I can tell you that the rich own everything and the poor get nothing; and if they dare to try to do something about it, they end up negotiating with the army. What u saw there was monarchy; what u can find there today are the sprouts of Dickensonian capitalism. There is no 'same for all' in China, never was.
lmb193 3 years ago
And why should economics be the driving force behind policy anyway? Wouldnt it make more sense to raise the minimum wage to 15 or 20 an hour, which would all but guarantee the elimination of the poor class, rather than trying some kind of Nietzschean more-power-to-the-supermen scheme in the hope (hope or incidental consequence? did they care, or was that just the rhetoric used for justification?) of raising the overall level of the economy so that the poor man gets the same shitty percentage of
lmb193 3 years ago
Imb193: "Wouldnt it make more sense to raise the minimum wage to 15 or 20 an hour, which would all but guarantee the elimination of the poor class,..."
Brilliant! But why stop at $20/hour? Let's raise it to $50 an hour. Or $100. Those people who aren't worth that - which would include ALL entry-level job seekers - wouldn't have jobs.
Curt300 3 years ago
Curt300: Stop at 20/hour because that's a reasonable living. $100 per hour is excessive, almost 200k per year. Yet there are many who want even more than that. 15/hour is only 30k per year. You mean to tell me that people who put in a 40 hour week arent worth 30k? In an economy which generates 13 trillion a year, almost 100k per worker? What is the value of a person? $7 an hour? Can one even live in America on that wage? No wonder they turn to dealing drugs...
lmb193 3 years ago
"What is the value of a person? $7 an hour? Can one even live in America on that wage?"
No, but it is fine as a training wage for my kids. It will put gas in thier cars, provide them with spending money and teach them good life lessons. They aren't worth any more than $7, so - at $20/hr - they wouldn't have jobs.
Curt300 3 years ago
RAISE THE MINIMUM WAGE? Ok, lets say we do that. What kind of people make minimum wage? Mostly young people who work at McDonalds and are high school or college students. McDonalds will have to drastically raise thier prices or fire a number of employees to be able to afford to pay their workers. And if workers are doing so well at McDonalds, whats the point of being, say, an engineer? When you rasie the minimum wage to a "living wage", you belittle people like engineers or accountants
krispy916 3 years ago
krispy: I don't know where to start with you. The fact that you were able to come to the conclusion that ensuring everyone a livable wage would somehow belittle others seems fantastic to me. An engineer making 60k a year would be belittled if Mcdonalds employees were to earn half his wage?? Or your idea about Mc needing to raise prices/cut jobs. Here's an idea, how about they just reduce their ridiculous profits. What? CEO need a new yacht? And it's not only students working these jobs.
lmb193 3 years ago
"Here's an idea, how about they just reduce their ridiculous profits."
Stockholders would move thier investments someplace where there was a better return. McDs would lose business and cut jobs.
Curt300 3 years ago
Thank you Curt!! My gosh, finally someone who understands how economics works.
krispy916 3 years ago
krispy: Don't mention it. I am glad that I could help.
Curt300 3 years ago
krispy: Sorry for the tone of that last post. I thought you were being sarcastic.
Curt300 3 years ago
Lol, no no trust me I'm very serious. It's unbelievable with how people believe that we can solve a bunch of problems by simply raising the minimum wage, not to mention it's rediculous as well. They just don't understand how the economy works. Well go figure, they're fiscal socialists. Socialism has proved that it fails and Capitalism has proven to work.
krispy916 3 years ago
Not so. McD would still return on it's investments even if it paid it's workers 15 or 20 an hour. And, as a min wage, that would apply to all other companies as well, so, yes, investors would lose across the board, regardless of which company they invested in. Or, in other words, wealth would finally 'trickle down', and the poor could be made middle class by only reducing the wealth of the wealthy - but notice that it would only be a reduction, not destruction...
lmb193 3 years ago
Your dream of $15-$20 as the set minimum wage for everyone is fiscally impossible Imb. You are forcing small business to pay their workers an amount that many of them can't afford. Look at gas stations, they hardly make anything as it is. They make 5-7 CENTS per gallon of gasoline sold, look at sole proprietorships and partnership companies. They will never be able to afford your rediculous minimum wage amounts and millions will LOSE their job
krispy916 3 years ago
You don't know where to start with me? I don't know where to start with you. So you're saying we should punish successful businesses? If you increase the minimum wage to a "living wage," corporations are not going to want to do business with the U.S. and the economy will fall. They will not be able to afford the labor costs, the number of stores will decine and MORE people will be out of a job. The fact is the VAST majority of workers work for minimum wage. Go look it up in the Dept. of Labor.
krispy916 3 years ago
*Sorry my mistake, the fact is the VAST majority of minimum wage workers are college and high school students. Go look it up in the Dept. of Labor.
krispy916 3 years ago
Also, a number of people who make minimum wage don't have to look after a family like people in much higher paying jobs.
krispy916 3 years ago
Price floors, like minimum wage, hardly ever work.
markiscrummy 3 years ago
dunno. I think it could do alot if it were moved from a 'minimum' to a living wage, say $15. Then you wouldn't have poor people, and you wouldn't have welfare spending (like health care) and I think other plagues on society like low education, children born out of wedlock, violent crime - all things related to low income - would be reduced.
lmb193 3 years ago
Morality should never be confused with affluence. People who lived through the Great Depression did not have low morals.
GBS990 3 years ago 2
That the increase in wages has to come from somewhere. That somewhere will be from the companies or businesses paying the wages, and they will take it from other workers in the form of layoffs and reliefs - in short, increased unemployment. Your living wage means fewer people make any wage at all.
FAHayek89 3 years ago
Why can't they take it from CEO's and investors who make 500x the wages of the avg workers??
lmb193 3 years ago