toad

Ocasio

Recommended Posts

OAC gets it on education, for which she and her family sacrificed so much . . . 

I so admire them for that. 

Interestingly, I think, is that one rarely encounters in Latin America cultures like Ocasio's

the sort of dumb-shit anti-intellectualism that is all over the US (and FAUX) 

Eastern Elites - blah blah 

Here is the secret: Education makes you a better person, whether or not you make a bunch of 

money - but you probably will.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, cmilliken said:

I'm not sure what that means.  You pay a tax based on the degree you get?  Or your tax rate is set by your degree?

A surcharge on income tax, kinda like the county income tax in Maryland or the County Sales Tax in FL.

If you have a degree, you didn't earn that.  (Hell, you probably haven't even paid for it yet.)  You should pay more because of your increased economic opportunity from your free education.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like she has a handle on how it's done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

why would any of this trigger the right? 

The Right wants validation, not change.

Edit: IMHO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, bhyde said:

The Right wants validation, not change.

Edit: IMHO

They are rent-seeking. They've invested heavily in the current economic structures, companies and models of business. Regulations make their industries free of serious competition. They want the same rules to apply in ten years. No disruption in their income stream or costly R&D to keep up or get ahead. Lazy profit taking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

why would any of this trigger the right? 

Doesn’t trigger me at all.  Look at the net worth of any president prior to taking office and their net worth 5 years after. 

My minor issue would be She is implying that these laws have been put in place recently. Just to benefit Trump 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

They are rent-seeking. They've invested heavily in the current economic structures, companies and models of business. Regulations make their industries free of serious competition. They want the same rules to apply in ten years. No disruption in their income stream or costly R&D to keep up or get ahead. Lazy profit taking.

Actually reduced regulations allow more competition not less

Capitalism in a free society Has only worked for 200 plus years  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Capitalism…. only 200 years old???? 10x that or more. It is the oldest and most trusted system of fair trade.... in its purest sense. What shocks me is the amount of people who do not understand that.

 

AOC is not new or anything special. She is quite typical of many politicians. Promise free shit, get elected. Time tested.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, The Joker said:

Actually reduced regulations allow more competition pollution not less

Capitalism in a free society Has only worked for 200 plus years  

 

America will truly be great when our rivers are flammable again, like the good old days.

Capitalism 200 + years? Your ignorance of history is unsurprising but still appalling

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gee I’m sorry since the discussion was the US  my 200 years reference was to this country.    

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, The Joker said:

Actually reduced regulations allow more competition not less

Capitalism in a free society Has only worked for 200 plus years  

 

 

But you still have to factor in free market failures and deal with them.  Neoliberal approaches do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Joker said:

Doesn’t trigger me at all.  Look at the net worth of any president prior to taking office and their net worth 5 years after. 

My minor issue would be She is implying that these laws have been put in place recently. Just to benefit Trump 

Ah, so it’s not the laws, but just their application or enforcement on Trump that bugs you.

His financial entanglements with Russian investors shouldn’t be investigated, his tax records shouldn’t be made public as they have been for every other president, and he should be able to lie about conducting business in Russia while on the campaign trail and modifying the RNC position on sanctions.

Trump’s violation of the emoluments clause and the lease agreement on his Washington hotel shouldn’t cause his party to criticize him, and we should have just let his family sell Chinese investors American Visas.

You don’t need two sets of rules, just argue they only apply to Democrats.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillDBastard said:

Capitalism…. only 200 years old???? 10x that or more. It is the oldest and most trusted system of fair trade.... in its purest sense. What shocks me is the amount of people who do not understand that.

 

AOC is not new or anything special. She is quite typical of many politicians. Promise free shit, get elected. Time tested.

This. Jesus invented Capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, phillysailor said:

Ah, so it’s not the laws, but just their application or enforcement on Trump that bugs you.

His financial entanglements with Russian investors shouldn’t be investigated, his tax records shouldn’t be made public as they have been for every other president, and he should be able to lie about conducting business in Russia while on the campaign trail and modifying the RNC position on sanctions.

Trump’s violation of the emoluments clause and the lease agreement on his Washington hotel shouldn’t cause his party to criticize him, and we should have just let his family sell Chinese investors American Visas.

You don’t need two sets of rules, just argue they only apply to Democrats.

