Page 14 of 16 [ 245 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16  Next

xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

29 Nov 2010, 10:11 am

Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
The neo-Confederates are not only solidly Republican but their values have taken over the Republican Party. All this talk about states' rights and decentralising the USA - they want to replace the US Constitution with the CS Constitution, effectively... This division of society into masters and servants, with workers being the hired help who don't count, only owners count... If the Republicans get their way the South would have conquered the USA and won the Civil war in the end.


What does states' rights have to do with slavery? There is such thing as Federal Government having too much power you know.



Slavery and the Civil War was an argument of the 10th Amendment versus the 9th. The Confederates argued it was their right to hold slaves as it was not explicitly banned in the Constitution and therefore their decision on the state-level was legal.

The only good idea the Confederates ever had was to eliminate riders on legislation.


Again, where are Republicans advocating slavery? The 13th and 14th amendments kinda make it difficult to reinstitute slavery.


The Republican platform tends to be against the worker's rights and tends to be against protecting workers' income in favor of protecting the incomes of the corporation's executives. Republicans protect big business at the detriment of the individual and more specifically the little individual citizen.


Seriously stop with the just spouting the DNC's talking points, Republicans are against Unions because they've felt the situation has gotten corrupt and out-of-hand. It is incredibly difficult to fire unionized workers even when they do things that you would expect someone should be reasonably fired.



Most union so-called corruption (which does not hold a candle to corporate corruption) is a function of the anti-communist purge of the unions in the '50s. When communists ran unions they were far more effective and less likely to sell their souls to Ronald Reagan as the Teamsters did in 1980 for example.



xenon13
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 Dec 2008
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,638

29 Nov 2010, 10:14 am

When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 90
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Nov 2010, 10:33 am

xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.

ruveyn



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

29 Nov 2010, 2:17 pm

ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 90
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Nov 2010, 2:18 pm

marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.


I'm Spartacus!

ruveyn



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Nov 2010, 3:39 pm

ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.

ruveyn


I'd rather steel, en garde! Nah, too messy. Needs more cowbell.



skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,848
Location: New Orleans, LA

29 Nov 2010, 3:43 pm

marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.


ruveyn doesn't really follow logic so much as rationalizations hidden behind a facade that pretends to be logic.


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Nov 2010, 3:44 pm

skafather84 wrote:
marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.


ruveyn doesn't really follow logic so much as rationalizations hidden behind a facade that pretends to be logic.


Yo mama.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 90
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Nov 2010, 6:23 pm

skafather84 wrote:
marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:

Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.


ruveyn doesn't really follow logic so much as rationalizations hidden behind a facade that pretends to be logic.


What I said was literally true. I was being my literal Aspie self again.

ruveyn



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

29 Nov 2010, 6:24 pm

marshall wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
xenon13 wrote:
When one glorifies the application of the Iron Law of Wages, that the so-called proles, being most people, must work for subsistence wages so the Masters can take it all according to Adam Smith's vile maxim by the way, then one glorifies effective slavery. Working for subsistence is slavery. End of discussion. If you set up a system where 90% of the population works for subsistence then you might as well create a slave system. The ethos is identical - everything belongs to the Master and all good comes because of the Master, the workers are just a bunch of layabouts trying to get out of an honest day's work.


Not so. One could beg or one could steal.


And the slave could flee from its master. Or perhaps murder its master. Everyone is free, including slaves! According to your sociopathic logic that is.


Wtf? A slave can flee or kill its master. If i was suddenly enslaved the git who had the gal to himself my master would be gutted. A slave is free, enslavement can only tame those who can not muster the will to live as they please. That you think an enslaved person somehow lacks the ability to make decisions disturbs me. This is of course assuming your post was sarcasm.

@ruveyn one could also kill the current system, that is the masters.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 90
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

29 Nov 2010, 6:26 pm

[quote="ikorack"

@ruveyn one could also kill the current system, that is the masters.[/quote]

That is possible but the attempt to do so probably will not succeed on the first try.

ruveyn



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

29 Nov 2010, 6:41 pm

ruveyn wrote:
ikorack wrote:

@ruveyn one could also kill the current system, that is the masters.


That is possible but the attempt to do so probably will not succeed on the first try.

ruveyn


well it wouldn't ever succeed if it was never tried, while if it where tried repeatedly things might change.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Nov 2010, 7:05 pm

ikorack wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
ikorack wrote:

@ruveyn one could also kill the current system, that is the masters.


