Re: Corporate Capitalism is not democracy

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote:

> a425couple wrote:
>
>> "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote in message...
>>
>>> a425couple wrote:
>>>
>>>> "Eris" <vit...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>
>>>>> Corporate Capitalism is not democracy
>>>>> It isn't capitalism either. It's a corporatocracy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Sigh, Capitalism is our economic system, with property rights and
>>>> freedom of choices as to what we get, and who we get it from (free
>>>> enterprise). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> As usual you leave out the ugliness of Capitalism. e.g. the vast
>>> numbers
>>> of people who are left in the worst poverty
>>
>>
>>
>> Pure nonsense!
>> The "worst poverty" is clearly when large numbers of
>> the population starve to death.
>> That was clearly in the years before corporations helped
>> capitalism develop effective trade,
>> or in areas of the world that in more modern times
>> shunned capitalism.
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by_death_toll#Famine
>>
>> China 1959-61, between 15 and 43 million.
>> USSR 1932-39, between 6 and 8 million.
>> USSR 1929-1922, between 5 and 10 million.
>> Starving to death IS clearly the "worst poverty".
>
>
> Again, as usual you completely ignore the ugliness of Capitalism,
> especially
> South of the Rio Grande down through South America. Son your own goofy
> website says up to 100 million killed by the [Capitalist] colonization of
> America, and if you want to play this game you need to include events
> like WW1, up to 65 million, as Capitalism certainly influenced the start
> of that war, and *certainly* the 7 million killed in the Vietnam war and
> the millions killed in Vietnam before 1945 were all caused by ugly
> Capitalism.
>
> Again, Capitalism is fine if it is well controlled by good socialist
> laws like anti-monopoly laws, minimum wage, 8 hour days, child
> labor laws, workers comp insurance, etc. but your "free" Capitalism
> is the ugliest as it leads to business owners ruthlessly cheating
> people out of a livable wage, and uncontrolled growth (like a cancer),
> as Capitalism *always* needs new markets to exploit, so the Capitalists
> move on to exploit elsewhere leaving blight and poverty in their path.
>
> So don't forget to add in every child who died of malnutrition,
> or infant deaths caused by inadequate health care, etc, *caused* by
> the greedy Capitalists...in your silly dishonest numbers game.

I add, the OP (Eris) is correct...Capitalism is an economic concept and
democracy is a governing concept...neither is necessary for the other.

and why are we capitalizing Capitalism but not democracy?
;-)

[Mark Test]

"Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." wrote in message
news:m5WdnZChy9w94xLN...@supernews.com...

---------------------------------------------------------------
Perhaps because we are a Republic? Perhaps because capitalism supports the
individual, whereas democracy and government limits the individual...?

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual
rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."
--- Ayn Rand

[Daryl]

Capitalism, if use properly results in the better life of all
involved. capitalism as it is today (not the small case) is
where you trash your own country to make more money and power for
just yourself. Screw the regular people.

Democracy lasts about 10 minutes as a community grows. It
outgrows it very quickly is is replaced by either a flavor of
mixed Republic or a mixed Socialist Government. Usually, it's
healthy to borrow from both. It's a balancing act. The US has
gone from a Democracy that lasted about 10 minutes to a Republic
for just the Rich While Landowners, to women voting, Blacks
voting, Polling Stations that used bully boys to prevent Non
White Rich Landowners from voting, and more. If you are in a
country that is a Democracy then you don't live in the United
States past the 10 minutes it was one for just the Rich White
Landowners.

What you do live in, right now, is a mix of Republic and
Corporate controlled Government. The Republic side is good but
the Corporate side is extremely bad. Corporations should not be
allowed in Politics like they are today. What we have today is
what I like to call Corporate Republic. Correct that and I have
no trouble with the policies of the Right. Unfortunately, the
Corporation have purchased out Government from the local to the
Federal. Had a Republican stand up and say they are going to
correct this and actually go and do it, then they have my vote.
Until then, their lack of FACT CHECKING and outright lying makes
me not vote for them.

I didn't move towards the left, the right moved away from me. If
we were in the Truman Time, I would be a Right Wing Republican.
But not today. Especially with the way you children are operating.



--
http://tvmoviesforfree.com
for free movies and Nostalgic TV. Tons of Military shows and
programs.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7953g$abh$1...@dont-email.me>,

By the same token as above, we should not allow unions to have a
political say, nor should we allow public employee unions, since they,
through their PACs and their own resources can control those with whom
they negotiate salaries and benefits.

[meport]

Since the US Supreme Court ruled that corporations are in fact individuals
and granted corporations all the rights and privileges of a person, except
voting rights, corporations and the capitalists that run them are therefore
democratic citizens of the United States.
---
meport

"Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." wrote in message
news:m5WdnZChy9w94xLN...@supernews.com...

[Daryl]

Agree wholeheartedly.

[Daryl]

On 11/5/2012 2:22 PM, meport wrote:
> Since the US Supreme Court ruled that corporations are in fact
> individuals and granted corporations all the rights and
> privileges of a person, except voting rights, corporations and
> the capitalists that run them are therefore democratic citizens
> of the United States.
> ---
> meport

And you don't see a problem with this? They don't have to even
come close to FACT CHECK!. And they can contribute millions as
long as it's not directly to the candidate. Yes, lump in Unions
along with Corporations since Unions ARE Corporations.

[Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D.]

Ah...thanks for the explanation. Where to start with your gross ignorance...

A Republic is also a democracy.

A democracy is *foremost* about the individual.

Capitalism does not "support" it's exploited individuals (e.g. slaves).

Complaining democracy limits the individual...son, ya want more than 1 vote?

Government is *supposed* to limit the individual.

Democracy and capitalism are not mutually exclusive.

Capitalism is an economic concept and democracy is a governing concept
...neither is necessary for the other.

you seem to be a confused person...so i ignored your stupid Ayn Rand quote
;-)

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <s9ednS_93PU6GAXN...@supernews.com>,

Wrong! In a republic, designated representatives create legislation and
policy; in a democracy, the majority of citizens do these tasks.

>
> A democracy is *foremost* about the individual.

Wrong! In a democracy the individual is subservient to the majority. The
most extreme version is "three wolves and two sheep voting on tonight's
dinner menu, while a constitutional republic is a well-armed sheep
conteting the vote."

>
> Capitalism does not "support" it's exploited individuals (e.g. slaves).

Wrong! Capitalism is the individual (or a group of individuals) creating
business enterprises. It is Constitutional limits that govern power here.

>
> Complaining democracy limits the individual...son, ya want more than 1 vote?

It depends on whether you are one of the sheep or one of the wolves.

>
> Government is *supposed* to limit the individual.

... and a Constitution is *supposed* to limit Government.

>
> Democracy and capitalism are not mutually exclusive.

True.

>
> Capitalism is an economic concept and democracy is a governing concept
> ...neither is necessary for the other.

True.

[Bill]

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 12:17:24 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Wrong! In a republic, designated representatives create legislation and
>policy; in a democracy, the majority of citizens do these tasks.
>>

We went through all this a couple of months ago and you collected a
phenominal spanking for claiming that republic is always
representative.

[meport]

Oh, I see the problem with this. As every single American Citizen should.

What I see is greed winning every time because everyone lets the greedy win
without ever trying to stop them. We take our crumbs and they get the cake.

Everyone keeps harping about "the problem(s) with our country" but no one
ever defines what "the problem(s) is". Want to know what "the problem(s)"
really is? Well, to put it bluntly you're "the problem". And I'm "the
problem". And anyone who votes over and over and over again for the status
quo is "the problem". Everyone who votes to elect same Congressman over and
over and over again is "the problem". Everyone who votes to elect the same
Senator over and over and over again is "the problem". Everyone who votes
against their own self interests over and over and over again is "the
problem". We give them the RIGHT to screw us to the wall and don't even try
to stop them when they do and then we wonder what "the problem" is.

So what's the solution? You know what the solution is. DO SOMETHING ABOUT
IT. Stop gripping and screaming to yourself in the wilderness. DO
SOMETHING TO STOP THEM. Vote them out of office. Don't fall into the trap
they want you to fall into. Don't accept the lies YOUR Congressman tells
you. Don't think it's not YOUR Congressman. Stop diluting yourself into
thinking that YOUR Congressman is totally in altruistic and that it's the
other guys Congressman who is at fault. BECAUSE IT IS YOUR CONGRESSMAN.
Their "the problem" and you know it. Stop diluting yourself about the real
facts and do something about it.
---
meport

"Daryl" wrote in message news:k79i1k$rm7$3...@dont-email.me...

