For all you Liberals

[KK]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Unions give employees collective-bargaining power. Which is more power than they started with. I don't see what you have against it. You and Wal-Mart, anti-Union. It must come full-circle to that cheap-labor thing I keep hearing so much about. Or maybe it's that personal responsiblity thing. Geeze, I can't keep your conservative values straight anymore.

It's called work ethic and yes - personal responsibility- something you should look up. If you work hard and are an asset to a company you shouldn't need to give up your personal bargaining rights to someone who may or maynot have your personal best interests at heart.

CkG

Despite your limited experience with unions, I don't see how working hard and unions are mutually exclusive. There are fields that have benefited nicely because of them. Supermarket workers for one. They'd be paid minimum wage if it wasn't for unions. Dock workers. Auto workers. Entertainment production. All of these people can now make a decent salary because of unions. Why are you so against people making a living wage? One that provides for their families? Without unions, these industries would be front-loaded with "McJobs" paying minimum wage or a few dollars more. You can't raise a family on minimum wage...

And you shouldn't have a family if you are making minimum wage. I was in a union for several years, what did it do for me. It forced me to go to management. Had I stayed union I would have been laid off even though 25% of the elder union members were totally useless. Is that fair? I don't believe so. Anyways, Going over to management my base salary is more than it was in the union, but now overtime is non-existant. Combine the union with overtime to management without overtime it's was about a 20,000 dollar paycut. Although now I have more time at home which is nice since now I have kids. Was the overtime I worked as a union member necessary, no. Most times it did no good to have the staffing we did, but the union wanted it that way, so we had to work it if we wanted to or not. Not very good business wise. Now as management we are more flexible with our work hours as we don't have to conform to any union rules. Unions in this company have outlived it's usefullness and now is a hamper on this dwindling business.

KK

 

[Kaiynne]

I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

 

[Moonbeam]

Nice post Kaiynne. We live in a society where the pigs have made the rules and the most evolved are considered fools.

 

[etech]

Kaiynne

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".

That's a ridiculous analogy. You imply that only the one who wins the race gets any reward. Wrong. The top 90% or so do very well and are well compensated for their training. It is only the person who comes in last who does not do well, the bottom 10%. The bottom 10% is usually the ones who did not prepare at all for the race.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

While I agree with you, in the interest of an adversarial system and furthering the market place of ideas, I must offer some counter points.
First and foremost: I ascribe to the belief that in order to fully realize and enjoy what you have attained, you must suffer for it. The longer and harder the road, the sweeter the reward. Those that have to suffer and fight for every inch of their success will value it that much more, and will pass those values along to their children, in fact I would go so far as to say that by their suffering innovation is born. Laziness and apathy are the enemies of innovation, by elminating those vices innovation is fostered. I liked your analogy about the race, however the simple fact here is: They all worked equally as hard, and the best equipped came out on top, you are offering the premise of financial freedom as being the limiting factor which fosters the 9 losers, however I offer the counter-premise that perhaps the limiting factor was outside of their control, but in a different way, one which is closer to the premise of the example: Natural ability. Brainpower to be exact, if they all worked equally as hard, the one who has the greatest natural ability should come out on top, however this may not always be the case, as those with money can afford to foster this ability whereas those without cannot. My point is: the one who has travalled the longer road had he worked harder than the rest would have surpassed them, and in so doing would have valued his success that much more. Passing these values down, the seeds of innovation would be instilled in the next generation, however this time it would be the wealthy child who not only had the good fortune of having wealth, but also had the want to innovate, hence in the next generation the wealthy would be back on top. You cannot dispute (using your own logic) that those who work the hardest should not deserve to be on top, however this still leaves the disadvantaged in their shackles.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

show me where I said something about other people good fortune.
I have nothing against people who are doing well, kudos for them
in fact i'm doing quite well myself. I have a good job and make good money.

with a response like that you are just proving that you don't know what I'm talking about.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

show me where I said something about other people good fortune.
I have nothing against people who are doing well, kudos for them
in fact i'm doing quite well myself. I have a good job and make good money.

with a response like that you are just proving that you don't know what I'm talking about.

I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

I am obviously one of those jokers, as I believe in surival of the fittest (those who work the hardest will reap the rewards of their labor so long as the have the intelligence to do so) I am saying that because my grandfather paid his way with blood sweat, and sacrifice I do not have to. That is my good fortune and I will not have you nor anyone else look down on me or anyone else who believes that survival of the fittest (those who work the hardest) is the way to go. Simply because I have the financial freedom that my grandfather did not.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

show me where I said something about other people good fortune.
I have nothing against people who are doing well, kudos for them
in fact i'm doing quite well myself. I have a good job and make good money.

with a response like that you are just proving that you don't know what I'm talking about.