You are becoming unhinged.  

I have no objections to the investigations.  It should be noted that her default was a “bad guy”.  Since when does following the laws and rules as written make you a “bad Guy”

She also used examples of fossil fuel companies and big Pharma. 

Why not companies in general?  

As to the emulments clause I don’t think it was meant the way you and others are trying to use it  

Most of our finding fathers were wealthy I do not think they Intended to stop an office holder from ending his interests to conduct business, when serving  

This has never been enforced since it was written  I’ll wait for the courts to decide  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillDBastard said:

Capitalism…. only 200 years old???? 10x that or more. It is the oldest and most trusted system of fair trade.... in its purest sense. What shocks me is the amount of people who do not understand that.

 

AOC is not new or anything special. She is quite typical of many politicians. Promise free shit, get elected. Time tested.

Well, I for one am shocked.  If you are going to argue for capitalism, you should go to the trouble of understanding what it is.  It is not "the most trusted system of fair trade".  

Capitalism is the use of monetized excess assets to gain additional wealth through investment.  It has to do with the rise of commercial banking, stabilized currencies (ultimately necessitating a stable central government), and corporatized ownership to defend against personal liability.   It has nothing to do with fair trade.  It is essentially the antithesis of fair trade in its purest sense in that the profit motive distorts the intention of the trade.  For reference, see "Art of the Deal" by DJtRump, et al.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, The Joker said:

...

I have no objections to the investigations.  It should be noted that her default was a “bad guy”.  Since when does following the laws and rules as written make you a “bad Guy”

...

When you're the person writing the laws to your advantage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Laws are in place to apply to the serfs, mostly. The only way one of the Lords gets pinched is if he steals from another Lord. Compare Made-Off with the people on Wall Street who were too smart to fail and crashed the economy. All they got was tighter regulations for a few years, and now they are free to do it again...as long as the life savings they lose belong to the serfs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

Well, I for one am shocked.  If you are going to argue for capitalism, you should go to the trouble of understanding what it is.  It is not "the most trusted system of fair trade".  

Capitalism is the use of monetized excess assets to gain additional wealth through investment.  It has to do with the rise of commercial banking, stabilized currencies (ultimately necessitating a stable central government), and corporatized ownership to defend against personal liability.   It has nothing to do with fair trade.  It is essentially the antithesis of fair trade in its purest sense in that the profit motive distorts the intention of the trade.  For reference, see "Art of the Deal" by DJtRump, et al.

 

Wholly crap. Are you serious? Talk about derangement syndrome and bastardization.

Capitalism is two people coming to an agreement on what is a fair price for goods or services. In its purest form either party can decide not to go ahead with the transaction if they do not feel it is equitable. That is the essence of capitalism. Economics 101.

As Sam Donaldson recently pointed out, what we have now in America is not capitalism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Bus Driver said:

7DA94F79-207F-444B-A570-155434E55BA1.jpeg

I find this very funny...…...

likely not in the same way as some others mind you, but funny none the less.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Wholly crap. Are you serious? Talk about derangement syndrome and bastardization.

Capitalism is two people coming to an agreement on what is a fair price for goods or services. In its purest form either party can decide not to go ahead with the transaction if they do not feel it is equitable. That is the essence of capitalism. Economics 101.

As Sam Donaldson recently pointed out, what we have now in America is not capitalism.

Nice description of the barter system and economic independence.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, let me help.

cap·i·tal·ism
/ˈkapədlˌizəm/
noun
 
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, bhyde said:

an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

And in particular, note the scale that definition is working at. A lemonade stand does not a capitalist system make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Olsonist said:

And in particular, note the scale that definition is working at. A lemonade stand does not a capitalism make.

Actually, it does. No one is regulating the price for a cup of lemonade.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want to call that capitalism then I have this participation trophy for you.

image.thumb.png.3b708d73592989df5f7c1458812dcabf.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Capitalism is not a political system.

Geezes fookin Christ..... I only studied the subject for 5 years in school.

Maybe you should have studied harder, and longer.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really, how long do you have to study in order to open a lemonade stand?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, bhyde said:

Here, let me help.

cap·i·tal·ism
/ˈkapədlˌizəm/
noun
 
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.
 