[Daryl]

On 11/6/2012 3:04 PM, meport wrote:
> Oh, I see the problem with this. As every single American
> Citizen should.
>
> What I see is greed winning every time because everyone lets the
> greedy win without ever trying to stop them. We take our crumbs
> and they get the cake.

><trimmed>

The biggest problem is, we have the Fox guarding the Fox House
and wondering where all the chickens have gone. We need an
external to clean the mess up. One that has the power and
freedom to take action. Not direct action but to report to the
American People when the laws they need to clean things up is
voted down by our Congress. The Enemy here isn't the President
or the Courts, it's the Congress who are about as corrupt as you
can get.

Daryl

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Unions are nothing more than an middleclass workers attempt to have a say !
The ..."Right To Work States"movement ... are an argmanent against such !
So why should Unions _not_ have a say ?

cheers....Jeff

[Daryl]

Say with the Employer, not the Government.

[Bill]

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 16:42:25 -0700, Daryl <dh...@nospami70west3.com>
wrote:

Freedom of association is a fundamental human right.

Why do you seek to remove this from a single section of society?

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

William, Orval likes being spanked and often at that.

cheers.....Jeff

[meport]

You missed my entire point. Yes Congress is a putrid sewer of corruption
and self interest. BUT STOP BLAMING CONGRESS. Blame yourself and every
other voter who gets in the election booth and puts his or her mark next to
the name of the incumbent.

WE HAVE NO ONE TO BLAME EXCEPT OURSELVES. WE, NOT THEM, ARE THE PROBLEM.

We have to stop being the tools, the enablers, the supporters of their
corruption. We have to stop automatically voting for them and sending them
back time after time to ply their sleaze.

We're the problem because we keep reelecting them. They glorify in our
stupidity. They know what they are and they prey on us. And laugh their
way to the bank weekly.
---
meport

"Daryl" wrote in message news:k7c3jh$49c$1...@dont-email.me...

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Would you mind retrying your response in clear and concise English, Daryl ?
Because I don't have a clue what you just said
cheers....Jeff

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7c6dl$knf$1...@dont-email.me>,

Unions have evolved into businesses themselves, often losing sight of
their original intent, which was to represent the membership. When union
bosses pull in 7-figure salaries plus benefits, it a rather hard pill to
swallow that "Unions are nothing more than an middleclass workers
attempt to have a say," rather than another bull elephant in the fight
to trample the ground.

[Daryl]

Say as in have a voice. Now reread it.

Daryl

[Daryl]

On 11/6/2012 7:22 PM, meport wrote:
> You missed my entire point. Yes Congress is a putrid sewer of
> corruption and self interest. BUT STOP BLAMING CONGRESS. Blame
> yourself and every other voter who gets in the election booth and
> puts his or her mark next to the name of the incumbent.
>
> WE HAVE NO ONE TO BLAME EXCEPT OURSELVES. WE, NOT THEM, ARE THE
> PROBLEM.
>
> We have to stop being the tools, the enablers, the supporters of
> their corruption. We have to stop automatically voting for them
> and sending them back time after time to ply their sleaze.
>
> We're the problem because we keep reelecting them. They glorify
> in our stupidity. They know what they are and they prey on us.
> And laugh their way to the bank weekly.
> ---
> meport

I think the blame needs to be directed at congress. This
Presidential Election will change almost nothing. Business as
usual for congress. We forget the message from Bugs Bunny.

http://tvmoviesforfree.com/mel/looney-tunes/daffy-for-president-video_8daf87e67.html

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

But you don't mind the Koch brothers not only sponsoring the Tea Party, but
also chipping in at least $100 million for various Republican campaigns
during this presidential run ?
Now why is that, Orval ?

cheers....Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Would you be able to supply some cites for these seven figure salaries
you're speaking of, Orval ?

it a rather
> hard pill to swallow that "Unions are nothing more than an
> middleclass workers attempt to have a say," rather than another bull
> elephant in the fight to trample the ground.

Have you ever seen what happens to workers who don't have Union
representation , Orval ?

The bull elephant trampling the ground is a good analogy, because that's
what management can easily do and THAT is why workers need unions.

cheers....Jeff

[Bill]

On Tue, 06 Nov 2012 21:31:01 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Unions have evolved into businesses themselves, often losing sight of
>their original intent, which was to represent the membership. When union
>bosses pull in 7-figure salaries plus benefits, it a rather hard pill to
>swallow that "Unions are nothing more than an middleclass workers
>attempt to have a say," rather than another bull elephant in the fight
>to trample the ground.

Those officials are elected.

What's your problem with democracy?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7cqdh$33c$1...@dont-email.me>,

OK -- six figure salaries, rather than 7+

From http://www.unionfacts.com/union/AFL-CIO

AFL-CIO:
Members: 11,601,104
Assets: $100,553,700.00
Employees: 448

President: $293,750.00
Exec VP: $260,320.00
Sec/Treas: $253,117.00

Crime & Corruption:
criminal charges 4
embezzlement charges 6
guilty pleas 5
indictments 3
officials sentenced 3

Political Contributions:
Democrats: $53,872,558.00 (0.9246)
Republicans: $4,221,471.00 (0.0725)


National Education Assn.
http://www.unionfacts.com/union/National_Education_Association
Members: 3,167,412
Assets: $223,413,157.00
Employees: 1,018

President: $492,484.00
Exec VP: $460,060.00
Sec/Treas: $371,904.00

Crime & Corruption:
criminal charges 61
criminal convictions 7
embezzlement charges 61
guilty pleas 55
indictments 27
officials sentenced 33

Political Contributions:
Democrats: $42,332,386.00 (0.7109)
Republicans: $17,019,773.00 (0.2858)


SEIU:
http://www.unionfacts.com/union/Service_Employees
Members: 1,921,768
Assets:$246,060,289.00
Employees: 873
President: $290,334.00
Exec VP: $242,138.00
Sec/Treas: $330,503.00

Crime & Corruption:
criminal charges 20
criminal convictions 1
embezzlement charges 22
guilty pleas 24
indictments 6
officials sentenced 12

Political Contributions:
Democrats: $142,750,904.00 (0.8939)
Republicans: $16,790,785.00 (0.1051)

American AMERICAN FEDERATION OF STATE COUNTY & MUNICIPAL Employees
http://www.unionfacts.com/union/American_Federation_of_State_County_%26_M
unicipal_Employe

Members: 1,423,584
Assets: $109,224,928.00
Employees: 662

General Counsel: $536,035.00
President: $512,369.00
DIRECTOR, ORGANIZING & FI $330,142.00
Sec/Treas: $433,886.00

Crime & Corruption:
criminal charges 21
criminal convictions 1
embezzlement charges 50
guilty pleas 49
indictments 11
officials sentenced 28

Political Contributions:
Democrats: $75,727,114.00 (0.7415)
Republicans: $26,057,113.00 (0.2551)

You can look up the stats on your favorite union at:
http://www.unionfacts.com/cuf

It is obvious that the unions are major businesses and act as such and
are major players in politics, rather than simple "nothing more than an
middleclass workers attempt to have a say."

>
> it a rather
> > hard pill to swallow that "Unions are nothing more than an
> > middleclass workers attempt to have a say," rather than another bull
> > elephant in the fight to trample the ground.
>
> Have you ever seen what happens to workers who don't have Union
> representation , Orval ?

I used to be one -- it didn't seem to make much difference. I have also
witnessed union excesses regarding work rules and who can do what. For
instance, if you are an exhibitor at the Orlando Convention Center, you
have to hire an electrician to plug your computer into a power outlet.

Clearly, unions have served some very important purposes - like
eliminating payment in company scrip, usable only at the Company Store,
legitimate health and safety concerns, child labor -- to name a few.

Excesses have been featherbedding rules on railroads, the above-cited
stuff requiring unnecessary "skills," etc.

>
> The bull elephant trampling the ground is a good analogy, because that's
> what management can easily do and THAT is why workers need unions.
>

Yes -- I have always said that the presence of a union is an indicator
of failed management. As an airline pilot friend put it: "The only thing
worse than having a union is having the conditions that require it."

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7cpth$mg$1...@dont-email.me>,

See my figures on union political activities in a previous reply to your
postings. They make the Koch Brothers look absolutely parsimonious.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 6, 10:09 pm, "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bberesf...@cogeco.ca> wrote:

> Have you ever seen what happens to workers who don't have Union
> representation , Orval ?

Yes, 19th Century US, highest sustained income growth ever.

> The bull elephant trampling the ground is a good analogy, because that's
> what management can easily do and THAT is why workers need unions.

Marxist bullshit. Management can't force people to work for them, and
companies compete against each other.

