U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-21-2011, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,407,659 times
Reputation: 4314

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Here, let me illustrate, first locally,
My father hated Edmund G "Pat" Brown, why? Because he was responsible for forcing employers to consider the safety and welfare of workers.
You're going to illustrate by telling a story about your daddy? The point of my comment wasn't that every wealthy person is an angel, but rather that the characterization of wealthy folks as unconcerned about the general welfare of society is silly. Many wealthy folks realize that a healthy society with a good distribution of wealth is in their long-term benefit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
So, there you see, the government forcing an employer to provide for the welfare and safety of the worker, something that was not done without government intervention.
Firstly, the thread is about unions. Secondly, I've not suggested that the government should not protect workers. My position is that law labors that provide a humane work environment are sufficient, unions are not required if such laws exist. When you have both strong labor laws and unions, the unions tend to seek rents.

 
Old 02-21-2011, 06:15 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 8,771,107 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
You're going to illustrate by telling a story about your daddy? The point of my comment wasn't that every wealthy person is an angel, but rather that the characterization of wealthy folks as unconcerned about the general welfare of society is silly. Many wealthy folks realize that a healthy society with a good distribution of wealth is in their long-term benefit.
The characterization of the super-wealthy as "unconcerned" is substantially correct ... anyone with half the brains god gave a gnat is aware of the raping and pillaging of our economy by the class of wealthy referred to ... no sir, they do NOT give a fig about anyone's welfare but their own ... it's take the money and run, scorched earth finance ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Firstly, the thread is about unions. Secondly, I've not suggested that the government should not protect workers. My position is that law labors that provide a humane work environment are sufficient, unions are not required if such laws exist. When you have both strong labor laws and unions, the unions tend to seek rents.
You aren't making much sense here ... but nevertheless here you go again, as often: defining for others what their responses should be limited to ... .highnlite was responding to your previous comment in which you wrote: "Yes, all the wealthy folks are big bad people that don't care about the welfare of the majority. The only way a business owner will treat his/her employees well is if the government forces him. Right....."
You can make your sarcastic wisecrack [about something I said earlier -- in context of the thread], but .highnlite is out of order for setting you straight? Hardly.
 
Old 02-21-2011, 07:15 PM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 7,629,887 times
Reputation: 2622
Quote:
You're going to illustrate by telling a story about your daddy? The point of my comment wasn't that every wealthy person is an angel, but rather that the characterization of wealthy folks as unconcerned about the general welfare of society is silly. Many wealthy folks realize that a healthy society with a good distribution of wealth is in their long-term benefit.
Your response is not logical, I illustrated the depth of concern the wealthy have for their workers, and you dismissed it as a story about my daddy. I suggest you reread my post, and instead of using it as a springboard for your need to post, think about it. I gave you not only local, but global extensions, your statement that "many" wealthy care, is true, it is also true that many do not.

Here is another, if a field needs an herbicide or pesticide, today that is generally done by laying perf hose and diluting the herbicide with irrigation water, that or, the 'cide is injected into the soil from a specialized attachment on a tractor, usually in the early hours of the morning, like 3:00 to 6:00 AM. Signs are posted warning anyone to stay out until such and such a date, But, that is only because government has forced growers to do it this way, in the good old days, 30 years ago, the grower would send in the crop dusters, never mind that there is dairy just beyond the field, never mind that there were often workers in the field at the time of spraying.

You see, the grower loses money when the pause button is pushed, it has required the government to force safety on the grower.

Government forces food safety, workplace safety airline safety, to say that the wealthy care about worker safety or food safety or your safety is not borne out by the facts, facts that I showed you, that you dismissed.
 
Old 02-21-2011, 10:45 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,407,659 times
Reputation: 4314
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
The characterization of the super-wealthy as "unconcerned" is substantially correct ... anyone with half the brains god gave a gnat is aware of the raping and pillaging of our economy by the class of wealthy referred to ... no sir, they do NOT give a fig about anyone's welfare but their own ... it's take the money and run, scorched earth finance
Yes anybody that disagrees with your position on matters doesn't have any brains. I just can't compete with that sort of logic so I won't even try...
 