I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

I am obviously one of those jokers, as I believe in surival of the fittest (those who work the hardest will reap the rewards of their labor so long as the have the intelligence to do so) I am saying that because my grandfather paid his way with blood sweat, and sacrifice I do not have to. That is my good fortune and I will not have you nor anyone else look down on me or anyone else who believes that survival of the fittest (those who work the hardest) is the way to go. Simply because I have the financial freedom that my grandfather did not.

you are taking my words way out of contest. You are indeed one of those people who think that socialism = laziness
it's probably hard to grasp for you that it's possible that a person can
a)be a hard worker
b)make good money
c)be a socialist

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

show me where I said something about other people good fortune.
I have nothing against people who are doing well, kudos for them
in fact i'm doing quite well myself. I have a good job and make good money.

with a response like that you are just proving that you don't know what I'm talking about.

I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

I am obviously one of those jokers, as I believe in surival of the fittest (those who work the hardest will reap the rewards of their labor so long as the have the intelligence to do so) I am saying that because my grandfather paid his way with blood sweat, and sacrifice I do not have to. That is my good fortune and I will not have you nor anyone else look down on me or anyone else who believes that survival of the fittest (those who work the hardest) is the way to go. Simply because I have the financial freedom that my grandfather did not.

you are taking my words way out of contest. You are indeed one of those people who think that socialism = laziness
it's probably hard to grasp for you that it's possible that a person can
a)be a hard worker
b)make good money
c)be a socialist

Find me someone that meets the three criteria you just set and I will show you a fool. BTW I'm sure you meant "context" words out of
context Give me a reason that another should benefit from my labor? It is against human nature, which is to survive at all costs. Philanthropy is a load of garbage made up by people who served to gain something from it (the lazy) If I do not serve to gain something from it (be aware that not all gain is monetary, and that I do gain satisfaction from giving to my family and friends) then it is not something I will do. I won't go out of my way to keep from helping someone, but I won't go out of my way to help someone if there is no chance or reimbursement. Now I know that a lot of you will think I am selfish, etc. Yes I am. Since that is a part of my nature I do not take it as an insult, to do so would be to deny my nature. Also I do give to "charitable" organizations, but for reasons, like hospice, or the American Cancer Society.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

nice post Kaiynne

LOL - I had to look up "succinctness" because I had no idea what it meant (English is not my primary language)

I agree with everything you say

this forum is infested with narrow minded people who believe "in the survival of the fittest" and see unions as a dangerous communist thing. They fail to realize that because of the struggle of the unions in the last century and regulation to protect employees they are able to live the comfortable life they have today. I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

My grandfather was the son of immigrants, and worked for 50 years on the railroad, sacrificing daily so that his children would have a better life. He put them through college through frugal saving, and a devotion to his cause. His son (my uncle) worked his way up to VP in canon for a time and is now with another optical producer. My mother was the first in her family to go to college, and now because of his sacrifices, I have the benefits I do. Money is not a concern for me like it was for him, yet through the values which he has instilled in me I do not spend money haphazardly. I don't leave my money idle, I invest it so that I may one day pass along these values and the fruits of my labor to my children. The next time before you spout off about others good fortune take a moment to think about how they got into that position.

show me where I said something about other people good fortune.
I have nothing against people who are doing well, kudos for them
in fact i'm doing quite well myself. I have a good job and make good money.

with a response like that you are just proving that you don't know what I'm talking about.

I would have love to see these jokers at work in the 19th century where raw capitalism was the way forward and where you had to work 6 days a week, 14 hours a day with a pay barely enough to survive and feed your children.

I am obviously one of those jokers, as I believe in surival of the fittest (those who work the hardest will reap the rewards of their labor so long as the have the intelligence to do so) I am saying that because my grandfather paid his way with blood sweat, and sacrifice I do not have to. That is my good fortune and I will not have you nor anyone else look down on me or anyone else who believes that survival of the fittest (those who work the hardest) is the way to go. Simply because I have the financial freedom that my grandfather did not.

you are taking my words way out of contest. You are indeed one of those people who think that socialism = laziness
it's probably hard to grasp for you that it's possible that a person can
a)be a hard worker
b)make good money
c)be a socialist

