New Orleans

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

Globalization is a net win for everyone. Because it raises the dreaded bottom that people supposedly race for.

 

 

The millions of Trump followers disagree.

I know. I just said that. In the next post.

 

Trump and sanders followers are equally misguided on this point, but it's not surprising because both candidates are nothing more than populists.

Yeah, well globalist economics is not a "win" for the working class anywhere, FTMP. It is a race to the bottom, I'm not sure what world you're living in. I think it was Volkswagon that opened some plants in Alabama or something because of the cheaper US labor there relative to the highly unionized labor in Germany. When our labor is cheaper than, say, China, we have big time problems.

Why??! That's a great thing. It'd be great if all economies in the world developed to the level of the US's.

 

That would also put downward pressure on the 1% salaries too.

 

Look, the capitalists/globalists want the lowest taxes and cheapest labor they can find, so what will continue to happen is the US standard will be eroded more and more to match the 3rd world standard, not the other way around.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

And this talk of putting teenagers to work as a fix to poverty, is ludicrous But it would maybe limit their energy to be out committing crimes. But so would school and school activities.

Nobody is putting kids to work that don't want to work or that their family doesn't want them to work. And, nobody is talking about forcing them to do labor that is dangerous or harmful to them.

 

The bolded part is true though. If the kid is at a job, he isn't out causing trouble. And, he is also learning a skill and how to work in a work environment. School activities only go so far in a poverty area. If the household needs food on the table and the adults in the family don't have jobs and have turned to selling drugs, guess what the kid is going to be doing? He isn't going to be going to the Chess club meeting. He is going to be working a street corner somewhere selling more meth.

 

Now...take that family and allow them to work in a legitimate job and also allow that kid to do the same (within appropriate parameters) and it could be a win win.

Industrial labor is generally dangerous, you know, that's why they have OSHA and is also why workers tend to want to form unions.

Sooo....it's dangerous for a 10 -12 year old to wash dishes, mop a floor, stuff envelopes, run a cash register, mow grass....

I thought you were talking about industrial jobs. Well, your 10-12 year olds are gonna have a helluva time competing with adult latinos for those restaurant kitchen jobs. Also hard for me to see 10-12 year olds doing menial office work, sorry, just me. Children of that age used to be reimbursed for various "chores" around the house, etc, allowance--that's when dad a a better paying job, I guess.

 

And cash register! Really, you're going to let a 10 year old run the cash register @ your business? Lol, c'mon!

If they can't compete, why do we need laws to keep them out?

 

Like OSHA, we are spending money on regulations to protect against horrors that the market has already extinguished.

 

Your "market" gives us pollution and sh#t working conditions. Your market gives us fracking, polluting the water table with carcinogens. The market gave us the near world economic collapse of '08. That's why they have the EPA and OSHA, USDA, and the like. If you don't have OSHA, well, they just basically work people to death, sorta like what is happening in Qatar and Saudi Arabian construction sites these days. The market delivers as many bads as it does goods.

 

I dunno, you sound like a Libertarian.

[cornographic]

I would read it. Please post anything substantive that you found there.

 

And his policies are absolutely anti-immigrant. He just wouldn't build a physical wall.

 

FDR is mythologized but he was awful for the overall development of the economy and poor people outside of the special interests who were paid off by his policies.

You are free to research Bernie on your own.

 

He is not anti immigrant, that's ridiculous. He's about immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship(amnesty) for undocumented folks already living here.

 

Yeah, your take on FDR is bonkers, not really useful for me to respond. I guess you don't like social security, public schools, unions, etc etc. Like I said, you sound like a Libertarian.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Globalization is a net win for everyone. Because it raises the dreaded bottom that people supposedly race for.

 

 

The millions of Trump followers disagree.

I know. I just said that. In the next post.

 

Trump and sanders followers are equally misguided on this point, but it's not surprising because both candidates are nothing more than populists.

Yeah, well globalist economics is not a "win" for the working class anywhere, FTMP. It is a race to the bottom, I'm not sure what world you're living in. I think it was Volkswagon that opened some plants in Alabama or something because of the cheaper US labor there relative to the highly unionized labor in Germany. When our labor is cheaper than, say, China, we have big time problems.

Why??! That's a great thing. It'd be great if all economies in the world developed to the level of the US's.

 

That would also put downward pressure on the 1% salaries too.

Look, the capitalists/globalists want the lowest taxes and cheapest labor they can find, so what will continue to happen is the US standard will be eroded more and more to match the 3rd world standard, not the other way around.