[peter skelton]

"Shawn Wilson" wrote in message
news:045cd40f-33b1-4555...@jj5g2000pbc.googlegroups.com...

On Nov 6, 10:09 pm, "Jeffrey Hamilton"
<bberesf...@cogeco.ca> wrote:

> Have you ever seen what happens to workers who don't have
> Union
> representation , Orval ?


>Yes, 19th Century US, highest sustained income growth ever.

That is bullshit, hot and steaming. You might want to check
out the Long Depression of 1873 or the panic of 1893.

[DGVREIMAN]

"Daryl" <dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote in message
news:k7cofh$ols$2...@dont-email.me...

Doug Says: You guys are way too cynical. The USA always finds a way
out of the disasters it creates for itself - thanks to the resolve and
intelligence of the American people. Eventually, we do something
about our enemies, and usually that happens with a bang.

Doug Grant (Tm)

[Daryl]

The Union is neither good or bad for the most part. Management
is neither good or bad for the most part. But when you have Bad
Management, the threat of the Union is a good thing. Not having
that option, the Management continues to be bad.

[Andrew Swallow]

The 18th, 19th and 20th were times of enormous growth in Britain and the
USA. Unfortunately it was a roller coaster ride, with lots of downs as
well as ups. Even though we are currently in a deep recession the
world's economy is still growing.

Trade unions are children of capitalist societies. Dictatorships soon
abolish them.

Andrew Swallow

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 7, 10:21 pm, Daryl <dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote:


> >> Have you ever seen what happens to workers who don't have Union
> >> representation , Orval ?
>
> > Yes, 19th Century US, highest sustained income growth ever.
>
> >> The bull elephant trampling the ground is a good analogy, because that's
> >> what management can easily do and THAT is why workers need unions.
>
> > Marxist bullshit.  Management can't force people to work for them, and
> > companies compete against each other.
>
> The Union is neither good or bad for the most part.

This is simply false. Unions are bad for non-union workers and
slightly bad for business*. (well, to the extent they are
'effective') Additionally it is no accident that the industries that
'died' in the US were the most unionized. Unions act as a parasite on
business, at least when they got government to support them.

*the economics of this are too long to go into here, but basically
what concessions unions get comes mostly out of the pockets of non-
union workers, not management.

>  Management
> is neither good or bad for the most part.  But when you have Bad
> Management, the threat of the Union is a good thing.  Not having
> that option, the Management continues to be bad.

If management is bad workers can simply quit. Problem solves itself.
When government gives unions special privileges business doesn't have
as flexible a way to deal with them. End result is that unionized
businesses/industries are outcompeted by the non-unionized.

[Bill]

On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 10:17:19 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:


>If management is bad workers can simply quit.

And starve...

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 8, 2:19 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >If management is bad workers can simply quit.
>
> And starve...

Work for someone else. The real world is not a socialist fantasy.
There are large numbers of employers, and they all need workers. If
workers quit, they're fucked. If they can't attract workers, they're
fucked. Marx could never figure this part of the economy out. Which
is why his theories about capitalism are all false.

[Daryl]

Right at this moment, workers are ducked and fucked. When the
Unemployment runs out, that's the end. Many are taking jobs they
normally wouldn't, working for employers that they normally
wouldn't. Employers are operating that if you don't like the
treatment then you can quit. And they try their damnedest to
help you quit. We have now have workers doing the jobs of 3
people but NO overtime. Things have changed and it's not for the
better.

Daryl

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 8, 5:03 pm, Daryl <dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote:


> > Work for someone else.  The real world is not a socialist fantasy.
> > There are large numbers of employers, and they all need workers.  If
> > workers quit, they're fucked.  If they can't attract workers, they're
> > fucked.  Marx could never figure this part of the economy out.  Which
> > is why his theories about capitalism are all false.
>
> Right at this moment, workers are ducked and fucked. When the
> Unemployment runs out, that's the end.  Many are taking jobs they
> normally wouldn't, working for employers that they normally
> wouldn't.  Employers are operating that if you don't like the
> treatment then you can quit.  And they try their damnedest to
> help you quit.  We have now have workers doing the jobs of 3
> people but NO overtime.  Things have changed and it's not for the
> better.

Still infinitely better than things were in the 'golden age of unions'
though, huh?

The current shitty economics conditions are all about government. A
bunch of lawyers injecting their bullshit into the legal system to
'improve things' has the usual effect- fucking things up royally.

[Daryl]

The only thing the Government did to help create this was the
almost total Deregulation. The rest is just plain greed.

[Bill]

Ah, you're sweet...

Let me know how one does that if they're a miner in a company town...

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 8, 5:52 pm, Daryl <dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote:


> > The current shitty economics conditions are all about government.  A
> > bunch of lawyers injecting their bullshit into the legal system to
> > 'improve things' has the usual effect- fucking things up royally.
>
> The only thing the Government did to help create this was the
> almost total Deregulation.  The rest is just plain greed.

No...

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 8, 6:03 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >Work for someone else.  The real world is not a socialist fantasy.
> >There are large numbers of employers, and they all need workers.  If
> >workers quit, they're fucked.  If they can't attract workers, they're
> >fucked.  Marx could never figure this part of the economy out.  Which
> >is why his theories about capitalism are all false.
>
> Ah,  you're sweet...
>
> Let me know how one does that if they're a miner in a company town...

I guess you didn't read my full post, let me quot you the iportant
part you ignored-

"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."

This includes imaginary towns with a single employer, no one owns a
car and apparently there is a high wall around the entire place....

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 15:53:09 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
> <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> >On Nov 8, 2:19�痦��麻祆�尖灬汶躞瀹�犁磲殪�镯�黩雉搴
��
�揪�旧�磲钺珏礤铘�轶�忉�黠螂弪�汜�箝眇禊�聃轸�
�揪
�揪�令�篝狎鲥��
��
��
�咀矧�骘�箫礤镱�屐箦���澡�蝈犰�黠蜢�轶�铒��箫汩犰轶�驷铘狍�
�驹桢蝈�狎�灬蜱�铛礅弪�镦�屙痨稆弪蟋�犷�翳妁�犰�铄邃�黠螂弪螽��涉
�诀矧脲蝮�聃轸��翳妁��骢汶邃���涉�翳妁�汜瞌�狒趄徙�黠螂弪蟋�翳妁��
�炬蹉脲洚��歪蝤�泔蹯�铄鲥�骈珲蝈�翳轶�疳螋�镦�翳�邈镱镯��秕舢��阻殂�
�鹃�麒��栝�翳屣蜷弩�徕秕�汜痖翎扉箜�狎�犰�驷祗瀹
�
�凌����酾蝈�篦邋舢�
�
�体�礤�腩秣�栾�镱�滹弩�翳狒�殒�翳妁���黹铄�轭��泔眇犷��麸黝��

俞礤�麽��狍�镱�滹弩�铒�忮泔礤��玑铉篝弪�轭��铄殓桠秕蜩镲�镦�玑铉篝弪螽
��
清蝾雉�柔篌孱疰祯�
刘铍衢

[Bill]

On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:30:28 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 8, 6:03锟絧m, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >Work for someone else. 锟絋he real world is not a socialist fantasy.
>> >There are large numbers of employers, and they all need workers. 锟絀f
>> >workers quit, they're fucked. 锟絀f they can't attract workers, they're
>> >fucked. 锟組arx could never figure this part of the economy out. 锟絎hich

>> >is why his theories about capitalism are all false.
>>

>> Ah, 锟統ou're sweet...

>>
>> Let me know how one does that if they're a miner in a company town...
>
>
>I guess you didn't read my full post, let me quot you the iportant
>part you ignored-
>
>"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."
>
>This includes imaginary towns with a single employer, no one owns a
>car and apparently there is a high wall around the entire place....

Oh I agree that everyone has some mobility, but if you've got a wife
and kids it is very restricted.

Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.

In many cases only Unions can get those for them.

And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
fundamental rights of man.

[Andrew Swallow]

Marx tended to describe a feudal system where the bosses were
aristocrats and the workers were serfs legally tied to the farm. The
idea that the men in top hats, who owned the mills, were rich workers
was too far outside this model.

Andrew Swallow

[Daryl]

Marx system just doesn't work at all. It's a fantasy all the
way. But danged it don't sound good to those grabbing at anything.