Find me someone that meets the three criteria you just set and I will show you a fool. BTW I'm sure you meant "context" words out of
context Give me a reason that another should benefit from my labor? It is against human nature, which is to survive at all costs. Philanthropy is a load of garbage made up by people who served to gain something from it (the lazy) If I do not serve to gain something from it (be aware that not all gain is monetary, and that I do gain satisfaction from giving to my family and friends) then it is not something I will do. I won't go out of my way to keep from helping someone, but I won't go out of my way to help someone if there is no chance or reimbursement. Now I know that a lot of you will think I am selfish, etc. Yes I am. Since that is a part of my nature I do not take it as an insult, to do so would be to deny my nature. Also I do give to "charitable" organizations, but for reasons, like hospice, or the American Cancer Society.

so we are discussing vocabulary. I made a mistake. I'm sorry that you have trouble reading my English but we can always have a discussion in French / Dutch / Flemish but I have serious doubts that you know anything else then English.

btw: I'm a hard worker, make good money and consider myself a socialist

 

[DaiShan]

Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

Good by me I was tiring of your boring drivel, I beat you on the issue, and hung you at the gallows you set up for me.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

Good by me I was tiring of your boring drivel, I beat you on the issue, and hung you at the gallows you set up for me.

yeah right you beat me

you can continue now with the cattle humping and the flagwaving
you are just one of those brainwashed cheap labor conservatives

 

[josphII]

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

what trash. comparing the benefits of being wealthy and affirmative action??? what would you prefer - giving ppl spots in universities and promotions because they are black, and taxing the rich 90%?

and last time i checked Yale is a PRIVATE institution, should they not be able to do as they please?? whats also funny is the very racist affirmative action policies at Yale, and other private schools, make the very racist affirmative action policies at UM (and other public schools) look like a joke.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

inadequite eduction, poor home life, blah blah blah. this is one reason why so many ppl are dislike democrats - because all they have are excuses! its easier to bitch about something you dont have, rather that doing something about it.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

easy for you to say that, considering you are not in the top 1%

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

i think everybody agrees that in theory it would be nice for teachers to be paid 150k, but ill tell you this, if salaries were suddenly raised to 150k probably less than 1% of current teachers would be re-hired. and this is another reason why ppl dislike democrats. the primary responsibility of education is the parents responsibility, not the teachers. when parents stop blaming other ppl for their son/daughtes lack of education and start taking responsibility you will realize that getting more qualified teachers isnt a nessesity, its a bonus. the fact that so many ppl DO succeed in public schools is proof of this.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage.

what garbage. this is NOT the system in place right now in America and when ppl stop blaming 'random chance' and realize that if they simply work hard they will reep the benefits. is anybody else disturbed by this total lack of personal responsibility? when ppl stop blaming others for their problems (weather it be education, lack of a good job, etc) and start taking responsibility for their actions (or inactions) maybe theyll realize that they can do something about it.

Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

 

[DaiShan]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

Good by me I was tiring of your boring drivel, I beat you on the issue, and hung you at the gallows you set up for me.

yeah right you beat me

you can continue now with the cattle humping and the flagwaving
you are just one of those brainwashed cheap labor conservatives

Think before you speak. I am left of center yet you accuse me of being a conservative, then you accuse me of bestiality. Those are ad hominem attacks and adequately characterize why you could not push your point. You lack the ability to stay on topic as many here seem to do. When they can think of nothing intelligent to say on the issue, they attack the man.

 

[freegeeks]

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

Good by me I was tiring of your boring drivel, I beat you on the issue, and hung you at the gallows you set up for me.

yeah right you beat me

you can continue now with the cattle humping and the flagwaving
you are just one of those brainwashed cheap labor conservatives

Think before you speak. I am left of center yet you accuse me of being a conservative, then you accuse me of bestiality. Those are ad hominem attacks and adequately characterize why you could not push your point. You lack the ability to stay on topic as many here seem to do. When they can think of nothing intelligent to say on the issue, they attack the man.

At least I can think you seem to lack any brain at all.
you started attacking me by childishly pointing at my English

continue the humping and the flagwaving

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Kaiynne
I am shocked at some of the statements made by people in this topic.

"The scum of society." if you are able to denote another human being as scum, you have a problem. The majority of your scum, are in fact children. The fact that they were born into terrible circumstances is no more their fault, than the fact that George W. Bush was born into an old money family is his fault. Do you think that he would have made it into Yale if he had been born in an inner city neighborhood in Austin? He can hardly utter a sentence without fumbling, and this after recieving the finest education money can buy. Cheap labor conservatives decry affirmative action, why do they not do the same for the legacy system, the system that supplanted a worthy student with a George W.