You're just not getting it. The capitalists are raising the 3rd world standard. In the long run, things will equalize and everyone will be better off. This is not just theory. We have real world evidence of this. And we have real evidence that government guided economies have the opposite effect.

 

If you seek cheaper gas, or groceries, or haircut, are you part of the problem too?

 

Or is it ok for you to seek a bargain but not companies?

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And this talk of putting teenagers to work as a fix to poverty, is ludicrous But it would maybe limit their energy to be out committing crimes. But so would school and school activities.

Nobody is putting kids to work that don't want to work or that their family doesn't want them to work. And, nobody is talking about forcing them to do labor that is dangerous or harmful to them.

 

The bolded part is true though. If the kid is at a job, he isn't out causing trouble. And, he is also learning a skill and how to work in a work environment. School activities only go so far in a poverty area. If the household needs food on the table and the adults in the family don't have jobs and have turned to selling drugs, guess what the kid is going to be doing? He isn't going to be going to the Chess club meeting. He is going to be working a street corner somewhere selling more meth.

 

Now...take that family and allow them to work in a legitimate job and also allow that kid to do the same (within appropriate parameters) and it could be a win win.

Industrial labor is generally dangerous, you know, that's why they have OSHA and is also why workers tend to want to form unions.

Sooo....it's dangerous for a 10 -12 year old to wash dishes, mop a floor, stuff envelopes, run a cash register, mow grass....

I thought you were talking about industrial jobs. Well, your 10-12 year olds are gonna have a helluva time competing with adult latinos for those restaurant kitchen jobs. Also hard for me to see 10-12 year olds doing menial office work, sorry, just me. Children of that age used to be reimbursed for various "chores" around the house, etc, allowance--that's when dad a a better paying job, I guess.

 

And cash register! Really, you're going to let a 10 year old run the cash register @ your business? Lol, c'mon!

If they can't compete, why do we need laws to keep them out?

 

Like OSHA, we are spending money on regulations to protect against horrors that the market has already extinguished.

Your "market" gives us pollution and sh#t working conditions. Your market gives us fracking, polluting the water table with carcinogens. The market gave us the near world economic collapse of '08. That's why they have the EPA and OSHA, USDA, and the like. If you don't have OSHA, well, they just basically work people to death, sorta like what is happening in Qatar and Saudi Arabian construction sites these days. The market delivers as many bads as it does goods.

 

I dunno, you sound like a Libertarian.

You do realize that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are much more similar to Scandinavian countries economically speaking than the US, right?

 

And have you been to those countries? I have.

 

The conditions are difficult. I have a huge amount of respect for the Indian taxi drivers I spoke to who drive all night, live in a conex box with 15 other men, and work construction all day just so they can send their production home to their families. It's truly amazing work ethic. And it means their kids won't have to do the same.

 

And for the life of me, I can't figure out why the "do good" liberals want to deny them those opportunities.

[Stumpy1]

 

People that live in poverty and commit crimes need to change their mindsets before any of it will get better. We can sit here and discuss ways to improve the situations but it wont matter or work if the affected people don't want to change. Those that commit crimes, such as robbery, do so because they probably find it easier to obtain money that way instead of working.

People in poverty commit petty crimes to eat. Eating is not a "mindset".

 

I will say a small percentage of people commit petty crimes so they can eat but I bet a larger number is so they can keep paying for their drug habit.

[BigRedBuster]

 

Now it's BP's fault.

 

 

This is getting good.

So BP bears no blame? Well, just ask all the small fisherman along the gulf coast. Many haven't recovered.

 

The gulf fishing industry has very little if anything to do with inner city New Orleans.

[cm husker]

 

 

I would read it. Please post anything substantive that you found there.

 

And his policies are absolutely anti-immigrant. He just wouldn't build a physical wall.

 

FDR is mythologized but he was awful for the overall development of the economy and poor people outside of the special interests who were paid off by his policies.

You are free to research Bernie on your own.

 

He is not anti immigrant, that's ridiculous. He's about immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship(amnesty) for undocumented folks already living here.

 

Yeah, your take on FDR is bonkers, not really useful for me to respond. I guess you don't like social security, public schools, unions, etc etc. Like I said, you sound like a Libertarian.

I'm a classical liberal. I like the idea of helping share the proceeds of productivity, but I want to do that in the most efficient way possible while eliminating all barriers to competition. The problem I have with progressives is that they want to engineer an outcome that too often isn't realistic or isn't universal.

 

That's why I philosophically have a problem with unions, which I don't think get the best deals for their member, all while tamping down non-member opportunities.

