f***ing low wages low hours... f*ck capitalism

Page 6 of 10 [ 159 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Oct 2013, 4:21 pm

zacb wrote:

I agree at least on the foreign policy bit. While I do think there were positive aspects to NAFTA, I do think that overall it is no better than regular trade. Heck, prior to NAFTA and 9/11, you did not even need a passport to get into NAFTA areas, now you do. Is that really free trade? I would beg to differ. I think I get what you are saying though about isolationism. So you would be more Pat Buchanan than Theo Roosevelt? But back on NAFTA. I think that in between all the restrictions the place on trade, the EXIM Bank, along with other things, I think it would be wise to shred up NAFTA and start from scratch. But on the other hand, I think we should be leery of protectionist tariffs, ala 1870's inflation and Smoot Hawley Act. But I think that regardless of protectionism or not, manufacturing as we know it won't come back, due to advances in tech and 3D printing. Heck, China alone has lost 45 million jobs due to automation, jobs that will never come back. So while I do think that the class divide needs dealt with, I don't think tariffs will do it, since it will hurt efficiency. But Good point on military isolationism.

Yes, I'm a big fan of Buchanan. The reason the elites hate him is he is on our side rather than theirs. He's one of the few people in the media for whom this can be said.

The reason for the financial problems in the 1870's was the war in the 1860's.

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Oct 2013, 4:23 pm

auntblabby wrote:

due to technological developments which displace human workers, if current trends continue there will be legions of the unemployed and unemployable, and if governments want peace they will either have to go medieval or go in the opposite direction towards ancient rome's "bread and circuses."

Blabby, there has been a lot of displacement by technology. But the fact remains that the corporate elites are still chasing cheap labor. So, there is still a need for it. It's only a question of who will do it.

zacb
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194

13 Oct 2013, 4:57 pm

I liked Pat, although I sometimes disagree with him. BTW, have you looked into the Constitution Party? I personally like Chuck Baldwin, but not the last candidate. Perhaps you might like the party as a whole.

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Oct 2013, 5:12 pm

zacb wrote:

I am familiar with Baldwin and the Constitution Party; I have voted for both. He's the best we have, but not good enough. He fails to diagnose our national situation properly, which is an American movement consisting of those who love the historic American nation versus post-American immigrants, their descendants, liberals, and others who feel alienated, who want to change the nation that was the envy of the world, and caused these people or their ancestors to flock to these shores, into something in their own image. Americans have NO real representation.

In other words, there is more to being an American than the Constitution, which had as much liberal influence in its creation as traditional Anglo-Protestant influences. The culture creates the state, not vice versa.

zacb
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 7 May 2012
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,194

13 Oct 2013, 5:29 pm

I agree, even though I am more on the libertarian part of the spectrum . That is why i think panarchism makes more sense, since people should congregate based on shared beliefs, not shared land mass. I also think that giving voting rights to everyone was questionable, since it redefined the state from a landowner's association pretty much, to more of a commune that no one has a say in. If we continue with this, it would be better that we all split according to belief, not the same area, which leads to conflict and force. But I doubt that will happen. Or at the very least we could go with Ludwig von Mises city state compromise, which seem to do better than nation states overall.

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Oct 2013, 5:50 pm

zacb wrote:

I agree, even though I am more on the libertarian part of the spectrum

. That is why i think panarchism makes more sense, since people should congregate based on shared beliefs, not shared land mass. I also think that giving voting rights to everyone was questionable, since it redefined the state from a landowner's association pretty much, to more of a commune that no one has a say in. If we continue with this, it would be better that we all split according to belief, not the same area, which leads to conflict and force. But I doubt that will happen. Or at the very least we could go with Ludwig von Mises city state compromise, which seem to do better than nation states overall.

You are very perceptive on your thoughts on the universal franchise. As Einstein noted, one of the key differences between genius and idiocy is that genius has strict limitations whereas idiocy knows no bounds. Consequently, idiots will always outnumber the smart at the polls. But rather than property qualifications, I would make voting rights contingent upon knowing what is going on, and passing a test to prove it. Nothing would improve the quality of our leaders quite like having a smarter electorate demanding better leaders. Instead of electing people who have cute buns, good hair cuts, or who know all the words to "What a Friend We Have in Jesus", we could go back to electing people who will govern responsibly even if they aren't always pretty boys.

I can't get behind you on libertarianism though; it is perhaps the most unworkable kind of liberalism.

Rocket123
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Dec 2012
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,203
Location: Lost in Space

13 Oct 2013, 5:59 pm

Thelibrarian wrote:

I think the evidence quite clearly shows that the US is losing its preeminent position, and free trade is to blame. Please consider:

I'm 51, and I was in junior high the last time this country ran a positive balance of trade, meaning we exported more than we imported. Because the US dollar is the world's reserve currency, we've been able to get away with this; no other country would have. But as the world fills up with a glut of dollars, our reserve currency status will be lost to this irresponsibility. I would further add that every single free trade deal, without exception, has made this trade deficit worse.

An economy, any economy, consists of three basic factors: producers, consumers, and entrepreneurs. And no economy can be stronger than the weakest of these factors--like a chain. Since WWII, the US public has been a large part of the consuming factor--the world's biggest market. But as all the wealth-generating capacity has been offshored over the years, American consumers have been on a debt binge to maintain their high consumption levels. It is unsustainable.