Funny, I have always been taught that capitalism was the allocation of surplus.  It seems only in America that we attach social structure to the definition.  I find that definition to be a bit ingenuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Laker said:

Funny, I have always been taught that capitalism was the allocation of surplus.  It seems only in America that we attach social structure to the definition.  I find that definition to be a bit ingenuous.

That's kind of the problem. Everyone has their own personal definition of what Capitalism is. And it seems to get conflated with political systems most of the time. If we can't even broadly agree on what it is, we're not going to have any meaningful conversation about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always been amused by the democracy vs. socialism or communism arguments.  

As if they were somehow exclusive.

(For what it’s worth, the former USSR’s constitution was far more democratic than the US version.  Then they fell into the “Fearless Leader” trap.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, bhyde said:

That's kind of the problem. Everyone has their own personal definition of what Capitalism is. And it seems to get conflated with political systems most of the time. If we can't even broadly agree on what it is, we're not going to have any meaningful conversation about it.

That is intentional.  I strongly recommend anyone who's interested in politics - regardless of ideology - read some Saul Alinsky (https://www.azquotes.com/author/247-Saul_Alinsky)

"A Marxist begins with his prime truth that all evils are caused by the exploitation of the proletariat by the capitalists. From this he logically proceeds to the revolution to end capitalism, then into the third stage of reorganization into a new social order of the dictatorship of the proletariat, and finally the last stage -- the political paradise of communism."

What I truly appreciate about Alinsky is that he basically lays out the fundamental playbook of the major political ideologies and their tactics.  The reason there isn't a good definition of 'capitalism' is because it's the "sum of all evil" for one group of players and the expression of the 'evil' changes over time therefore it's definition changes as well.  Conservatives do the same thing with 'socialism'.  Control of the language and symbolism is very important to obtaining and maintaining power.

For example, another quote:

"The despair is there; now it's up to us to go in and rub raw the sores of discontent, galvanize them for radical social change."

If that doesn't describe the rise of the Trump presidency, I don't know what does.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, Left Shift said:

I have always been amused by the democracy vs. socialism or communism arguments.  

As if they were somehow exclusive.

(For what it’s worth, the former USSR’s constitution was far more democratic than the US version.  Then they fell into the “Fearless Leader” trap.)

I have always been amused by arguments based on labels used as absolutes.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Olsonist said:

Really, how long do you have to study in order to open a lemonade stand?

None. Which is why capitalism is commerce in its purest state. Two people come to a mutually agreed price, very plain, simple transaction.

Capitalism, unlike a Command Economy, Socialism, Communism or some hybird does not rely, nor is it dependent on government interference. So while the latter all require  regulation, and thus tied at the hip to a political system to administer, Capitalism, true Capitalism, is unencumbered by politics and/or the political system du jour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

None. Which is why capitalism is commerce in its purest state. Two people come to a mutually agreed price, very plain, simple transaction.

Capitalism, unlike a Command Economy, Socialism, Communism or some hybird does not rely, nor is it dependent on government interference. So while the latter all require  regulation, and thus tied at the hip to a political system to administer, Capitalism, true Capitalism, is unencumbered by politics and/or the political system du jour.

And you end up with the same messes that all Neoliberals end up with eventually.  Give you a hint:  Fletcher and his original work based on Einstein's Brownian Motion paper.  (Random Walk)  As in all physical processes, you go from lower to higher disorder, not the other way around.  There has to be some process of controlling the disorder.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillDBastard said:

None. Which is why capitalism is commerce in its purest state. Two people come to a mutually agreed price, very plain, simple transaction.

Capitalism, unlike a Command Economy, Socialism, Communism or some hybird does not rely, nor is it dependent on government interference. So while the latter all require  regulation, and thus tied at the hip to a political system to administer, Capitalism, true Capitalism, is unencumbered by politics and/or the political system du jour

So, remind me, why is it called "CAPITALISM" again? Something to do with "capital" I always thought.

DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, BillDBastard said:

None. Which is why capitalism is commerce in its purest state. Two people come to a mutually agreed price, very plain, simple transaction.

Capitalism, unlike a Command Economy, Socialism, Communism or some hybird does not rely, nor is it dependent on government interference. So while the latter all require  regulation, and thus tied at the hip to a political system to administer, Capitalism, true Capitalism, is unencumbered by politics and/or the political system du jour.