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

People that live in poverty and commit crimes need to change their mindsets before any of it will get better. We can sit here and discuss ways to improve the situations but it wont matter or work if the affected people don't want to change. Those that commit crimes, such as robbery, do so because they probably find it easier to obtain money that way instead of working.

People in poverty commit petty crimes to eat. Eating is not a "mindset".

 

I will say a small percentage of people commit petty crimes so they can eat but I bet a larger number is so they can keep paying for their drug habit.

 

I would agree with that statement. I would say a vast majority is because of a drug problem or simply don't give a sh#t about anybody else and don't care if they steal something...so hey....why not?

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Globalization is a net win for everyone. Because it raises the dreaded bottom that people supposedly race for.

 

 

The millions of Trump followers disagree.

I know. I just said that. In the next post.

 

Trump and sanders followers are equally misguided on this point, but it's not surprising because both candidates are nothing more than populists.

Yeah, well globalist economics is not a "win" for the working class anywhere, FTMP. It is a race to the bottom, I'm not sure what world you're living in. I think it was Volkswagon that opened some plants in Alabama or something because of the cheaper US labor there relative to the highly unionized labor in Germany. When our labor is cheaper than, say, China, we have big time problems.

Why??! That's a great thing. It'd be great if all economies in the world developed to the level of the US's.

 

That would also put downward pressure on the 1% salaries too.

Look, the capitalists/globalists want the lowest taxes and cheapest labor they can find, so what will continue to happen is the US standard will be eroded more and more to match the 3rd world standard, not the other way around.

You're just not getting it. The capitalists are raising the 3rd world standard. In the long run, things will equalize and everyone will be better off. This is not just theory. We have real world evidence of this. And we have real evidence that government guided economies have the opposite effect.

 

If you seek cheaper gas, or groceries, or haircut, are you part of the problem too?

 

Or is it ok for you to seek a bargain but not companies?

 

I'm happy to pay more for quality products that last, and that is what I usually do. If my standard as a worker is greater, then I have the means to pay for well made products from fellow workers who also have a decent standard of living. Economic growth happens for the ground up, not trickle down. In short, I don't shop @ Wal Mart. I'd rather but Red Wing boots, that last a long time, than some cheapo crap. Too bad, Red Wing boots have moved some of their production to Mexico.

 

If the capitalists want to raise the standards so much, for the workers, which they don't and never have and that's why they fight unions so fiercely at every turn....but if they did, why does German co. move to Alabama for cheaper labor and the TPP want to open up the cheaper labor of, say, Viet Nam since the already cheap Chinese labor is getting "too costly"? Why all the "inversions" in Ireland? Why the H1-B visa program? Why the outsourcing? Why the increase in child labor in India? It's ALL about cheap labor to maximize profits at the top.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And this talk of putting teenagers to work as a fix to poverty, is ludicrous But it would maybe limit their energy to be out committing crimes. But so would school and school activities.

Nobody is putting kids to work that don't want to work or that their family doesn't want them to work. And, nobody is talking about forcing them to do labor that is dangerous or harmful to them.

 

The bolded part is true though. If the kid is at a job, he isn't out causing trouble. And, he is also learning a skill and how to work in a work environment. School activities only go so far in a poverty area. If the household needs food on the table and the adults in the family don't have jobs and have turned to selling drugs, guess what the kid is going to be doing? He isn't going to be going to the Chess club meeting. He is going to be working a street corner somewhere selling more meth.

 

Now...take that family and allow them to work in a legitimate job and also allow that kid to do the same (within appropriate parameters) and it could be a win win.

Industrial labor is generally dangerous, you know, that's why they have OSHA and is also why workers tend to want to form unions.

Sooo....it's dangerous for a 10 -12 year old to wash dishes, mop a floor, stuff envelopes, run a cash register, mow grass....

I thought you were talking about industrial jobs. Well, your 10-12 year olds are gonna have a helluva time competing with adult latinos for those restaurant kitchen jobs. Also hard for me to see 10-12 year olds doing menial office work, sorry, just me. Children of that age used to be reimbursed for various "chores" around the house, etc, allowance--that's when dad a a better paying job, I guess.

 

And cash register! Really, you're going to let a 10 year old run the cash register @ your business? Lol, c'mon!

If they can't compete, why do we need laws to keep them out?

 

Like OSHA, we are spending money on regulations to protect against horrors that the market has already extinguished.

Your "market" gives us pollution and sh#t working conditions. Your market gives us fracking, polluting the water table with carcinogens. The market gave us the near world economic collapse of '08. That's why they have the EPA and OSHA, USDA, and the like. If you don't have OSHA, well, they just basically work people to death, sorta like what is happening in Qatar and Saudi Arabian construction sites these days. The market delivers as many bads as it does goods.