Creating wealth is being able to take things out of the ground and make them into things people want to buy. Today, this country's biggest exports concentrate around the raw materials needed to make the things people want to buy. This role of being impoverished resource provider to the industrialized countries was the biggest grievance the colonial states had against their European imperial masters. It is more than a little bit ironic that the tables have turned 180 degrees, and needlessly so. It is because of free trade.

I could go on, but suffice it to say that until this country starts making things again, and at above-subsistence wages--that things not only here, but all over the world, will only get worse. The world will have lost its great market over excessive greed and narcissism that led to free trade.

I agree that our balance of trade is a huge issue. It’s also unsustainable (unless, other countries are willing to continue lending us money at low interest rates to buy their products). I also agree that it’s important for this country to manufacture things. So, this issue can be addressed, eventually.

But, does it really make sense to blame free trade on people’s inability to control their impulses (by spending money they do not have)? Yes, I realize that companies encourage this bad behavior (particularly, finance companies). But still, people have to be responsible for their actions. There’s something called personal responsibility. Don’t spend money you don’t have buying things you don’t need and cannot afford.

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

13 Oct 2013, 6:26 pm

"I agree that our balance of trade is a huge issue. It’s also unsustainable (unless, other countries are willing to continue lending us money at low interest rates to buy their products). I also agree that it’s important for this country to manufacture things. So, this issue can be addressed, eventually."

The only way to address this issue is by affording our country the same protections we afford our microwaves and toaster ovens. Otherwise, the jobs won't come back until Americans are willing to work for a couple of bowls of rice and beans a day and a warm place to sleep. Free trade is indeed a race to the bottom.

But, does it really make sense to blame free trade on people’s inability to control their impulses (by spending money they do not have)? Yes, I realize that companies encourage this bad behavior (particularly, finance companies). But still, people have to be responsible for their actions. There’s something called personal responsibility. Don’t spend money you don’t have buying things you don’t need and cannot afford.

It's not that simple. For decades now, I have only bought China-made merchandise when it was something I really needed. So pathetically little is still made here that it's just not possible to buy American very often.

starkid
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 9 Feb 2012
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,812
Location: California Bay Area

13 Oct 2013, 9:11 pm

You can get a brand new free cellphone, free 250 minutes per month plus 250 free text messages per month with Assurance Wireless.

All you need is proof that you are low income. They send the phone in the mail and your minutes and texts automatically renew each month. I have one and it's great.

Once again, someone has made a post asking for help with a personal problem and WPers have massively derailed the thread.

thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,124

14 Oct 2013, 11:12 am

Welcome to life.

It's time to find a new job. Your only working it sounds like a couple hours a day, a couple days a week. Simply put, the job doesn't pay enough. Capitalism or Socialism aside, it's not fair you'd get the same amount of money as someone who works 40 hours a week.

Simply put, job doesn't pay enough or have enough hours, time to find a new job.

CaptainTrips222
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,100

21 Oct 2013, 10:16 am

Fnord wrote:

One person blames "genetics" the other person blames "government".

No one ever blames themselves.

If you did the best you could under the circumstances, it's hard to hold yourself accountable. Especially when, in many of our cases, we ARE discriminated against for something we really can't help.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

21 Oct 2013, 4:10 pm

CaptainTrips222 wrote:

If you did the best you could under the circumstances, it's hard to hold yourself accountable. Especially when, in many of our cases, we ARE discriminated against for something we really can't help.

but it seems so many high-funtioning aspies on this website can't seem to understand that, as they are so invested in horatio alger and NT emulation that they are blinded to the sufferings of those of us who struggle having been born under a lesser god. it is the same mental process as that of working class people who totally disrespect their fellows because they themselves believe they uniquely will climb up the ladder to upper-class success and leave their fellows behind, dog-eat-dog-style.

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

21 Oct 2013, 4:20 pm

auntblabby wrote:

CaptainTrips222 wrote:

If you did the best you could under the circumstances, it's hard to hold yourself accountable. Especially when, in many of our cases, we ARE discriminated against for something we really can't help.

What you describe is one of the pernicious effects of the radical egalitarianism of right-liberals. When the rich banker sees his impoverished janitor, he can salve his guilty conscience by telling himself that since we were all created equal, the only reason the janitor didn't attend Harvard Business school too is because unlike the virtuous banker, the janitor was too lazy to apply himself. It's the ultimate in self-serving morality.

The reality is that we were not all created equal. Rather, we are all unique and different, with aspies being among the most unique and different of all.

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

21 Oct 2013, 4:23 pm

what a concept- all men are NOT created equal. i wonder how our laws would have developed if that were the motif?

Thelibrarian
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 5 Aug 2012
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,948
Location: Deep in the heart of Texas

21 Oct 2013, 6:37 pm

auntblabby wrote:

what a concept- all men are NOT created equal. i wonder how our laws would have developed if that were the motif?

Gosh, maybe we would all be treated as individuals with different needs. I suppose we couldn't have that--could we?

auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 115,217
Location: the island of defective toy santas

21 Oct 2013, 6:44 pm

Thelibrarian wrote:

auntblabby wrote:

what a concept- all men are NOT created equal. i wonder how our laws would have developed if that were the motif?

Gosh, maybe we would all be treated as individuals with different needs. I suppose we couldn't have that--could we?

not unless we lived in northern europe.

Page 6 of 10 [ 159 posts ] Go to page Previous 1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 Next

Jump to:

f***ing low wages low hours... f*ck capitalism Post Reply New Topic

f***ing low wages low hours... f*ck capitalism