Old 02-21-2011, 11:01 PM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,407,659 times
Reputation: 4314
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Your response is not logical, I illustrated the depth of concern the wealthy have for their workers, and you dismissed it as a story about my daddy.
Right, what is logical is deriving a general conclusion about wealthy people with a story about your daddy.

Regardless, your underlying reasoning here is silly. Most employers don't need the government to tell them to treat their employees well, nor do they need the government to tell them not to destroy their environment. The laws exist for the minority that are welling to do the wrong thing. They also exist to deal with human ignorance. Our laws are based on our sense of justice, not the other way around.

In terms of your story about dusting, I don't have much to say. I'm not involved in farming, but it sounds like regulations were past to deal with new information about farming practices. Where the farmers aware of the damage they were causing? Are are seriously suggesting that all farmers will knowingly pollute the environment without the government?

Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Government forces food safety, workplace safety airline safety, to say that the wealthy care about worker safety or food safety or your safety is not borne out by the facts, facts that I showed you, that you dismissed.
Right I dismissed it, because as usual you're not addressing what I'm claiming, but rather some silly straw man you've built. That is what you do, you pigeonhole everyone into one of your straw man and start trying to beat it. The existence of regulations is perfectly consistent with my claim, my claim is merely that there are a lot of wealth folks that care about the general welfare of society and that there are tons of business owners that care about their customers and workers. These folks don't need the government to do the right thing. The regulations exist for those that do the wrong thing.

Last edited by user_id; 02-21-2011 at 11:12 PM..
 
Old 02-22-2011, 08:40 AM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 7,629,887 times
Reputation: 2622
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by user_id View Post
Right, what is logical is deriving a general conclusion about wealthy people with a story about your daddy.

Whenever I talk to children I use personal examples, I figured it would work with you. You can extrapolate what I said to the entire AG industry, as his ideas were mainstream, you can extrapolate that out to industry, as evidenced by the amount of government intervention for health and safety over the last 120 years, that you refuse to acknowledge that is just plain odd.

Regardless, your underlying reasoning here is silly. Most employers don't need the government to tell them to treat their employees well, nor do they need the government to tell them not to destroy their environment.

Yes, they do, have you been under a rock? Tell you what, take a drive up to Oroville, you will see, just west of town, thousands of acres of gravel and cobbles, the result of years of running dredges through once productive farmland to extract gold. Then drive up to Malakoff Diggings State Park, where you can see canyons carved by hydraulic mining, the detritus of which washed into the Sacramento Valley destroying thousands of acres of once productive farmland, leading to one of the first government environmental interventions, banning hydraulic mining, as it was destroying farmland.

I could go on for days with examples of the "wealthy elite" not caring about a damned thing except profits, most people are aware of this, and why the actions of the greedy led to our governmental regulatory agenices, you are being either purposely obtuse, or, you never read a book. I suggest you start with "The Jungle" by Upton Sinclair



The laws exist for the minority that are welling to do the wrong thing. They also exist to deal with human ignorance. Our laws are based on our sense of justice, not the other way around.

Laws are the result of actions requiring laws, that again, is obvious to most, based on your reasoning that laws stem from our sense of justice, regulations would precede the need, but they don't.

In terms of your story about dusting, I don't have much to say. I'm not involved in farming, but it sounds like regulations were past to deal with new information about farming practices. Where the farmers aware of the damage they were causing? Are are seriously suggesting that all farmers will knowingly pollute the environment without the government?

Of course they would, and did, and do, when they can get away with it, the dangers of parathion and malathion were well known. My father was sued by the dairyman when his cows were dusted with parathion. Spending a little time researching before posting would help you. Remember that today, California Agriculture is completely dependent on the illegal hire, of illegal labor, our staunch Republican wealthy elite farmers.