 

I dunno, you sound like a Libertarian.

You can refer to another thread on this topic, but there is scant evidence that OSHA has provided a marginal increase in worker safety.

 

And that's despite billions pouring into compliance and enforcement over the years.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Globalization is a net win for everyone. Because it raises the dreaded bottom that people supposedly race for.

 

 

The millions of Trump followers disagree.

I know. I just said that. In the next post.

 

Trump and sanders followers are equally misguided on this point, but it's not surprising because both candidates are nothing more than populists.

Yeah, well globalist economics is not a "win" for the working class anywhere, FTMP. It is a race to the bottom, I'm not sure what world you're living in. I think it was Volkswagon that opened some plants in Alabama or something because of the cheaper US labor there relative to the highly unionized labor in Germany. When our labor is cheaper than, say, China, we have big time problems.

Why??! That's a great thing. It'd be great if all economies in the world developed to the level of the US's.

 

That would also put downward pressure on the 1% salaries too.

Look, the capitalists/globalists want the lowest taxes and cheapest labor they can find, so what will continue to happen is the US standard will be eroded more and more to match the 3rd world standard, not the other way around.

You're just not getting it. The capitalists are raising the 3rd world standard. In the long run, things will equalize and everyone will be better off. This is not just theory. We have real world evidence of this. And we have real evidence that government guided economies have the opposite effect.

 

If you seek cheaper gas, or groceries, or haircut, are you part of the problem too?

 

Or is it ok for you to seek a bargain but not companies?

I'm happy to pay more for quality products that last, and that is what I usually do. If my standard as a worker is greater, then I have the means to pay for well made products from fellow workers who also have a decent standard of living. Economic growth happens for the ground up, not trickle down. In short, I don't shop @ Wal Mart. I'd rather but Red Wing boots, that last a long time, than some cheapo crap. Too bad, Red Wing boots have moved some of their production to Mexico.

 

If the capitalists want to raise the standards so much, for the workers, which they don't and never have and that's why they fight unions so fiercely at every turn....but if they did, why does German co. move to Alabama for cheaper labor and the TPP want to open up the cheaper labor of, say, Viet Nam since the already cheap Chinese labor is getting "too costly"?

I'm not saying that capitalist want to raise standards. I'm saying that's the net result.

 

If costs in China are going up relative to Vietnam, that's because sol and labor leverage has improved as China has liberalized their economy. That's a good thing. And eventually Vietnam wages and leverage will increase. And eventually, there will be more productive vibrant economies and less places to find "cheap" labor, and that's a good thing.

 

 

As to your Walmart example, that's great that you want to and can pay for higher grade products. The other day I was in whole foods and saw about a dozen variety of eggs, from free range to fertile to vegetarian fed and a whole variety of sizes and colors and bird types. That's an incredible testament to capitalism as a system. And it would go away if the socialist have their way.

[cornographic]

 

 

Now it's BP's fault.

 

 

This is getting good.

So BP bears no blame? Well, just ask all the small fisherman along the gulf coast. Many haven't recovered.

 

The gulf fishing industry has very little if anything to do with inner city New Orleans.

 

Well, has less these days, since the industry has contracted since BP did its thing.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Globalization is a net win for everyone. Because it raises the dreaded bottom that people supposedly race for.

 

 

The millions of Trump followers disagree.

I know. I just said that. In the next post.

 

Trump and sanders followers are equally misguided on this point, but it's not surprising because both candidates are nothing more than populists.

Yeah, well globalist economics is not a "win" for the working class anywhere, FTMP. It is a race to the bottom, I'm not sure what world you're living in. I think it was Volkswagon that opened some plants in Alabama or something because of the cheaper US labor there relative to the highly unionized labor in Germany. When our labor is cheaper than, say, China, we have big time problems.

Why??! That's a great thing. It'd be great if all economies in the world developed to the level of the US's.

 

That would also put downward pressure on the 1% salaries too.

Look, the capitalists/globalists want the lowest taxes and cheapest labor they can find, so what will continue to happen is the US standard will be eroded more and more to match the 3rd world standard, not the other way around.

You're just not getting it. The capitalists are raising the 3rd world standard. In the long run, things will equalize and everyone will be better off. This is not just theory. We have real world evidence of this. And we have real evidence that government guided economies have the opposite effect.

 

If you seek cheaper gas, or groceries, or haircut, are you part of the problem too?

 

Or is it ok for you to seek a bargain but not companies?