That's actually the Free Market which is different from Capitalism. Seriously, you studied this stuff for 5 years. Really?

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042215/what-difference-between-capitalist-system-and-free-market-system.asp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

That's actually the Free Market which is different from Capitalism. Seriously, you studied this stuff for 5 years. Really?

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042215/what-difference-between-capitalist-system-and-free-market-system.asp

We are presuming he passed his exams.  And that he didn't have Laffer for a professor.  Or some other economist who was hoping to get a job on K Street pimping tax breaks and trickle down.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Laker said:

And you end up with the same messes that all Neoliberals end up with eventually.  Give you a hint:  Fletcher and his original work based on Einstein's Brownian Motion paper.  (Random Walk)  As in all physical processes, you go from lower to higher disorder, not the other way around.  There has to be some process of controlling the disorder.  

Emergent order is a characteristic of markets. And our universe, which entropy suggests should just be a uniform cloud of... something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 6:05 PM, Left Shift said:

As I understand it, the personhood of corporations was an added line to a Supreme Court decision inserted by a clerk.  It became precedent due to inertia and, until Citizen's United, never really had a test case.

If you get tired of your blissful state, I've offered help here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 4:58 PM, AJ Oliver said:

Can they get the death penalty, marry your sister, pay taxes like the rest of us? 

Not just "NO", but "HELL NO" !! 

Corps are WAAAAY out of control - and how big money rules over us.  

And the very idea of corps with constitutional rights is a completely made-up footnote to a SCOTUS decision that was 

added AFTER the court had voted. Read ya some Thom Hartman. 

How can big money rule over you?  Can a corporation make you do anything?

If people have constitutional rights, do you think that an assembly of people should somehow lose their constitutional rights?

Let's say you want to publish a book, but no publisher will do it, because it is nonsense.  But you can't afford to publish it yourself.  So you find the 10 people in the world that agree with you, and you put your money together and publish the book.  Do you lose your rights because you assembled your money together in an effort to present your views through your book?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, jzk said:
On 2/8/2019 at 5:58 PM, AJ Oliver said:

Corps are WAAAAY out of control - and how big money rules over us.  

And the very idea of corps with constitutional rights is a completely made-up footnote to a SCOTUS decision that was 

added AFTER the court had voted. Read ya some Thom Hartman. 

How can big money rule over you?  Can a corporation make you do anything?

They've been known to exercise their first amendment right to expre$$ them$elve$ by filing civil right$ law$uit$.

It's outrageous. And also SO UNFAIR. And I think that particular corporation might even have a racist name. The evil never ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/8/2019 at 5:58 PM, AJ Oliver said:

And the very idea of corps with constitutional rights is a completely made-up footnote to a SCOTUS decision that was 

A powerful dissent on this point from Justice Stevens in Citizens United:

Quote

We have long since held that corporations are covered by the First Amendment

Um... Or something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Olsonist said:

That's actually the Free Market which is different from Capitalism. Seriously, you studied this stuff for 5 years. Really?

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/042215/what-difference-between-capitalist-system-and-free-market-system.asp

Oh wow, now that you quote a source that has "-pedia" in its name...…..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here, let me try again.

cap·i·tal·ism

Dictionary result for capitalism

noun
an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s good Mis, where’d you get that one?

Please don’t tell me it’s an original thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Oh wow, now that you quote a source that has "-pedia" in its name...…..

It'll do but then I'd have thought that's all I'd need to jog the memory of someone who studied this stuff for 5 years. However, if you prefer, we can use Karl Marx' definition of Capitalism:

Capitalism is a mode of production based on private ownership of the means of production

Seriously, this is not controversial stuff. Capitalism has been very good to me, probably much better to me than to you. I know and understand capitalism. I also know and understand the Free Market and so I avoid it wherever I can. Peter Thiel has a line, Competition Is For Losers which summarizes my attitude towards the Free Market which your lemonade stand is a cartoon example of.

Capitalism is not the Free Market and the Free Market is not Capitalism. These are different things. You would fail what we call in engineering, dimensional analysis.