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes: > On Thu, 8 Nov 2012 17:30:28 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson > <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote: > >On Nov 8, 6:03 N pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >Work for someone else. N The real world is not a socialist fantasy. > >> >There are large numbers of employers, and they all need workers. N If > >> >workers quit, they're fucked. N If they can't attract workers, they're > >> >fucked. N Marx could never figure this part of the economy out. N Which > >> >is why his theories about capitalism are all false. > >> > >> Ah, N you're sweet... > >> > >> Let me know how one does that if they're a miner in a company town... > >I guess you didn't read my full post, let me quot you the iportant > >part you ignored- > >"The real world is not a socialist fantasy." > >This includes imaginary towns with a single employer, no one owns a > >car and apparently there is a high wall around the entire place.... > Oh I agree that everyone has some mobility, but if you've got a wife > and kids it is very restricted. Yes. That is true and good points (hence the analogy to a gangster-ridden neighbourhood which a great many families struggle with in my country). > Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions. But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they. > In many cases only Unions can get those for them. The argument is debatable. Whatever good they may have done, there is also the other side of the coin. At what point do the unconsidered consequences of what appears to be a good idea become visible? One generation down, or two? And in what pernicious ways? > And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the > fundamental rights of man. And disassociation... Gernot Hassenpflug Aunkai

[Bill]

On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
<ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:

>Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>
>But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
>out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
>those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
>toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.

How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
to me?

>> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
>
>The argument is debatable. Whatever good they may have done, there is
>also the other side of the coin. At what point do the unconsidered
>consequences of what appears to be a good idea become visible? One
>generation down, or two? And in what pernicious ways?

Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.

>
>> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
>> fundamental rights of man.
>
>And disassociation...

No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>
> >Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
> >
> >But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
> >out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
> >those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
> >toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
>
> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
> to me?
>
> >> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
> >
> >The argument is debatable. Whatever good they may have done, there is
> >also the other side of the coin. At what point do the unconsidered
> >consequences of what appears to be a good idea become visible? One
> >generation down, or two? And in what pernicious ways?
>
> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.

Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
Bruno will break your legs!"

> >
> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
> >> fundamental rights of man.
> >
> >And disassociation...
>
> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.

... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any organization
-- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.

[Daryl]

He if free to do just that. If it's not a union closed shop then
he has the freedom to vote against a union having a closed shop,
not come in in the first place (majority rule) or move to an open
shop or non union job. the other workers have exactly the same
rights.

[Bill]

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>
>Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
>Bruno will break your legs!"

Sometimes democracy needs defending.

Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
brother Fred the unstable plasterer...

>> >
>> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
>> >> fundamental rights of man.
>> >
>> >And disassociation...
>>
>> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>
>... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any organization
>-- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.

Where do you draw the line there?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>,

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
>
> >> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
> >
> >Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
> >Bruno will break your legs!"
>
> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
>
> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
> brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
>

Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?

> >> >
> >> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
> >> >> fundamental rights of man.
> >> >
> >> >And disassociation...
> >>
> >> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
> >
> >... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any organization
> >-- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.
>
> Where do you draw the line there?

Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.

[Daryl]

You are now comparing the Majority Voted In Union as Rape?
Danged, you are off the deep end on this one

[Malcom "Mal" Reynolds]

In article <orfairbairn-33F6...@70-3-168-216.pools.spcsdns.net>,

Orval Fairbairn <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

> > Where do you draw the line there?
>
> Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.

prayer in school is forced association and I suppose forcing a woman to have the
baby that results from rape is another form of forced association

[Bill]

On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 23:42:39 -0400, Orval Fairbairn

<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
>> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>>
>> >> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>> >
>> >Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
>> >Bruno will break your legs!"
>>
>> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
>>
>> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
>> brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
>>
>
>Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?

Don't be absurd.

The iodea that a bunch of thugs, even with guns, could dominate a
mass movement is just silly.

>> >> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
>> >> >> fundamental rights of man.
>> >> >
>> >> >And disassociation...
>> >>
>> >> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>> >
>> >... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any organization
>> >-- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.
>>
>> Where do you draw the line there?
>
>Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.

So is paying taxes.

Do you object to that as well.

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 8, 6:36 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."
>
> >This includes imaginary towns with a single employer, no one owns a
> >car and apparently there is a high wall around the entire place....
>
> Oh I agree that everyone has some mobility,  but if you've got a wife
> and kids it is very restricted.

Jesus Fucking Christ...

Let me repeat-

"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."

This is America. The US has a fucking illegal alien problem,
consisting of Mexican dirt farmers who walked across a thousand
fucking miles of fucking desert with their fucking families to build a
better life. Are you honestly THAT fucking clueless?

"The real world is not a socialist fantasy." There are no mythical
one-employer towns where the people can't leave. Period.

> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.

Load of socialist crap.

> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.

Best times ever for American workers is now, when unions are
historically *weak*. Unions are *not* good for workers as a whole.

[Bert]

In
news:c1d081cb-af58-4c0c...@lg12g2000pbb.googlegroups.com

Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

> The US has a fucking illegal alien problem, consisting of Mexican dirt
> farmers who walked across a thousand fucking miles of fucking desert
> with their fucking families to build a better life.

Other than the fact that these folks are here illegally, what's the real
problem?

--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

[Bill]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 08:44:01 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 8, 6:36�pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."
>>
>> >This includes imaginary towns with a single employer, no one owns a
>> >car and apparently there is a high wall around the entire place....
>>
>> Oh I agree that everyone has some mobility, �but if you've got a wife
>> and kids it is very restricted.
>
>
>
>Jesus Fucking Christ...
>
>Let me repeat-
>
>"The real world is not a socialist fantasy."
>
>This is America.

Not where I live it isn't.

But keep going...

>
>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>
>
>Load of socialist crap.

Your desire to cripple men and women doing an honest day's work for an
honest day's pay is noted.

>> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
>
>
>Best times ever for American workers is now, when unions are
>historically *weak*. Unions are *not* good for workers as a whole.

Well, except for getting rid of stuff like the company store,
company scrip and stuff like that.

As a general rule unions in these days of a reasonable minimum wage
are far more interested in conditions and vacation time.

In unionised Europe the average working week is 38 hours, with a
minimum six weeks paid vacation a year for established staff and a
maximum working week of 48 hours and protection from being sacked on a
whim because you called the foreman an idiot..

What's that sort of stuff like where you live?

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 10, 9:58 am, Bert <b...@iphouse.com> wrote:

> > The US has a fucking illegal alien problem, consisting of Mexican dirt
> > farmers who walked across a thousand fucking miles of fucking desert
> > with their fucking families to build a better life.
>
> Other than the fact that these folks are here illegally, what's the real
> problem?

*I* don't object to their presence, if that's what you're getting at.

[Bert]

In news:1a4b26c9-5d23-4e36...@n2g2000pbp.googlegroups.com

So the US doesn't really have "a fucking illegal alien problem?"

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 10, 10:24 am, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>
> >Load of socialist crap.
>
> Your desire to cripple men and women doing an honest day's work for an
> honest day's pay is noted.

I know how labor markets work, you don't. Employers will increase
hiring if the marginal cost of doing so is less than the marginal
benefit, and reduce it if the other way around. Arbitrary notions of
"decent pay and safe working conditions" don't enter into it. All you
can do is force the unproductive out of the labor market entirely that
way, and that makes them *worse* off.

> >> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
>
> >Best times ever for American workers is now, when unions are
> >historically *weak*.  Unions are *not* good for workers as a whole.
>
> Well,  except for getting rid of  stuff like the company store,
> company scrip and stuff like that.

Those were never negatives. It was only socialist propaganda that
claimed they were. Economic forces are economic forces. If workers
can get a better deal elsewhere they *will* move. Employers have to
compete against each other by offering employees what the employees
want. If they don't their factory will sit idle.

> As a general rule unions in these days of a reasonable minimum wage
> are far more interested in conditions and vacation time.

Doesn't matter.

> In unionised Europe the average working week is 38 hours,  with a
> minimum six weeks paid vacation a year for established staff and a
> maximum working week of 48 hours and protection from being sacked on a
> whim because you called the foreman an idiot..

And unemployment is higher than in the US. (well, since Obama I
haven't checked)

Employers will look at the lifecycle cost of hiring- recruiting,
training, wages/benefits and termination. Laws against firing people
for whatever reason just increase termination costs, and employers
respond be hiring fewer people, which means more unemployment. There
is a reason Europe is poorer then the US, and that reason is
(ironically) Europe's attempts to 'help' it workers.

There is no free lunch. The highest growth, highest wage places in
the world were historically the 19th century US and post WWII Hong
Kong, neither of which had a government trying to 'help' its people.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7ko16$61e$1...@dont-email.me>,

Yes -- especially if it is done via anything but a fully secret ballot.
Card check opens it up for the bosses to send Big Louie around to
recalcitrant workers remarking about how nice their families look and
"It would be a shame if something happened to them."