That is possible but the attempt to do so probably will not succeed on the first try.

ruveyn


well it wouldn't ever succeed if it was never tried, while if it where tried repeatedly things might change.


Dr. Horrible to the rescue!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apEZpYnN_1g[/youtube]



Raymond_Fawkes
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,209

29 Nov 2010, 7:34 pm

Raymond_Fawkes wrote:
Most people don't understand realism in economics - I'm not saying none of you do, I'm just saying the established courses in school aren't completely truthful and here's why.

The United States economic policy's are handed down through the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve is funded by, and takes orders by corporations. These bailouts we see are not to free the housing market, jump start our economy .. but to be handed over to the banks to invest back into Wallstreet so it appears they have bigger gains then the reality of the situation. Doing this also inflates our currency, we owe China 2 trillion dollars and our Debt is over 14 trillion. We will be able to pay back the debt faster by doing this method, but only if the world reserve currency continues to be the US dollar.

All countries in the world who have resources the US needs, we acquire through trade and manipulation. Private firms are sent into the countries, convincing them to take out loans for big projects (like hydro plants, power plants, electrical grids , etc) - they go to the UN and get the loan with US dollars, and those contracts are sent to contractors like Haliburton,Bechtel,Stone and Webster . These projects don't benefit the people for the most part, but the wealthiest in their societies. 90% of the money goes back to the US corporations as they're contracted. That country then goes into enormous debt that they cannot possibility pay back so they refinance. For instance 50% of Ecuador's national budget goes back into paying the debt. If they have resources the US needs, they're bartered for and acquired to pay down their debts. If they refuse to pay the debt, then the CIA sanctioned "Jackals" are sent in. Like in Panama with Omar Torrijos or Ecuador with Hymn Rodos , Allende in Chile, Armas in Guatemala .. it's part of what Vietnam was about. When all else fails, they send in the military like we see in Iraq.

The United States, along with the UN and corrupted officials have successful created a empire without the use of military but through economic means. This is why it's so crucial for the world to be using the dollar as reserve currency. In the coming years (the next 20 to 30) it will probably no longer be the world currency but instead exchanged for a one world currency. Corporations, along with the wealthy elite control the world. We're indoctrinated by this 2 party, left - right paradigm, an dogmatic system that leaves us less educated. It's designed to look like we have choices while we sit here and argue with each other while the fact of the matter is the agenda is still the same. Lobbiest's, along with Wallstreet dictate government policies - it doesn't take a genius to understand that the US will continue to inflate the currency, and before the dollar is replaced by another it will pay off most of it's debt to be on a clean slate. Many of us live in the US so we don't see the destruction of what it's doing to the outside exporters. Many countries will be imposing a 50% tax on the dollar. This is what free enterprise capitalism is all about-- To me the most logical solution would be to impose 50% tariffs on foreign goods so our country keeps up, and so our jobs stay here but our country as much as you and me want to believe it does not have that power, the people who pull the strings do. If you are one of those zombies who watches Fox News, and CNN for their information .. I'd suggest you to read economic books instead and do independent research.



I'd also like to add, that If China continues to resist the request of raising it's currency value, then a long drawn out war will boost the US market back up. The only countries without a Rothschild bank are Iran; North Korea; Sudan; Cuba; and Libya. What are our policies now ? Are they Conservative, Liberal ? How much longer until people wake up to the Neo Agenda and understand it's not about left or right anymore ? Get out of the paradigm and look at reality.



iamnotaparakeet
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2007
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,091
Location: 0.5 Galactic radius

29 Nov 2010, 7:39 pm

Raymond_Fawkes wrote:
The only countries without a Rothschild bank are


WTF, is this some sort of antisemitic conspiracy theory?



ikorack
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,870

29 Nov 2010, 7:52 pm

iamnotaparakeet wrote:
ikorack wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
ikorack wrote:

@ruveyn one could also kill the current system, that is the masters.


That is possible but the attempt to do so probably will not succeed on the first try.

ruveyn


well it wouldn't ever succeed if it was never tried, while if it where tried repeatedly things might change.


Dr. Horrible to the rescue!

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=apEZpYnN_1g[/youtube]


I hope you where not trying to make a point with that video, my short term memory wiped out after the cuteness that is Felicia Day appeared on screen.