And CAD, all i have read from you is essentially summed up in a few words, if an employer doesn't pay you a living wage then find one who does. So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage. Wait, i hear the answer allready, you don't deserve a living wage if you are not qualified for one. You know what i say to that. Everyone is deserving of a living wage. Every person can go in many different directions, some people fall by the wayside, and in many cases it is not their fault, they have been left behind by inadequite eductation, or a poor home life. Would every single one of those people have rather been born a George W. ? of course they would. Can everyone be born into that life? No. But everyone can be born into a situation where there are measures which will prevent them from falling through the cracks. How could anyone advocate a system that does not provide assistance for people who need it. The situation that you have so much praise for rewards arbitrarily and punishes even more arbitrarily. You could only support it if you had an immense amount to gain from it which it sounds to me that you obviously do.

To the person that said that all liberals are either lazy or rich, i say, i am neither rich nor lazy. Yet i support social programs and would gladly pay taxes of 90% to see those programs properly funded if i were in the top 1% of the wealthy.

To the person who thinks teachers are lazy, explain this equation to me, teachers on average make less than 50 thousand a year, this is something like 10 to 100 times less than your average CEO, now you tell me who is providing a more important service, the CEO or the Teacher. Also tell me how if all teachers were paid $150,000 a year you would not have the absolute best and brightest teaching children, think of the benefit this would have for society to eductate every child to their maximum potential. Your average teacher is not lazy they are usually overworked and underpaid and probably resentfull that they chose to try to educate when all of the people they knew in college who studied economics are now making six figure salaries.

Somewhere along the line this country had instilled in it an attitude of kill or be killed, now you tell me who that benefits more the cheap labor conservative or the workers trying to out compete each other for increasingly scarce resources.

The problem with sentiments people like CAD will espouse are simply that for every winner in that competition there are nine losers, do we cast off these loser and relegate them to a life of misery or do we understand that if there are nine losers for every winner everyone loses.

i know this has been long and somewhat rambling but stick with me because i need to really drive home this concept that is rather obvious yet counter intuitive.

say you have a race, and all of people in the race are unfit and out of shape, there will still be a winner. Now say that there are ten people in the race, and the person who comes first has put in no more effort than any of the others he or she just happens to be more naturally talented than the rest. It is irrelevant to the race who wins, there will allways be one winner by the definition of the event "race".
Now say everyone in that previous race trains as hard as possible, and equally hard, no one person trains harder than the rest. If we hold a second race will there be more than one winner? No of course not, so all of the other people who trained as hard as the person who eventually won get nothing for their efforts.
This is the system in place in America right now, and it rewards those who through no merit of their own have an initial advantage. Why is this revered so much. Why is this system seen as the pinnacle of all possible systems, the reason is that the person who wins the race gets to tell the story, the nine losers vanish from sight.

CAD you are obviously a winner, but tell me do you feel anything at all for the ones who didn't win? I hope you do.

To the person who said that there are some crazy mofo's out to kick us back into the 19th century, i envy your succinctness.

"So tell me what you would do if all of the employers you were qualified for were unwilling to pay you a living wage." - You aren't "qualified" then.
A living wage isn't THAT much if you look at it. People today need "things" and think "things" are what makes life livable. Case in point - I recently bumped into a group of people that were talking about how "poor" their neighbor or freind was. I politely asked if they knew how much that person made and they told me. I then asked what this person owns. I also asked what this person does with their free time. Not only does this "poor" person make more money than I do(barely), he also owns his home and has 3 cars, a satelite dish, etc etc etc. The also informed me that he liked to "enjoy" his freetime(they wouldn't say more than that). I ask you - do people know what "poor" is anymore? Do people realize it is their lifestyle that makes them "poor". A liveable wage is relative - is my point. Can you raise a family working for minimum wage? maybe - but it wouldn't be easy, but again if you are making minimum wage you aren't skilled, or work at a job that requires little to no skill. What is a "livable" wage to you Kaiynne?

Employers who don't pay their workers enough or don't treat them well, will eventually not have any workers left and will cease to exist IF people tell them to get bent. People seem to enjoy being helpless and seem to need to rely on other people to do thier bidding. That isn't what America stands for, it doesn't promote good work ethic and knowledge, and it doesn't help to promote self reliance and responsibility.