Right I dismissed it, because as usual you're not addressing what I'm claiming, but rather some silly straw man you've built. That is what you do, you pigeonhole everyone into one of your straw man and start trying to beat it. The existence of regulations is perfectly consistent with my claim, my claim is merely that there are a lot of wealth folks that care about the general welfare of society and that there are tons of business owners that care about their customers and workers. These folks don't need the government to do the right thing. The regulations exist for those that do the wrong thing.

Sorry, bub, the sheer number of regulatory agencies that regulate industry health and safety throughout the country is clear evidence that your thesis floats like the titanic.

The history of the clean air act, the clean water act, and many more also give the lie to your idea. I have to go along with Nullgeo on this, you argue just to argue, you could not believe in your own arguments, that would require such a level of delusion that you would be take off the streets and institutionalized.

 
Old 02-22-2011, 09:44 AM
 
25,631 posts, read 30,310,140 times
Reputation: 23111
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Apparently you did not get the memo, there is no crisis no budget problem in Wisconsin, as of Jan 31 Wisconsin had a project surplus of 127 million dollars, the crisis has been manufactured by the Republicans, period.
You need to check the facts.


http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/...ve-budget-sur/


Wisconsin's state budget -- frequently asked questions - JSOnline
 
Old 02-22-2011, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Conejo Valley, CA
12,476 posts, read 17,407,659 times
Reputation: 4314
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
You can extrapolate what I said to the entire AG industry, as his ideas were mainstream, you can extrapolate that out to industry, as evidenced by the amount of government intervention for health and safety over the last 120 years, that you refuse to acknowledge that is just plain odd.
I can, but why would I? You want me to take what you say on faith, and I have no interest in that. Your story provides no evidence whatsoever for the general claim you are trying to make. If you want to convince people of things you need to provide evidence not stories about your daddy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Yes, they do, have you been under a rock? Tell you what, take a drive up to Oroville, you will see, just west of town, thousands of acres of gravel and cobbles...

Why? What exactly would this prove? How would this tell me how likely an individual business owner is to knowingly pollute the environment?


Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Sorry, bub, the sheer number of regulatory agencies that regulate industry health and safety throughout the country is clear evidence that your thesis floats like the titanic.
Absolutely not. Firstly, regulations themselves are not always virtuous, established corporations will support regulations that provide barriers to entry. So a good deal of our regulations are not necessary for public welfare, but rather the welfare of XYZ corp. Secondly, my claim is not that every business will do the right thing nor have I suggested that regulations aren't needed. It only takes one business to cause massive environmental damage, so even if the majority wouldn't do it you still need the regulations. Hence, the existence of environmental regulations says nothing about the probability that an individual business will pollute. Even if the probability was low you'd still need the regulations.

Anyhow, you're just telling stories. That's great if you're around a camp fire, but your stories establish absolutely nothing. I can tell numerous stories about business owners that go above and beyond what the government requires of them in terms of labor conditions, environmental safety, etc. But what's the point? It doesn't prove anything...


 
Old 02-22-2011, 10:44 AM
 
Location: Tower of Heaven
4,023 posts, read 6,423,206 times
Reputation: 1439
Quote:
Originally Posted by 18Montclair View Post
I rarely agree with O'Reilly, but he poses some good questions here:
Insurrection in Wisconsin - FoxNews.com

Here's another perspective from USA Today.
Wisconsin is 'ground zero' for battle over unions - USATODAY.com

So many problems, so few solutions that arent painful.
I don't think so, not by an union gov..Unfortunately.
 
Old 02-22-2011, 11:00 AM
 
29 posts, read 36,525 times
Reputation: 50
States are left with the freedom to tax and spend as they deem necessary. The people of a state are supposed to be free to vote for the use of taxes. Do they? Did they? How could they? Voting programs are appeasement programs. The people have been duped. Now it's to late. The cost to run a state - which is a business and NOT! a government - has lost all hopes of recovery from the lack of control of spending and now everyone must help. Help with what? MONEY! Money from where. From the people of the state. In a inadvertent way. And that is by less state tax money being spent on the people of the state.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:56 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top