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <em6s9852h9v94hnk7...@4ax.com>,

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 23:42:39 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>,
> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
> >> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> >In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
> >> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >>
> >> >> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
> >> >
> >> >Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
> >> >Bruno will break your legs!"
> >>
> >> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
> >>
> >> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
> >> brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
> >>
> >
> >Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?
>
> Don't be absurd.
>
> The iodea that a bunch of thugs, even with guns, could dominate a
> mass movement is just silly.

Reality check, please!

[Bill]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 10:16:12 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 10, 10:24 am, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>>
>> >Load of socialist crap.
>>
>> Your desire to cripple men and women doing an honest day's work for an
>> honest day's pay is noted.
>
>
>I know how labor markets work, you don't.

Oh yes I bloody do.

Employers will increase
>hiring if the marginal cost of doing so is less than the marginal
>benefit, and reduce it if the other way around. Arbitrary notions of
>"decent pay and safe working conditions" don't enter into it. All you
>can do is force the unproductive out of the labor market entirely that
>way, and that makes them *worse* off.

So it's ok to cripple a man if it saves a couple of dollars?

>> >> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
>>
>> >Best times ever for American workers is now, when unions are
>> >historically *weak*.  Unions are *not* good for workers as a whole.
>>
>> Well,  except for getting rid of  stuff like the company store,
>> company scrip and stuff like that.
>
>
>Those were never negatives. It was only socialist propaganda that
>claimed they were.

Actually, they were, which is why they're illegal even in the USA.

>> In unionised Europe the average working week is 38 hours,  with a
>> minimum six weeks paid vacation a year for established staff and a
>> maximum working week of 48 hours and protection from being sacked on a
>> whim because you called the foreman an idiot..
>
>
>And unemployment is higher than in the US. (well, since Obama I
>haven't checked)

Then you should...

>Employers will look at the lifecycle cost of hiring- recruiting,
>training, wages/benefits and termination.

Don't be absurd.

You're looking at a management training system that calls a week 'the
medium term'.

>There is no free lunch. The highest growth, highest wage places in
>the world were historically the 19th century US and post WWII Hong
>Kong, neither of which had a government trying to 'help' its people.

And you wish to go back to streets lined with crippled workers begging
for alms from the passing rich.

Well I don't.

We're all well past that and it's only lunatic buffoons like yourself
who wants to go back to it.

[Bill]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 16:19:23 -0400, Orval Fairbairn

<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <em6s9852h9v94hnk7...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 23:42:39 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>,
>> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>> >> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
>> >> > Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> >> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>> >> >
>> >> >Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
>> >> >Bruno will break your legs!"
>> >>
>> >> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
>> >>
>> >> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
>> >> brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
>> >>
>> >
>> >Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?
>>
>> Don't be absurd.
>>
>> The iodea that a bunch of thugs, even with guns, could dominate a
>> mass movement is just silly.
>
>Reality check, please!

So when did it ever happen?

>> >> >> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
>> >> >> >> fundamental rights of man.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >And disassociation...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>> >> >
>> >> >... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any organization
>> >> >-- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.
>> >>
>> >> Where do you draw the line there?
>> >
>> >Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.
>>
>> So is paying taxes.
>>
>> Do you object to that as well.

No answer I see...

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <4iqt98plt74hpe183...@4ax.com>,

Not in your world!

[Bill]

On Sat, 10 Nov 2012 20:26:26 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>In article <4iqt98plt74hpe183...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >> The iodea that a bunch of thugs, even with guns, could dominate a
>> >> mass movement is just silly.
>> >
>> >Reality check, please!
>>
>> So when did it ever happen?
>
>Not in your world!

Not in your either it seems.

Unions being dominated by Mafia thugs who screw the workforce is a
Hollywood fantasy.

People 'vote Mafia' when it suits them.

>> >> >
>> >> >Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.
>> >>
>> >> So is paying taxes.
>> >>
>> >> Do you object to that as well.
>>
>> No answer I see...

Still no answer here either...

[Shawn Wilson]

On Nov 10, 4:58 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >I know how labor markets work, you don't.
>
> Oh yes I bloody do.

No, you don't. I had actual graduate economics courses in the topic.
You are a socialist loon who will merely regurgitate the socialist
party line until I get sick of responding to you.

>  Employers will increase
>
> >hiring if the marginal cost of doing so is less than the marginal
> >benefit, and reduce it if the other way around.  Arbitrary notions of
> >"decent pay and safe working conditions" don't enter into it.  All you
> >can do is force the unproductive out of the labor market entirely that
> >way, and that makes them *worse* off.
>
> So it's ok to cripple a man if it saves a couple of dollars?

And, here we go... socialist fantasy time...

If a man would rather take the job that pays more but has higher rick
of injury to the one that is safer but less well paid, who are yOu to
tell him he can't?

And, of course, there is never perfect safety, you can always spend
more to be marginally safer. Where do you stop? You can't spend all
your money on safety. You have to eat.

> >> >Best times ever for American workers is now, when unions are
> >> >historically *weak*. Unions are *not* good for workers as a whole.
>
> >> Well, except for getting rid of stuff like the company store,
> >> company scrip and stuff like that.
>
> >Those were never negatives.  It was only socialist propaganda that
> >claimed they were.
>
> Actually,  they were,  which is why they're illegal even in the USA.

No, they aren't. (feel free to cite an actual *law* on that if you
want to continue playing this game) And, your repeating "is too" ad
infinitum will not make it true. Your socialist fantasies are not
reality.

> >> In unionised Europe the average working week is 38 hours, with a
> >> minimum six weeks paid vacation a year for established staff and a
> >> maximum working week of 48 hours and protection from being sacked on a
> >> whim because you called the foreman an idiot..
>
> >And unemployment is higher than in the US.  (well, since Obama I
> >haven't checked)
>
> Then you should...

No need. I understand the economics of labor markets already.

> >Employers will look at the lifecycle cost of hiring- recruiting,
> >training, wages/benefits and termination.
>
> Don't be absurd.

Right, so you are going to play infinitely stupid again.

Fuck off, I'm done with you now.

[Bill]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:12:36 -0800 (PST), Shawn Wilson
<ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Nov 10, 4:58 pm, Bill <blackuse...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> >I know how labor markets work, you don't.
>>
>> Oh yes I bloody do.
>
>
>
>No, you don't. I had actual graduate economics courses in the topic.

Now that's a statement that'll cause a few giggles.

"I did a course in that..."

Had the bloke who taught you the course ever actually spent any time
outside a university?

>You are a socialist loon who will merely regurgitate the socialist
>party line until I get sick of responding to you.

Love the idea of 'socialist party' not getting any capital letters.

Still, at least you've stopped calling me a Communist.

>If a man would rather take the job that pays more but has higher rick
>of injury to the one that is safer but less well paid, who are yOu to
>tell him he can't?

I live in a society where employers have waht6 is known as 'a duty of
care' enshrined in law.

In a moral society where employers take responsibility for their
workers' safety it wouldn't be necessary.

>And, of course, there is never perfect safety, you can always spend
>more to be marginally safer. Where do you stop? You can't spend all
>your money on safety. You have to eat.

In reality it is perfectly easy to establish safe systems of work and
assess risk in any situation.

That this is done all over Europe shows it is possible.

>> >> In unionised Europe the average working week is 38 hours, with a
>> >> minimum six weeks paid vacation a year for established staff and a
>> >> maximum working week of 48 hours and protection from being sacked on a
>> >> whim because you called the foreman an idiot..
>>
>> >And unemployment is higher than in the US.  (well, since Obama I
>> >haven't checked)
>>
>> Then you should...
>
>
>No need. I understand the economics of labor markets already.

Try the CIA fact book and compare rates.

You'll find that the US unemployment rate is higher than the major
Western European countries.

>> >Employers will look at the lifecycle cost of hiring- recruiting,
>> >training, wages/benefits and termination.
>>
>> Don't be absurd.
>
>
>Right, so you are going to play infinitely stupid again.

Employers don't live in a long term world, as I said and you snipped.

>Fuck off, I'm done with you now.

Your admission of defeat is accepted.

[Paul F Austin]

On 11/9/2012 7:52 AM, Bill wrote:
> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>
>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>>
>> But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
>> out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
>> those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
>> toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
>
> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
> to me?

Very revealing. You reserve the right to reject charity but are in favor
of using the state as your thug to extract the same sums for the same
purposes.

The US has much higher labor mobility than does Europe and that's one of
the reasons why USian unemployment has been and is lower than that of
the EU (save for a couple of quarters in 2009). The current difference
is about 3 and half percentage points.

Paul

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:

> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>
> >Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
> >
> >> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
> >
> >But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
> >out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
> >those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
> >toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
>
> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
> to me?