America is all about rising up from the depths of disparity - Everyone has a chance to "make it" - sure some have the advantage of heritage but that shouldn't be used as an excuse for you to not work hard or give up. I choose to work hard because I know someday I will find that one chance to do something great, does that make me dispise those that don't aspire to do great things? No. I just feel that by creating unions for everything, you legitimize their fear of success and destroy their self-reliance.

Obviously there are places for unions and their original intent was honorable but it has gotten to the point of enabling people to fail - which is a whole different pandora's box.

CkG

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan

Originally posted by: freegeeks

Originally posted by: DaiShan
Ne Soyez pas stupide. Also you meant anything else BESIDES English. Now explain to me why you think that others deserve the fruits of your labor? I will gladly take them, just want to know why I am taking them.

I refuse having a discussion who is pointing all the time to my bad english grammar skills
you are the living proof how close minded some people are


goodbye

Good by me I was tiring of your boring drivel, I beat you on the issue, and hung you at the gallows you set up for me.

yeah right you beat me

you can continue now with the cattle humping and the flagwaving
you are just one of those brainwashed cheap labor conservatives

Think before you speak. I am left of center yet you accuse me of being a conservative, then you accuse me of bestiality. Those are ad hominem attacks and adequately characterize why you could not push your point. You lack the ability to stay on topic as many here seem to do. When they can think of nothing intelligent to say on the issue, they attack the man.

At least I can think you seem to lack any brain at all.
you started attacking me by childishly pointing at my English

continue the humping and the flagwaving

Hehehehe....


...and the rift grows....



CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Hehehehe....


...and the rift grows....



CkG

That's the problem with liberals. They keep demonstrating they are capable of independent thought.

Not like those neo-cons that march together in rigid lock-step. (Or is that goosesteps?)

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Hehehehe....


...and the rift grows....



CkG

That's the problem with liberals. They keep demonstrating they are capable of independent thought.

Not like those neo-cons that march together in rigid lock-step. (Or is that goosesteps?)

No - it means the glue that binds all the fringe groups together as liberals/democrats is cracking. You can call it independent thought if it makes you "feel" better but in reality is no more independent than what individual conservatives think. It's just that we have more common base thoughts and you feel the need to attack it as "blindness".

I'd really hate to see the Democrats break apart since it is such fun watching them trip overthemselves and bloody their own noses day after day. But if they must split - they must.

Any guesses what that "glue" is?

CkG

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Hehehehe....


...and the rift grows....



CkG

That's the problem with liberals. They keep demonstrating they are capable of independent thought.

Not like those neo-cons that march together in rigid lock-step. (Or is that goosesteps?)

No - it means the glue that binds all the fringe groups together as liberals/democrats is cracking. You can call it independent thought if it makes you "feel" better but in reality is no more independent than what individual conservatives think. It's just that we have more common base thoughts and you feel the need to attack it as "blindness".

I'd really hate to see the Democrats break apart since it is such fun watching them trip overthemselves and bloody their own noses day after day. But if they must split - they must.

Any guesses what that "glue" is?

CkG

Love for America? A burning desire to see this country remain proud and free? Concern for their fellow man, a recognition that in a truly civilized society, those who benefit from our capitalist system bear at least a little responsiblity for making sure we share the fruits of our success with those who don't? Concern for the environment, i.e., the silly notion that their children and grandchildren deserve fresh air and natural beauty? Fiscal responsibility? Repulsion at our new policies of global imperialism and pre-remptive invasions based on lies? Truth and integrity in the White House?

Just say when.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Hehehehe....


...and the rift grows....



CkG

That's the problem with liberals. They keep demonstrating they are capable of independent thought.

Not like those neo-cons that march together in rigid lock-step. (Or is that goosesteps?)

No - it means the glue that binds all the fringe groups together as liberals/democrats is cracking. You can call it independent thought if it makes you "feel" better but in reality is no more independent than what individual conservatives think. It's just that we have more common base thoughts and you feel the need to attack it as "blindness".

I'd really hate to see the Democrats break apart since it is such fun watching them trip overthemselves and bloody their own noses day after day. But if they must split - they must.

Any guesses what that "glue" is?

CkG

Love for America? A burning desire to see this country remain proud and free? Concern for their fellow man, a recognition that in a truly civilized society, those who benefit from our capitalist system bear at least a little responsiblity for making sure we share the fruits of our success with those who don't? Concern for the environment, i.e., the silly notion that their children and grandchildren deserve fresh air and natural beauty? Fiscal responsibility? Repulsion at our new policies of global imperialism and pre-remptive invasions based on lies? Truth and integrity in the White House?

Just say when.

Nope - keep trying.

CkG