Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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 03-12-2015, 05:25 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
That's illogical and you couldn't be more wrong. But that OK. It's allowed here in America.
IF it's so illogical to you, then please don't be a fool against yourself and join a unionized workplace.

 
Old 03-12-2015, 05:28 PM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Exactly how were unions ever forced to support anyone?
Maybe that's the way unions wanted it. If times and attitudes have changed so much, then they should consider asking lawmakers to abolish that requirement.
 
Old 03-12-2015, 05:48 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
What kind of nonsense is that?

I'm not a Libertarian, but seeing how they are so stupid they can't even gain control of a local school board, I'll defend against a totally fallacious article filled with lies, innuendos and misrepresentations.



Corporations are only 3% of all US businesses.

Corporate power is derived directly from government, and corporations are dependent upon government for their existence...

no government = no corporations

small government with limited powers = small corporations with limited powers

big government with broad unchecked powers = big corporations with broad unchecked powers


No doubt the blithering idiot who wrote the article is oblivious to Entity Theory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
That means businesses may force whatever they like onto their employees and those who buy their products.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea View Post
No, wrong, Consumers always have a choice.

Employees have a choice, too.....they can start their own business. And if they are too damn stupid, pathetic, lazy or weak to run their own business, then they can find someone who is capable of running their business and pay that person for doing so.

The fact that neither Consumers nor Workers want to exercise the choices they have does not negate the fact that they have choices.



Equivocation
Equivocation is the illegitimate switching of the meaning of a term during the reasoning.

You might want to tell the idiot who wrote the article that bosses and employers are not necessarily one in the same.



68% of the 1% are not "bosses."

68% of the 1% are athletes, musicians, entertainers on TV, film or drama, or are celebrities of some sort.



So making them dependent upon government will certainly motivate them to reach their full potential.

Anyone familiar with the doubling factor?

The 2nd Welfare Generation should be half of the 1st Welfare Generation; the 3rd Generation should be half of the 2nd Welfare Generation; the 4th Generation should be half of the 4rd Generation, the 5th Generation half of the 4th Generation and so on.

If the 1st Welfare Generation was 20 Million households; then the 2nd Generation should be 10 Million households.

3rd Generation 5 Million households
4th Generation 2.5 Million households
5th Generation 1.25 Million households

and so on, but never reaching ZERO, since that is an impossibility.



Everyone has the same opportunities.

I authorize you to obtain a weapon and go to the nearest impoverished family and force them --- at gun-point --- to take advantage of the opportunities available to them.



Why?

I'm doing just fine.



On the contrary....it imprisons the majority and reduces their potential.




That is their own choice. They can become independent anytime they want to be independent.




...and very small homogeneous populations.

Cook County, Illinois has 200,000 more people than the entire Kingdom of Norway.


How many Spanish language radio stations and TV stations do the Scandinavian nation-State kingdoms have?

Defending...

Mircea
I think you've violated forum rules by attributing quotes from the link to me personally. I'd appreciate it if you'd correct this. Thanks & respect.
 
Old 03-12-2015, 06:03 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
IF it's so illogical to you, then please don't be a fool against yourself and join a unionized workplace.
Hi there StillwaterTownie, I think it's possible Curmudgeon doesn't understand what you're saying. At least he knows how to properly use the quote function.
 
Old 03-12-2015, 06:14 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
Although I prob should cut Mircea some slack? He seems a tad emotionally overwrought.
 
Old 03-12-2015, 06:18 PM
 
Location: *
13,242 posts, read 4,901,503 times
Reputation: 3461
What a mess!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mircea
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Is it 'real principles' or does it demonstrate axiomatic thinking without plausible, practical, logical, real-time, real-world application? In other words ...

Libertarianism - Liberapedia
What kind of nonsense is that?

I'm not a Libertarian, but seeing how they are so stupid they can't even gain control of a local school board, I'll defend against a totally fallacious article filled with lies, innuendos and misrepresentations.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
... Pitfalls of LibertarianismEdit
Libertarians tend to be supporters of unchecked corporate power,...
Corporations are only 3% of all US businesses.

Corporate power is derived directly from government, and corporations are dependent upon government for their existence...

no government = no corporations

small government with limited powers = small corporations with limited powers

big government with broad unchecked powers = big corporations with broad unchecked powers


No doubt the blithering idiot who wrote the article is oblivious to Entity Theory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
That means businesses may force whatever they like onto their employees and those who buy their products.
No, wrong, Consumers always have a choice.

Employees have a choice, too.....they can start their own business. And if they are too damn stupid, pathetic, lazy or weak to run their own business, then they can find someone who is capable of running their business and pay that person for doing so.