LOL I did not say I was going to give you anything, you don't need it, in my view.

> >> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
> >
> >The argument is debatable. Whatever good they may have done, there is
> >also the other side of the coin. At what point do the unconsidered
> >consequences of what appears to be a good idea become visible? One
> >generation down, or two? And in what pernicious ways?
>
> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.

So?

> >> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
> >> fundamental rights of man.
> >
> >And disassociation...
>
> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.

In capitalism it is possible. In socialism, not.
--
Gernot Hassenpflug

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Aboslutely!
--
Gernot Hassenpflug

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Bert <be...@iphouse.com> writes:

> In news:1a4b26c9-5d23-4e36...@n2g2000pbp.googlegroups.com
> Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > On Nov 10, 9:58�犴��洛螋�尖��轲栾躞瀹泔砭�黩雉搴
��
�揪��澡�沼�栳��骢汶轭�殪戾玑�犰殄�痱镡戾憩�泔铙轶糸铉�镦�湾�汜�
�揪��溟螋�驷蝽弪�麒�麽祀邃�徙蝻篌��翳秕筢钿�骢汶轭�黹戾�镦�骢汶轭�
�揪��溴箦螋�鏖翳�翳彘�骢汶轭�驷黹扉弩�麸�怩殪��忮趑弪�扉驽�
�揪
�揪�萧桢�翳犷�翳�驷泗�翳狒�翳弩�骘祀�狎�桢蝈�殪戾玑祆��麒狒��翳�
�揪�蝈犰�痱镡戾砜
��
��
�����滹瞌�镡赍泗�麸�翳彘�痱弩孱沐��殒�翳狒��麒狒��酾蝈�珏趑轭�狒�
�
�语�翳�沼�滹弩瞌�蝈犰禊�栳鲥�⑨�骢汶轭�殪戾玑�犰殄�痱镡戾砜�

�翳轭�轸�麽�铒�礤犷�箦蜷秕箪��盹蝈�扉脲�秭弪�翳�麸瓞�洛螋�
��
清蝾雉�柔篌孱疰祯�

[Gernot Hassenpflug]

Shawn Wilson <ikono...@gmail.com> writes:

> On Nov 10, 10:24�犴��麻祆�尖灬汶躞瀹�犁磲殪�镯�黩雉搴
�
��揪�碰弪�铄�溴箦蝣弩�溴沐铘�疳��犷�筢驽�黠螂轭�泔钿轸轱铙�
��
��咎镝�镦�箫汩犰轶�泸狃�
��
��亠躜�溴箝蝈�麸�泸轲痨�礤�犷�黠礤�滹轭�犷�栾铄篝�溽��黠螂�骘�犷
��栾铄篝�溽��疳��轶�铒翦洚
�
�
��腩秣�栾�灬怙�磲螂弭�黠螂����滹瞌舢��彭痨稆弪�鏖祆�轭泸遽箦
�栝蜷铉�殒�翳�磲蜱轭犰�泔篝�镦�滹轭�箫�轶�戾篌�翳犷�翳�磲蜱轭犰
�忮铄骈衄�犷�蝈漉沐�轸�殒�翳�雉桢�麽��狎秕钿���硫忾趄狎��铒糸镱�镦
��邈孱�疳��犷�筢驽�黠螂轭�泔钿轸轱铙�滹瞌�孱翦�轭麸�轸���领���
�汜�滹�轶�骘蜚�翳�躅痱镤蹉糸鲥�秕�镦�翳�灬怙�磲螂弭�孱糸蝈禊�翳狒
�麽��犷�翳狒�磲脲�翳屙��矧箦��镦娈

麻祆�箬秕熹�蝈徜�⒙狍殂�陪镱镯殂螈�犷�⒘痧扉邃�陪镱镯殂螈�怡�澡镯狍
语麇祆�骘�犷�邃蹉狒轱�镱�栾�翳轶�泔礤�徕秕衄�躅轭趱轸轹�狍�轸�磲�
狒�骈蝮�狃疱狎�ㄩ�翳�箬矧舡翦蝽��殒�镱�滹弩�铒�泔铙殇弪�翳�
栝滗孱�彐驽泗�犷�祜铉�弪�泔铙羼蹂钽弩┊
��
清蝾雉�柔篌孱疰祯�

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article <k7cpth$mg$1...@dont-email.me>,

> "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Orval Fairbairn wrote:

>>> In article <k7953g$abh$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>> Daryl <dh...@nospami70west3.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 11/5/2012 10:33 AM, Mark Test wrote:
>>>>> "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." wrote in message
>>>>> news:m5WdnZChy9w94xLN...@supernews.com...
>>>>>
>>>>> Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> a425couple wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Dr. Vincent Quin, Ph.D." <dr...@coldine.edu> wrote in message...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> a425couple wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Eris" <vit...@gmail.com> wrote in message...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Corporate Capitalism is not democracy
>>>>>>>>>> It isn't capitalism either. It's a corporatocracy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Sigh, Capitalism is our economic system, with property
>>>>>>>>> rights and freedom of choices as to what we get, and who we
>>>>>>>>> get it from (free enterprise).
>>>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As usual you leave out the ugliness of Capitalism. e.g. the
>>>>>>>> vast numbers
>>>>>>>> of people who are left in the worst poverty
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Pure nonsense!
>>>>>>> The "worst poverty" is clearly when large numbers of
>>>>>>> the population starve to death.
>>>>>>> That was clearly in the years before corporations helped
>>>>>>> capitalism develop effective trade,
>>>>>>> or in areas of the world that in more modern times
>>>>>>> shunned capitalism.
>>>>>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_and_anthropogenic_disasters_by
>>>>>>> _d
>>>>>>> eath_toll#Famine
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> China 1959-61, between 15 and 43 million.
>>>>>>> USSR 1932-39, between 6 and 8 million.
>>>>>>> USSR 1929-1922, between 5 and 10 million.
>>>>>>> Starving to death IS clearly the "worst poverty".
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, as usual you completely ignore the ugliness of
>>>>>> Capitalism, especially
>>>>>> South of the Rio Grande down through South America. Son your
>>>>>> own goofy
>>>>>> website says up to 100 million killed by the [Capitalist]
>>>>>> colonization of
>>>>>> America, and if you want to play this game you need to include
>>>>>> events
>>>>>> like WW1, up to 65 million, as Capitalism certainly influenced
>>>>>> the start
>>>>>> of that war, and *certainly* the 7 million killed in the
>>>>>> Vietnam war and
>>>>>> the millions killed in Vietnam before 1945 were all caused by
>>>>>> ugly Capitalism.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Again, Capitalism is fine if it is well controlled by good
>>>>>> socialist
>>>>>> laws like anti-monopoly laws, minimum wage, 8 hour days, child
>>>>>> labor laws, workers comp insurance, etc. but your "free"
>>>>>> Capitalism
>>>>>> is the ugliest as it leads to business owners ruthlessly cheating
>>>>>> people out of a livable wage, and uncontrolled growth (like a
>>>>>> cancer),
>>>>>> as Capitalism *always* needs new markets to exploit, so the
>>>>>> Capitalists
>>>>>> move on to exploit elsewhere leaving blight and poverty in
>>>>>> their path.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So don't forget to add in every child who died of malnutrition,
>>>>>> or infant deaths caused by inadequate health care, etc,
>>>>>> *caused* by
>>>>>> the greedy Capitalists...in your silly dishonest numbers game.
>>>>>
>>>>> I add, the OP (Eris) is correct...Capitalism is an economic
>>>>> concept and
>>>>> democracy is a governing concept...neither is necessary for the
>>>>> other.
>>>>>
>>>>> and why are we capitalizing Capitalism but not democracy?
>>>>> ;-)
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> Perhaps because we are a Republic? Perhaps because capitalism
>>>>> supports the
>>>>> individual, whereas democracy and government limits the
>>>>> individual...?
>>>>>
>>>>> "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny
>>>>> individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."
>>>>> --- Ayn Rand
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Capitalism, if use properly results in the better life of all
>>>> involved. capitalism as it is today (not the small case) is
>>>> where you trash your own country to make more money and power for
>>>> just yourself. Screw the regular people.
>>>>
>>>> Democracy lasts about 10 minutes as a community grows. It
>>>> outgrows it very quickly is is replaced by either a flavor of
>>>> mixed Republic or a mixed Socialist Government. Usually, it's
>>>> healthy to borrow from both. It's a balancing act. The US has
>>>> gone from a Democracy that lasted about 10 minutes to a Republic
>>>> for just the Rich While Landowners, to women voting, Blacks
>>>> voting, Polling Stations that used bully boys to prevent Non
>>>> White Rich Landowners from voting, and more. If you are in a
>>>> country that is a Democracy then you don't live in the United
>>>> States past the 10 minutes it was one for just the Rich White
>>>> Landowners.
>>>>
>>>> What you do live in, right now, is a mix of Republic and
>>>> Corporate controlled Government. The Republic side is good but
>>>> the Corporate side is extremely bad. Corporations should not be
>>>> allowed in Politics like they are today. What we have today is
>>>> what I like to call Corporate Republic. Correct that and I have
>>>> no trouble with the policies of the Right. Unfortunately, the
>>>> Corporation have purchased out Government from the local to the
>>>> Federal. Had a Republican stand up and say they are going to
>>>> correct this and actually go and do it, then they have my vote.
>>>> Until then, their lack of FACT CHECKING and outright lying makes
>>>> me not vote for them.
>>>>
>>>> I didn't move towards the left, the right moved away from me. If
>>>> we were in the Truman Time, I would be a Right Wing Republican.
>>>> But not today. Especially with the way you children are operating.
>>>
>>> By the same token as above, we should not allow unions to have a
>>> political say, nor should we allow public employee unions, since
>>> they, through their PACs and their own resources can control those
>>> with whom they negotiate salaries and benefits.
>>
>> But you don't mind the Koch brothers not only sponsoring the Tea
>> Party, but also chipping in at least $100 million for various
>> Republican campaigns during this presidential run ?
>> Now why is that, Orval ?
>>
>> cheers....Jeff
>
> See my figures on union political activities in a previous reply to
> your postings. They make the Koch Brothers look absolutely
> parsimonious