Where did you spend your 5 years?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Olsonist said:

It'll do but then I'd have thought that's all I'd need to jog the memory of someone who studied this stuff for 5 years. However, if you prefer, we can use Karl Marx' definition of Capitalism:

Capitalism is a mode of production based on private ownership of the means of production

Seriously, this is not controversial stuff. Capitalism has been very good to me, probably much better to me than to you. I know and understand capitalism. I also know and understand the Free Market and so I avoid it wherever I can. Peter Thiel has a line, Competition Is For Losers which summarizes my attitude towards the Free Market which your lemonade stand is a cartoon example of.

Capitalism is not the Free Market and the Free Market is not Capitalism. These are different things. You would fail what we call in engineering, dimensional analysis.

Where did you spend your 5 years?

Grade seven.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And the Reich just loves it when Big Money combines itself into giant corps to increase its power. 

But they are horrified when laboring folks combine into unions, 

and fight them tooth and nail - up to and including shooting them down in the streets like dogs. 

Read Labor's Untold Story  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

“Shoot them down in the street like dogs”. Sounds like a Nazi quote to me. 

Hows that whole “Vets for Peace” thing going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, chum said:

“Shoot them down in the street like dogs”. Sounds like a Nazi quote to me. 

Hows that whole “Vets for Peace” thing going?

Actually it was the Andrew Carnegie and the Pinkertons that rallied around that idea as a strategy.  http://thepittsburghhistoryjournal.com/post/26626347745/striking-workers-and-pinkerton-strike-breakers-on

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That was Dale Carnegie, no relation although he did change the spelling of his last name from Carnagey to feign an association.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, chum said:

Mr. “Winning Friends and Influencing People” himself.

That was Dale Carnegie.  Andrew Carnegie was one of the big four "robber barons" of the 1890s

th.jpeg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

California had our big four robber barons, Crocker, Stanford, Huntington and Hopkins. Crocker was worth about $80B built on a railroad monopoly that was finally busted in 1890 with the Sherman Anti-Trust Act which only had a single vote cast against it in the Senate and passed unanimously in the House.

Frickin' communists.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about the Reich, and the main reason they deserve zero respect, 

is their willful ignorance. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry I got my Carnegie's mixed up AJ it's been awhile I've been too busy winning friends and influencing people and making a lot of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, AJ Oliver said:

The thing about the Reich, and the main reason they deserve zero respect, 

is their willful ignorance. 

I thought they were always claiming how well educated they were.  Very smart, geniuses even.

Or is that just the flip side of willful ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 It's better than the willful arrogance that I see here sometimes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Like Olsonist, I sorta got lucky and did pretty well in the capitalist lottery. 

But I have tried not to forget where I came from - hard-scrabble Irish in my case. 

For a good long while, I have been inspired by that social democratic traitor to his class 

who said of his oligarchic peers, "I welcome their hatred." 

And hey Mr. Olsonist, didja see that PBS show on the Transcontinental Railroad ? 

Corruption of mind-boggling proportions !! On the western side of the Sierras, the trestles were falling down before trains even went over them !!

But still, the Huntington Gardens in LA are pretty cool. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Uhh, I don’t hate you or your elk AJ. I’m not mad, angry, pissod off or any of that. Life is short, and to be enjoyed. Cheers mate!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Left Shift said:
4 hours ago, AJ Oliver said:

The thing about the Reich, and the main reason they deserve zero respect, 

is their willful ignorance. 

I thought they were always claiming how well educated they were.  Very smart, geniuses even.

Or is that just the flip side of willful ignorance.

Two guys who have no clue what Citizens United was about, and wasn't about, discussing willful ignorance.

It's entertainment like this that keeps me coming around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Contumacious Tom said:

Two guys who have no clue what Citizens United was about, and wasn't about, discussing willful ignorance.

It's entertainment like this that keeps me coming around.

But they are smarter then everyone else, just ask them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Olsonist said:

It'll do but then I'd have thought that's all I'd need to jog the memory of someone who studied this stuff for 5 years. However, if you prefer, we can use Karl Marx' definition of Capitalism:

Capitalism is a mode of production based on private ownership of the means of production

Seriously, this is not controversial stuff. Capitalism has been very good to me, probably much better to me than to you. I know and understand capitalism. I also know and understand the Free Market and so I avoid it wherever I can. Peter Thiel has a line, Competition Is For Losers which summarizes my attitude towards the Free Market which your lemonade stand is a cartoon example of.