The fact that neither Consumers nor Workers want to exercise the choices they have does not negate the fact that they have choices.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
If workers are too weak to fight back against a bullying boss, that's just too bad.
Equivocation
Equivocation is the illegitimate switching of the meaning of a term during the reasoning.

You might want to tell the idiot who wrote the article that bosses and employers are not necessarily one in the same.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
The top 1% of the population has an overwhelming advantage in securing top-level jobs,....
68% of the 1% are not "bosses."

68% of the 1% are athletes, musicians, entertainers on TV, film or drama, or are celebrities of some sort.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Libertarians are squeamish towards those in the lower class reaching their full potential.
So making them dependent upon government will certainly motivate them to reach their full potential.

Anyone familiar with the doubling factor?

The 2nd Welfare Generation should be half of the 1st Welfare Generation; the 3rd Generation should be half of the 2nd Welfare Generation; the 4th Generation should be half of the 4rd Generation, the 5th Generation half of the 4th Generation and so on.

If the 1st Welfare Generation was 20 Million households; then the 2nd Generation should be 10 Million households.

3rd Generation 5 Million households
4th Generation 2.5 Million households
5th Generation 1.25 Million households

and so on, but never reaching ZERO, since that is an impossibility.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
To them, it would be unethical to provide others in society with the same opportunities the wealthy elite receive.
Everyone has the same opportunities.

I authorize you to obtain a weapon and go to the nearest impoverished family and force them --- at gun-point --- to take advantage of the opportunities available to them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
If you're born into poverty and your parents are unable to provide a decent upbringing, sad day for you.
Why?

I'm doing just fine.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Libertarians want to restrict or abolish government protection for those who are struggling financially. Ironically, this restricts freedom for the majority.
On the contrary....it imprisons the majority and reduces their potential.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
Alternatively, family members who aren't earning a salary or a wage become totally dependent on the economic provider/providers in the family.
That is their own choice. They can become independent anytime they want to be independent.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ChiGeekGuest View Post
The Scandinavian nations and other Happy Liberal nations all have mixed economies.....
...and very small homogeneous populations.

Cook County, Illinois has 200,000 more people than the entire Kingdom of Norway.


How many Spanish language radio stations and TV stations do the Scandinavian nation-State kingdoms have?

Defending...

Mircea
 
Old 03-13-2015, 07:31 AM
 
Location: Salisbury,NC
16,757 posts, read 8,177,783 times
Reputation: 8532
The latest version of Mircea has gone down a little. The older posts were better written with less sarcasm.

The failure of those who do not understand how leverage in any agreement is important. The GOP and ALEX understand that by dropping union rights means less leverage for employees and potential employees.

Right to work = the right to earn less and have less benefits. See Stats for NC.
 
Old 03-13-2015, 07:50 AM
 
34,620 posts, read 21,540,819 times
Reputation: 22232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boss View Post
Right to work = the right to earn less and have less benefits. See Stats for NC.
Right to work = the freedom to choose.
 
Old 03-13-2015, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,567,116 times
Reputation: 9675
Quote:
Originally Posted by PedroMartinez View Post
Right to work = the freedom to choose.
Or freedom to choose to be a freeloader and so when you got a grievance against the boss, you are entitled to free support from the union. Now that is a pretty damned good deal for the worker. Don't you quite strongly agree?
 
Old 03-13-2015, 10:00 AM
 
Location: Midwest
38,496 posts, read 25,753,611 times
Reputation: 10789
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vejadu View Post
Any argument trying to prove that certain states are just 'poor' states by only comparing average income, while completely disregarding the COL, is ignoring a massive piece of the puzzle. The COL completely changes things.



Four of the five states with the highest average disposable income, adjusted for COL, are right-to-work states. Every state in the 'poor' South (aside from SC) is better off than California or Oregon.

"Average" means adding all the incomes and dividing by the number of earners. When you have a company CEO who earns 100s of millions by taking advantage of his employees who he pays barely minimum wage, you have a skewed statistic. Because of this, the "median" income is a better indicator.

Quote:
There is a significant difference in median family incomes in states that are RTW versus those that are not. Using a three-years-average median family income for 2009 to 2009, RTW states have a median family income of $46,919, non RTW it is $53,418, a difference of $6,499 or 13.9 percent per year. Testing for the impact of RTW on median family incomes, the relationship is -0.4. This means there is statistical evidence that RTW is associated with lower incomes: RTW depresses wages.
The economic and political truth about right-to-work legislation | MinnPost
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.


Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 08:38 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top