I'm happy to pay more for quality products that last, and that is what I usually do. If my standard as a worker is greater, then I have the means to pay for well made products from fellow workers who also have a decent standard of living. Economic growth happens for the ground up, not trickle down. In short, I don't shop @ Wal Mart. I'd rather but Red Wing boots, that last a long time, than some cheapo crap. Too bad, Red Wing boots have moved some of their production to Mexico.

 

If the capitalists want to raise the standards so much, for the workers, which they don't and never have and that's why they fight unions so fiercely at every turn....but if they did, why does German co. move to Alabama for cheaper labor and the TPP want to open up the cheaper labor of, say, Viet Nam since the already cheap Chinese labor is getting "too costly"?

I'm not saying that capitalist want to raise standards. I'm saying that's the net result.

 

If costs in China are going up relative to Vietnam, that's because sol and labor leverage has improved as China has liberalized their economy. That's a good thing. And eventually Vietnam wages and leverage will increase. And eventually, there will be more productive vibrant economies and less places to find "cheap" labor, and that's a good thing.

 

 

As to your Walmart example, that's great that you want to and can pay for higher grade products. The other day I was in whole foods and saw about a dozen variety of eggs, from free range to fertile to vegetarian fed and a whole variety of sizes and colors and bird types. That's an incredible testament to capitalism as a system. And it would go away if the socialist have their way.

 

If industry moves out of China to Viet Nam, then there's less industry in China, right? The only reason why labor pay has slightly improved in China is, as is usually the case, labor has had to protest, and strike, and try to unionize for some years now. Labor has to fight for improvements, the capitalists generally don't fight for improvements for labor. Their $ interests are contrary, obviously.

 

Food, France, heavier socialistic society, great variety of cuisine. Italy, same deal. Capitalism is just a way of profiteering. Production and distribution can be supplied under socialism. All your advanced industries are developed thru social redistribution of tax $: "corporate welfare". Socialize the costs and privatize the profits, thats the US system.

 

The US system has socialism running throughout it in many ways, which I have gone into extensively in the past on the board here. The military is economically socialistic, for e.g.

[cornographic]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

And this talk of putting teenagers to work as a fix to poverty, is ludicrous But it would maybe limit their energy to be out committing crimes. But so would school and school activities.

Nobody is putting kids to work that don't want to work or that their family doesn't want them to work. And, nobody is talking about forcing them to do labor that is dangerous or harmful to them.

 

The bolded part is true though. If the kid is at a job, he isn't out causing trouble. And, he is also learning a skill and how to work in a work environment. School activities only go so far in a poverty area. If the household needs food on the table and the adults in the family don't have jobs and have turned to selling drugs, guess what the kid is going to be doing? He isn't going to be going to the Chess club meeting. He is going to be working a street corner somewhere selling more meth.

 

Now...take that family and allow them to work in a legitimate job and also allow that kid to do the same (within appropriate parameters) and it could be a win win.

Industrial labor is generally dangerous, you know, that's why they have OSHA and is also why workers tend to want to form unions.

Sooo....it's dangerous for a 10 -12 year old to wash dishes, mop a floor, stuff envelopes, run a cash register, mow grass....

I thought you were talking about industrial jobs. Well, your 10-12 year olds are gonna have a helluva time competing with adult latinos for those restaurant kitchen jobs. Also hard for me to see 10-12 year olds doing menial office work, sorry, just me. Children of that age used to be reimbursed for various "chores" around the house, etc, allowance--that's when dad a a better paying job, I guess.

 

And cash register! Really, you're going to let a 10 year old run the cash register @ your business? Lol, c'mon!

If they can't compete, why do we need laws to keep them out?

 

Like OSHA, we are spending money on regulations to protect against horrors that the market has already extinguished.

Your "market" gives us pollution and sh#t working conditions. Your market gives us fracking, polluting the water table with carcinogens. The market gave us the near world economic collapse of '08. That's why they have the EPA and OSHA, USDA, and the like. If you don't have OSHA, well, they just basically work people to death, sorta like what is happening in Qatar and Saudi Arabian construction sites these days. The market delivers as many bads as it does goods.

 

I dunno, you sound like a Libertarian.

You can refer to another thread on this topic, but there is scant evidence that OSHA has provided a marginal increase in worker safety.

 

And that's despite billions pouring into compliance and enforcement over the years.

 

I worked as a union carpenter for years. I have first hand experience that OSHA is a good, invaluable org. Otherwise, we'd still be working with asbestos, crap scaffolding, all kinds of crazy long hours, etc. If corp.s are penalized for noncompliance, thats their fault. They probably save in terms of potential work related lawsuits, though.