Capitalism is not the Free Market and the Free Market is not Capitalism. These are different things. You would fail what we call in engineering, dimensional analysis.

Where did you spend your 5 years?

The free market is great for consumers.  Of course businesses would prefer no competition which is why they use government to their advantage any way they can.  Why do you suppose Amazon supports a $15 minimum wage?  Because it gives it a huge advantage over its competitors like Walmart.  It is much more automated, and doesn't require the lesser skilled labor that Walmart does.  And, I am not sure this even applies to their offshore customer service team that is probably independent contractors.  Is this good for someone trying to make it in this world?  Not if you are an entry level worker that wants a job at Walmart.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jzk said:

The free market is great for consumers.  Of course businesses would prefer no competition which is why they use government to their advantage any way they can.  Why do you suppose Amazon supports a $15 minimum wage?  Because it gives it a huge advantage over its competitors like Walmart.  It is much more automated, and doesn't require the lesser skilled labor that Walmart does.  And, I am not sure this even applies to their offshore customer service team that is probably independent contractors.  Is this good for someone trying to make it in this world?  Not if you are an entry level worker that wants a job at Walmart.  

I am a lawyer.  We have that special places like doctors.  And corporate executives.  Do I need to go on?  I have a good friend who makes a fine living with his high school education.  Relatively, we are doing very well if you have work.  The problem is those without.  Maybe the problem is within us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

I am a lawyer.  We have that special places like doctors.  And corporate executives.  Do I need to go on?  I have a good friend who makes a fine living with his high school education.  Relatively, we are doing very well if you have work.  The problem is those without.  Maybe the problem is within us.

I am a lawyer too.  What about it?  Lawyers use the bar to exclude competition from the marketplace.  I know many lawyers busting ass and just barely making it.  Now I sell stuff on ebay.  There is a way for anyone that wants to find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jzk said:

I am a lawyer too.  What about it?  Lawyers use the bar to exclude competition from the marketplace.  I know many lawyers busting ass and just barely making it.  Now I sell stuff on ebay.  There is a way for anyone that wants to find it.

Maybe you are not good at it.  Try something else.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

Maybe you are not good at it.  Try something else.

 

I am not good at selling stuff on ebay?  How would you know?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, jzk said:

I am not good at selling stuff on ebay?  How would you know?

I know very little actually.  But I do care for the people on the planet.  I may not be the best, but I try.  Keeping myself is the least of my problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hasher said:

I know very little actually.  But I do care for the people on the planet.  I may not be the best, but I try.  Keeping myself is the least of my problems.

You think you are special because you care for people on the planet?  I advocate a system whereby the common person can become as wealthy as they want to be.  I advocate a system where all of the people have the opportunity to do great things.  Other systems end up causing misery and death for the common person.

Just don't be jealous when someone does greater things than you and becomes more wealthy than you.  What kind of shit is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jzk said:

You think you are special because you care for people on the planet?  I advocate a system whereby the common person can become as wealthy as they want to be.  I advocate a system where all of the people have the opportunity to do great things.  Other systems end up causing misery and death for the common person.

Just don't be jealous when someone does greater things than you and becomes more wealthy than you.  What kind of shit is that?

I am glad you are self sufficient.  That is great.  Some are not.  If you fall and hit your head, you won't be quite as a right.  I believe in working hard and being the best I can be.  On that, you and I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jzk said:

You think you are special because you care for people on the planet?

Astronaut Lives Matter!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

I am glad you are self sufficient.  That is great.  Some are not.  If you fall and hit your head, you won't be quite as a right.  I believe in working hard and being the best I can be.  On that, you and I agree.

I want everyone to be able to be successful.  I think government tends to stand in their way.  How do you suppose we help those that are not?  With other people's money?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Contumacious Tom said:

Astronaut Lives Matter!

I love science fiction too!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, hasher said:

I love science fiction too!

Great but I meant the real ones. They're planning to go to Mars now. You'll need to expand the caring zone to the solar system.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, jzk said:

I want everyone to be able to be successful.  I think government tends to stand in their way.  How do you suppose we help those that are not?  With other people's money?

I had a good start.  My father made very little money.  But he and my mother loved me.  Still do.  It was very important.  Not everyone has that.  This is not an easy equation to solve.  I am glad you are well.  I have this fantasy we can all be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Contumacious Tom said:

Great but I meant the real ones. They're planning to go to Mars now. You'll need to expand the caring zone to the solar system.