You're full of shite, Orval, supply some figures to back up your assertion.

cheers...jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article <k7cqdh$33c$1...@dont-email.me>,

> "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>
>> Orval Fairbairn wrote:

>>> In article <k7c6dl$knf$1...@dont-email.me>,

>>>> Unions are nothing more than an middleclass workers attempt to have
>>>> a say ! The ..."Right To Work States"movement ... are an argmanent
>>>> against such ! So why should Unions _not_ have a say ?
>>>>
>>>> cheers....Jeff
>>>
>>> Unions have evolved into businesses themselves, often losing sight
>>> of their original intent, which was to represent the membership.
>>> When union bosses pull in 7-figure salaries plus benefits,
>>
>> Would you be able to supply some cites for these seven figure
>> salaries you're speaking of, Orval ?
>
> OK -- six figure salaries, rather than 7+

OK, so you were lying then ! Not to worry, I already knew that.

You might wish to look at some of those SEVEN figure salaries that YOUR
business leaders collect, Orval and then see if you can figure out why they
deserve them !

cheers....Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

>> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
>> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>>>
>>> But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
>>> out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons,
>>> but those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out
>>> their toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
>>
>> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is
>> acceptable to me?
>>

>>>> In many cases only Unions can get those for them.
>>>
>>> The argument is debatable. Whatever good they may have done, there
>>> is also the other side of the coin. At what point do the
>>> unconsidered consequences of what appears to be a good idea become
>>> visible? One generation down, or two? And in what pernicious ways?
>>

>> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>
> Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
> Bruno will break your legs!"

Wrong again, fool. Elections _are_ democratic, and as a rule have multiple
candidates!

>>>
>>>> And, in the end, freedom of association remains one of the
>>>> fundamental rights of man.
>>>
>>> And disassociation...
>>
>> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>
> ... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any
> organization -- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a labor union.

He doesn't have to join any union, he simply doesn't have to join that work
force....easy peasy...

cheers...Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Orval Fairbairn wrote:
> In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>,

> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn

>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>> In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
>>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>>>
>>> Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or Guido and
>>> Bruno will break your legs!"
>>

>> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
>>
>> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even bigger
>> brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
>>
>
> Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?

Ah, Yes the union busters....and very famous they are at that.

cheers,,,,Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Daryl wrote:

> On 11/9/2012 8:42 PM, Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>> In article <cj5r98psftklan51d...@4ax.com>, Bill
>> <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 09 Nov 2012 12:27:04 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
>>> <orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <n0vp989fbq10sscnb...@4ax.com>,
>>>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> Unions are invariably organised in a democratic way.
>>>>
>>>> Make that a Democratic way. "You WILL vote for Big Jim or
>>>> Guido and Bruno will break your legs!"
>>>
>>> Sometimes democracy needs defending.
>>>
>>> Have you met my friends Mick the big welder and his even
>>> bigger brother Fred the unstable plasterer...
>>>
>>
>> Have you met MY friends, Mr. Smith and Mr. Wesson?
>>
>>>>>>

>>>>>>> And, in the end, freedom of association remains
>>>>>>> one of the fundamental rights of man.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And disassociation...
>>>>>
>>>>> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>>>>
>>>> ... but he SJOULD be free to disassociate himself from any
>>>> organization -- whether it is a club, a religion --- or a
>>>> labor union.
>>>

>>> Where do you draw the line there?
>>
>> Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced
>> association.
>>
>

> You are now comparing the Majority Voted In Union as Rape?
> Danged, you are off the deep end on this one

I'm quite sure Orval is the kind of indivudual would feel violated , when
his dental hygenist says "open up wide" !

cheers....Jeff

[Jeffrey Hamilton]

Would you like to give some examples of WHAT THE FUCK it is that you're
talking about, Orval ?

cheers....Jeff

[Kerryn Offord]

On 12/11/2012 3:24 p.m., Jeffrey Hamilton wrote:
> Orval Fairbairn wrote:
>> In article <k7cqdh$33c$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> "Jeffrey Hamilton" <bbere...@cogeco.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> Orval Fairbairn wrote:

<SNIP>

>>
>> OK -- six figure salaries, rather than 7+
>
> OK, so you were lying then ! Not to worry, I already knew that.
>
> You might wish to look at some of those SEVEN figure salaries that YOUR
> business leaders collect, Orval and then see if you can figure out why they
> deserve them !
>
> cheers....Jeff
>
>

7 figure? Those pikers.. what about the 8 figure salaries

[Kerryn Offord]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_unemployment_rate
This is a list of unemployment rates for various countries. Unless
indicated otherwise, statistics are based on The World Factbook.[1]

United States 7.9 2012 (October)[118]

Austria 3.9 2012 (April)[11]
Belgium 7.4 2012 (April)[11]
Denmark 6.2 2012 (April)[11]
Finland 7.6 2012 (April)[11]
France 10.2 2012 (April)[11]
Germany 5.4 2012 (April)[11]
Greece 25.4 2012 (August)[48]
Iceland 6.6 2012 (April)[11]
Ireland 14.9 2012 (June)[11]
Italy 10.2 2012 (April)[11]
Luxembourg 5.2 2012 (April)[11]
Netherlands 6.6 2012 (September)[87]
Norway 3.0 2012 (March)[11]
Portugal 15.7 2012 (July)
Spain 25.8 2012 (October)
Sweden 7.3 2012 (April)[11]
Switzerland 3.1 2012 (April)[109]
United Kingdom 7.9 2012 (September)[11]

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7pmjo$9pu$1...@dont-email.me>,

I notice that you snipped most of my post, in order to cover up your
disingenuousness.

Look up your favorite union(s) at:
http://www.unionfacts.com/

If you have read my posts honestly, you would have seen that I have
never claimed that so many executives deserve their seven-figure
compensation. Rather, I support shareholder determination of that
compensation. That makes you tantamount to a liar.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7pmac$8ik$1...@dont-email.me>,

Look it up for yourself, Fool! See: http://www.unionfacts.com/

I posted the figures, which you conveniently snipped in your response to
the post. You are a liar!

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <k7pnij$e0u$1...@dont-email.me>,

Since you are obviously ignorant of US politics, I suggest that you
crawl back under the rock you came from.

[Mark Borgerson]

In article <k3trfu...@localhost.localdomain>, ha4h-grnt@asahi-
net.or.jp says...

�翳轭�疳螋�镦�翳�痱镡戾�鏖翳�翳�沼�灬怙�磲螂弭�轶�翳狒�麸�
磲铢�泔蝠矧狒轱铙�泔铙殇弪�箅殪戾�灬怙�麸�忮��泔眄镤轸��翳狒
镱禊�铄邃�忮�泔铙殇弪邃�躅糸�翳�铄��聃狎翦蜢��蝈痫螋���燥�怩眇
翳�铛礅弪�骘�揍祆�郁蝈弭�翳妁�磲��沲�翳�黠螂骘蝮�鏖翳秕�
泔铙殇弪轭�翳狒�翳�黠螂弪�翳妁�灬��镦��磲��铒�忮�翳弪�
麒孱�溴磲钿�轭泸遽箦�犷�盹蝈�痱镤蹉糸镱�轶�铄邃邃�
亠�箦�栝玷�翦汨�泔眇犷殄�祜忖�铉�犰�翳�糸礤�骘�盹蝈
骘蝈殓�黠螂弪�麒孱�翳弪�狎�祜趔�镦�躅屙痨稆邃�孱玳铄弪�
桢蝈���澡�痱镡戾�骘�翳�泔眇犷��轶�翳狒�翳�盹蝈�屮疱蜷孱沐�
孱玳铄弪�狎�盹蝈�屮疱铙轹�犷�翳妁�汜瞌�痱镳弪禊�聃犷糸纟
翳�痱镤蹉糸鲩豉�翳狒�屮疱蜷孱沐�怛轭珞�

骚�扉脲�麸�箦�殒�翳弪濮�犷��溟骀弪孱沐�轭�栝蜷铉�犷�
骈蜷铉�痱徙糸沐�忮赭邋�瘐忪殂禊�趄徜邃�泔蝠矧狒轱�犷
雉桢�泔眇犷殄�麒�狎�铒�箫�痱弩篚蝈�麸�痱镤蹉�
箬矧舡翦蝽�蝈篚祠�骘�轭鲥篝矧螽

歪螂�嘛蜱弪箫�

[Paul F Austin]

And here is the time series for the US, the EU and Japan from eurostat:
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php?title=File:Unemployment_rates_EU-27,_EA-17,_US_and_Japan,_seasonally_adjusted,_January_2000_-_September_2012.png&filetimestamp=20121031092401

As I said...

Paul

[Bill]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 20:43:35 -0500, Paul F Austin
<pfau...@bellsouth.net> wrote:

>On 11/9/2012 7:52 AM, Bill wrote:
>> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
>> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
>>
>>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
>>>
>>> But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
>>> out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
>>> those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
>>> toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
>>
>> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
>> to me?
>
>Very revealing. You reserve the right to reject charity but are in favor
>of using the state as your thug to extract the same sums for the same
>purposes.

Damn right I do.

It's called 'society'.

You live in it, you're part of it.

That you happen to be rich should give you no special privileges.

>The US has much higher labor mobility than does Europe and that's one of
>the reasons why USian unemployment has been and is lower than that of
>the EU (save for a couple of quarters in 2009). The current difference
>is about 3 and half percentage points.

US unemployment is greater than that of the UK, France and Germany.

[Bill]

On 12 Nov 2012 10:51:34 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug

That denies the right of the state to levy taxes for the greater good.

[Bill]

On 12 Nov 2012 10:53:04 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug

<ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:

>Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>

>> >

>> >Wherever association is forced. Rape is an extreme of forced association.
>>
>> So is paying taxes.
>>
>> Do you object to that as well.
>
>Aboslutely!

Then, I'm afraid, you're out of the game...

[Bill]

Oh dear, that web site...

It's a keeper...

[Andrew Chaplin]

Gernot Hassenpflug <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote in
news:wqxrfv...@localhost.localdomain:

> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>
> In capitalism it is possible. In socialism, not.

No man is an iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the
Continent, a part of the maine; if a clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe
is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Mannor of
thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I
am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell
tolls; It tolls for thee.

It was true when Donne wrote in the 17 century and is still true, whether
you're a capitalist, a socialist or a social democrat.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

[Bill]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:20:17 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>Look it up for yourself, Fool! See: http://www.unionfacts.com/

Now that one's a keeper.

It's so far around the bend it's actually certifiable.

[Bill]

On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 23:18:37 -0400, Orval Fairbairn
<orfai...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>I notice that you snipped most of my post, in order to cover up your
>disingenuousness.
>
>Look up your favorite union(s) at:
>http://www.unionfacts.com/
>

Any organisation that claims US unions are on a par with North Korea
is, at best, demented.

[Bill]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2012 13:51:53 +0000 (UTC), Andrew Chaplin
<ab.ch...@yourfinger.rogers.com> wrote:

>Gernot Hassenpflug <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote in
>news:wqxrfv...@localhost.localdomain:
>
>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> No. A man cannot disassociate himself from society.
>>
>> In capitalism it is possible. In socialism, not.
>
>No man is an iland, intire of it selfe; every man is a peece of the
>Continent, a part of the maine; if a clod bee washed away by the Sea, Europe
>is the lesse, as well as if a Promontorie were, as well as if a Mannor of
>thy friends or of thine owne were; any mans death diminishes me, because I
>am involved in Mankinde; And therefore never send to know for whom the bell
>tolls; It tolls for thee.

I do wish you wouldn't post stuff I already have set by in notes ready
for when someone to tries, yet again, to refute reality.

[Andrew Chaplin]

Bill <black...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:5b32a8djndkd2bo8j...@4ax.com:

;p

[Uncle Steve]

On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 01:12:04PM +0000, Bill wrote:
> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 20:43:35 -0500, Paul F Austin
> <pfau...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> >On 11/9/2012 7:52 AM, Bill wrote:
> >> On 09 Nov 2012 15:58:30 +0900, Gernot Hassenpflug
> >> <ha4h...@asahi-net.or.jp> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Bill <black...@gmail.com> writes:
> >>>
> >>>> Everyone deserves decent pay and safe working conditions.
> >>>
> >>> But not forcibly at other people's expense. I'm quite happy to fork
> >>> out voluntary to help someone I judge needy for whatever reasons, but
> >>> those may not be reasons someone else will wish to fork out their
> >>> toiled-for and sweated-for money for. Nor should they.
> >>
> >> How dare you presume that your charity, given on a whim, is acceptable
> >> to me?
> >
> >Very revealing. You reserve the right to reject charity but are in favor
> >of using the state as your thug to extract the same sums for the same
> >purposes.
>
> Damn right I do.
>
> It's called 'society'.

You may not be aware that there are people who use the term 'society'
to mean something quite different from the strict dictionary
definition. To some, the idea of 'society' refers to their special-
interest group, as in the society of politicians or the society of law
enforcement. To belabor the obvious, implicit in that idea is that
there are members of 'society' and others who are not. This is only a
problem when the general idea of society is subordinated to the
restricted definition by a dominant group, such as the society of
Christians for example. I'm sure you can work-out the extended
implications, Bill.

> You live in it, you're part of it.
>
> That you happen to be rich should give you no special privileges.

Why do people like you say shit like that when it's obvious that you
don't actually believe what you're saying? Do you also believe you
can fool all of the people all of the time?

> >The US has much higher labor mobility than does Europe and that's one of
> >the reasons why USian unemployment has been and is lower than that of
> >the EU (save for a couple of quarters in 2009). The current difference
> >is about 3 and half percentage points.
>
> US unemployment is greater than that of the UK, France and Germany.

The nice thing about unemployment is that it paradoxically provides
employment for a great number of otherwise unemployable people, and a
great big bureaucracy they can call home.


Regards,

Uncle Steve

--
Q: How many police officers does it take to change a light-bulb?
A: One police officer to arrest the light-bulb for aggravated
darkness. Two police officers to arrest the lamp and electrical box
for conspiracy to commit darkness. A team of detectives to
investigate the house wiring for collaborators and other subversives,
including a 24/7 surveillance operation. One officer to refer the
entire neighborhood to a federal policing agency. One officer to
acquire a warrant to search houses that use a suspiciously low amount
of electricity. A dozen SWAT officers to execute the search
warrant...

[Bert]

In news:8at1a85ntj8rma5pj...@4ax.com Bill

<black...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 11 Nov 2012 20:43:35 -0500, Paul F Austin
><pfau...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>>
>>Very revealing. You reserve the right to reject charity but are in favor
>>of using the state as your thug to extract the same sums for the same
>>purposes.
>
> Damn right I do.
>
> It's called 'society'.

Society as a group of armed gangs, stealing from one another?

Now, that's interesting.

--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <pv22a8dogpdt2mfq2...@4ax.com>,

Who claimed that?

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <iqv1a8hbq8h9basa5...@4ax.com>,

... but it has some good stats, if you go to the "financials" and
political involvement.
It shows that they are the 500 lb gorillas in politics.

[Orval Fairbairn]

In article <gjt1a8t2s6f8pg6qh...@4ax.com>,

See: http://www.unionfacts.com/cuf/ for your favorite union and its
financials and influence peddling.

[Keith W]

O I dont know, this is an organization largely funded by businesses
who have a vested interest in suppressing the bargaining rights
of trade unions. As such it seems to be eminently sane although of
course it will scarcely be to the benefit of ordinary working
people.

Keith