Is there someone out there?  I guess we don't know yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, hasher said:

I had a good start.  My father made very little money.  But he and my mother loved me.  Still do.  It was very important.  Not everyone has that.  This is not an easy equation to solve.  I am glad you are well.  I have this fantasy we can all be.

Your start has nothing to do with other people's start.  In my experience, successful people become successful people for reasons other than family wealth, education, upbringing, etc.   And success is not taught in our public education system.  Of course, someone that "gets it" will use their education, family wealth, or whatever else as a tool to help their success.  But it is not the cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, jzk said:

Your start has nothing to do with other people's start.  In my experience, successful people become successful people for reasons other than family wealth, education, upbringing, etc.   And success is not taught in our public education system.  Of course, someone that "gets it" will use their education, family wealth, or whatever else as a tool to help their success.  But it is not the cause.

I only have this little supply of knowledge.  I had love and I gave my children love.  Thankfully, we are successful. YMV

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, hasher said:

Is there someone out there?  I guess we don't know yet.

No, I don't mean another probe. I mean humans. They're picking them now. My little joke has now dragged on far too long, but we'll have to start caring about the humans on Mars. We can start with any in orbit now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Contumacious Tom said:

No, I don't mean another probe. I mean humans. They're picking them now. My little joke has now dragged on far too long, but we'll have to start caring about the humans on Mars. We can start with any in orbit now.

Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hasher said:
2 hours ago, jzk said:

Your start has nothing to do with other people's start.  In my experience, successful people become successful people for reasons other than family wealth, education, upbringing, etc.   And success is not taught in our public education system.  Of course, someone that "gets it" will use their education, family wealth, or whatever else as a tool to help their success.  But it is not the cause.

I only have this little supply of knowledge.  I had love and I gave my children love.  Thankfully, we are successful. YMV 

Gosh, I thought JZK had exhausted this vein of stupidity but apparently he's digging out another motherload.

Tell us, why are successful people successful, if it has nothing to do with their family wealth, or their education, or their upbringing? What else is there? God's destiny? Dotting the "i" in "Capitalism" with a little smiley-face?

It also begs the question, what "successful" people do you have experience with?

-DSK

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, hasher said:
2 hours ago, jzk said:

...   ...   ...

I am glad you are self sufficient.  That is great.  Some are not.  If you fall and hit your head, you won't be quite as a right.  I believe in working hard and being the best I can be.  On that, you and I agree.

Reading his posts, it would be kind of a surprise if JZK can sit up and feed himself . Falling and hitting his head might be an improvement.

-DSK

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Left Shift said:

That was Dale Carnegie.  Andrew Carnegie was one of the big four "robber barons" of the 1890s

th.jpeg

 

Have to give Carnegie credit for one thing though. He was a very old-fashioned Presbyterian and believed that one could not enter heaven rich (something to that effect in the Bible that most Christians ignore today). Hence he gave away vas's sums of money - Carnegie libraries, Carnegie Hall, Carnegie-Mellon U, etc). Rockefeller was also a major philanthropist. Vanderbilt and Morgan not so much. I think Vanderbilt was too busy spending money on boats.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Have to give Carnegie credit for one thing though. He was a very old-fashioned Presbyterian and believed that one could not enter heaven rich (something to that effect in the Bible that most Christians ignore today). Hence he gave away vas's sums of money - Carnegie libraries, Carnegie Hall, Carnegie-Mellon U, etc). Rockefeller was also a major philanthropist. Vanderbilt and Morgan not so much. I think Vanderbilt was too busy spending money on boats.

Carnegie made a lot of money.  More than I.  He gave it away.  Rockefeller owned 5% of the American economy.  I think his treasure survives. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, hasher said:

Carnegie made a lot of money.  More than I.  He gave it away.  Rockefeller owned 5% of the American economy.  I think his treasure survives. 

I didn't mean to suggest that Rockefeller was in the same give-it-away class as Carnegie. The role played by the Rockefeller Foundation in starting the Green Revolution saved many millions of lives. Without it the world today would be a much worse place.  I just am not aware of any major contributions by the Morgan Foundation or Vanderbilt Foundation if they even exist.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites