Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
Amnesty Bill for illegal immigrants defeated in Senate.
Friday, June 29, 2007 1:44 PM
FINN MAC CUMHAL
Quote:Originally posted by rue: There is no scarcity. The only things that have absolute limits are enviromental - arable land, fresh water, trees, oceans, air, ores.
Friday, June 29, 2007 1:49 PM
RUE
I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!
Friday, June 29, 2007 1:56 PM
SIGNYM
I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:15 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: And yet, even with the overcrowded world as it is today there is enough food for everyone - it's the poor distribution that causes starvation. There is more than enough air to breathe (though it's beyond its fluorocarbon and CO2 carrying capacity), and even fresh water to drink. The only ores that might be in short supply soon are oil and gold. But that is a much a problem of waste as anything else. So no, even now at this point there are no natural shortages - just human-created ones.
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:36 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:41 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: "If there were no scarcity, then everything would be free and we would all have everything we want, in as much as we want, whenever we wanted it." No, you're confusing things. Let's take a primitive tribe where survival is whatever you can gather on your own. These things are 'free' (no monetary cost) but everyone has to work for them. So clearly even when things are 'free' you can't have as much of whatever, whenever.
Quote:Originally posted by rue: There is also the difference between work and jobs. IF people with no jobs and lots of time could muster the initial capital, they could build their own homes and grow their own food - they could work for their survival. But b/c there are people who 'own the means of production' and the accumulated capital, the natural process of self-sufficiency is blocked.
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:49 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:53 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: No, the limiting factor here is TIME - people effort.
Quote:Originally posted by rue: 'Cause it's new to you. Just ask yourself this - WHY is it that all around the globe there are people with no homes, no food, no clothes - and lots and lots of time on their hands. You'd think that with all that time to kill they'd build themselves homes, grow their own food, 'work' to sustain themselves even without a 'job'. Why doesn't that happen? What is the disconnect between their time and work - and their survival?
Friday, June 29, 2007 2:56 PM
FLETCH2
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Fletch2. You're partly correct in why places with $1/day labor have high unemployment. The highest employment goes to the nations with the highest productivity. Wage reduction is a bounded figure. You can only reduce wages to a certain point but then starvation takes over. OTOH you can increase productivity a hundred-fold or more with technology. Cheap labor simply cannot compete with technologized labor. Now, class... does anyone see where this is going? --------------------------------- Always look upstream.
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:01 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:03 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:09 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: "That doesn’t make it any less scarce." No, it's not scarce in the sense of being unavailable to them. People are using their own time and effort.
Quote:Originally posted by rue: "I suspect that it probably does happen. If it doesn’t happen, it’s perhaps because they are expecting some handout from the government or some other entity." You mean people who spend all day combing the dumps of Manila are too lazy to find a job ? Or that they are looking for a handout form the government ? Do you say the same about the people who spend 16 hours a day digging for gold in the open pit in Brazil ? Finn, if you think that people all over the globe are too damned lazy to get off their asses so as not to starve --- if you think they're waiting for government handouts when there are no government programs - you've got issues.
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:13 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:24 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: Finn, 'ya need to think a little. I've already made my point - it was a few posts back. The rest is explainin'. I can't help it if you don't get it.
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:28 PM
Quote:You mean people who spend all day combing the dumps of Manila are too lazy to find a job ? Or that they are looking for a handout from the government ? Do you say the same about the people who spend 16 hours a day digging for gold in the open pit in Brazil ? Finn, if you think that people all over the globe are too damned lazy to get off their asses so as not to starve --- if you think they're waiting for government handouts when there are no government programs - you've got reality issues.
Friday, June 29, 2007 3:58 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: So Finn, have you figured out how it is that people can be homeless and starving and STILL not have "jobs"?
Friday, June 29, 2007 4:09 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 4:20 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Finn, you are a dunderhead! (Consider that friendly exasperation.) How do you explain the many other nations with NO minimum wage who still have starvation and high unemployment? You keep pointing to one example that MIGHT back up your minimum-wage fixation (Maybe. It needs to be examined) and ignore the dozens of other examples that refute it. I know you're not stupid. THINK man! --------------------------------- Always look upstream.
Friday, June 29, 2007 4:43 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 5:21 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 5:22 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 7:00 PM
6IXSTRINGJACK
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: I guess your question to me is: Do I care about the people working illegally in the USA? My answer is: Not really.
Friday, June 29, 2007 7:57 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 8:07 PM
Friday, June 29, 2007 8:08 PM
PIRATENEWS
John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!
Friday, June 29, 2007 10:33 PM
Quote:Originally posted by rue: Finn, what I find weird (and frankly perverse) is that you would rather assume a half a billion or so people around the globe are poor b/c they're too lazy and too entitled to work.
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Finn- You've said at one time or another in this thread that starving people are lazy, that rich people create jobs, that the minimum wage causes unemployment and poverty.
Friday, June 29, 2007 11:17 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: . Fletch2- What I'm trying to get you to see is that increasing productivity and reducing wages has a limit to it's applicability. The endpoint to unfettered capitalism is either (a) you reduce wages to the point where people are working but getting paid next to nothing or (b) you maximize your productivity to the point where you employ no one at all. Please understand that I'm looking at boundary conditions to make a point. Then what? --------------------------------- Always look upstream.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 12:25 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Fletch2: Now in theory you could develop what I call IP land barons --- that is people that make nothing of their own but own patents such that they can extort licence payments from people that DO make things.
Quote:It is almost impossible to force someone bellow that level and expect them to keep working.
Quote:Demographics say that as the boomer population ages the workforce will shrink, as it does so potential employers will have to compete for workers and you can expect wages to rise.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 12:56 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: A great analogy of this would be anyone working in the recording industry or the RIAA that would be out of jobs if there were no Artists, or if it becomes more lucrative for the Artist (which seems may the case recently) to start your own label or work with independent labels.
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Won't have a choice if trends keep up and we're all working for the same employer one day.
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Not exactly sure where you're getting your Demographic data from here. Possibly a poll from before the civil rights movement that only included white demographic data.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:08 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal: Of course you have a choice, unless the government enacts slavery. If the only jobs available are jobs that don’t pay enough for someone to survive, then the person will have to quite the job (or not seek it in the first place) and start foraging, farming or something else, but they certainly can’t continue to work a job that isn’t providing for their basic survival and interfering with their efforts to do so.
Quote:“[[]T[]]he boomer population.” As in baby boomers. From the 40s to the 60s the population in much of the developed world spiked because people were having so many babies. Those babies are now a large workforce, which will eventually retire or die, but who have not had enough babies to replace all of them. In other words the workforce in the developed world will shrink.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:11 AM
KHYRON
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Quote:Originally posted by Fletch2: Demographics say that as the boomer population ages the workforce will shrink, as it does so potential employers will have to compete for workers and you can expect wages to rise. Not exactly sure where you're getting your Demographic data from here. Possibly a poll from before the civil rights movement that only included white demographic data. Every place I look shows world population exponentially growing out of control. The only people that aren't having more kids in thier families are the primarily white, suburbanite middle-class people who would rather pay health insurance and have plasma TV's than have 3 or more kids. Poor people all around the world, regardless of government assistance or the lack thereof, have no problem with spitting out as many kids as their bodies will physically let them. Now that the 3rd world is catching up quickly in education and technology, we're not going to experience what you're talking about until we get everyone in the world on birth control, there is a "Children of Men" type syndrome or a worldwide epidemic.
Quote:Originally posted by Fletch2: Demographics say that as the boomer population ages the workforce will shrink, as it does so potential employers will have to compete for workers and you can expect wages to rise.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Thanks for trying to shoot down my valid theories so quickly. Care to argue the entire point this time without picking out the sentence that you want to argue? For God sake man.... Think outside of the box.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:19 AM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:21 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Finn mac Cumhal: Actually the fact that your response is composed of pejorative personal attacks instead of some sort of reasoned reply or clarification is pretty clear to me that I was right on the money the first time.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:23 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: Can't take the heat, get out of RWED. I talk like that to everybody who talks to me like I'm stupid jack.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:31 AM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 1:49 AM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:52 AM
Quote:Originally posted by Khyron: A truly global workforce is still a couple of years (maybe decades) away and I expect the US to engage in a very active immigration program for both skilled and unskilled labour once the boomers have left the workforce. Then again, perhaps the boomers leaving the workforce might even be the incentive for the US to start laying the foundations for a global workforce... who knows...
Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:10 AM
SERGEANTX
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Do I care that people work illegally in this country? Yes I do. very much! Am I much concerned about their welfare in this country? Not so much.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:17 AM
Quote:Originally posted by 6ixStringJack: The amount of people on the planet is still growing, that much is for sure. Maybe the growth rate really is decreasing though. (This is another topic that I admit I really can't say because there is far too many variables and no way of truly taking a census of every living being and cataloging the rate in every nook and cranny of this crazy rock we live on). Personally, I hope the birth to life rate is declining healthfully and slowly. I would love for a worldwide decline in birth, but a voluntary one. I keep picturing in my mind an Earth completley spent of resources where we're breating toxic air with little Oxygen and tons of Carbon Monoxide and our collective Governments are using Chinese tactics to make sure we aren't procreating. Population control has gotta happen somehow, sometime and soon. There's got to be a balance. I just hope it happens naturally in a good way, rather than forced upon us at the end of a barrel.
Quote:Ain't it kinda funny how the things that made some of the best Sci-Fi short stories, novels and movies we grew up with are actually either happening now or are something that we can really imagine could very well be the case in our lifetimes or our children's lifetimes?
Saturday, June 30, 2007 5:36 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SergeantX: Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Do I care that people work illegally in this country? Yes I do. very much! Am I much concerned about their welfare in this country? Not so much. I think this is the part of the 'get tough on immigration' rhetoric that I find so distasteful. I do care about the welfare of these people. They want to be Americans so bad, they're willing to break the law to do it. I admire their spirit. I prefer 'amnesty' to criminalizing them further and creating more intrusive government power in the process. This problem developed because we no longer see our nation as a magnet for freedom loving people - we see it as an exclusive club for the privileged and the rich. SergeantX "Dream a little dream or you can live a little dream. I'd rather live it, cause dreamers always chase but never get it." Aesop Rock
Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:29 AM
Quote:So no, your arguments are a fallacy and as such do not bear further consideration.
Quote:Let's look at your two end points. First productivity can never rise to the point where nobody makes something... Even if manufacture was completely automated you would still need to pay industrial designers to design your products, people to test them, package, market and sell them... So no... you do still need a workforce of some kind... sorry.
Quote:Now in theory you could develop what I call IP land barons
Quote:As to the other idea, the one where everyone works for nothing much at all that doesn't work either unless you legalise slavery again. At the end of the day every employee has a cost base a set of standing bills necessary to survive. It is almost impossible to force someone bellow that level and expect them to keep working.
Quote:If there is an abundance of labour then wages are lower
Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:46 AM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 7:48 AM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 8:16 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Quote:So no, your arguments are a fallacy and as such do not bear further consideration. Oh for heaven's sake Fletch2! Are you not aware of hypothetical arguments?
Quote: Quote:Let's look at your two end points. First productivity can never rise to the point where nobody makes something... Even if manufacture was completely automated you would still need to pay industrial designers to design your products, people to test them, package, market and sell them... So no... you do still need a workforce of some kind... sorry. First of all, automation is far more advanced than you think. There are fewer and fewer reasons to involve humans, even in the design process. When automation is maximally applied, only a small percent of people are required to design and troubleshoot. Do you see any economic reason - not technical reason but economic reason- why we would not reach that state of maximal automation? And if we reach that state, what does "everyone else" do for a living?
Quote: Quote:Now in theory you could develop what I call IP land barons That is one direction that we're heading...
Quote: Quote:As to the other idea, the one where everyone works for nothing much at all that doesn't work either unless you legalise slavery again. At the end of the day every employee has a cost base a set of standing bills necessary to survive. It is almost impossible to force someone bellow that level and expect them to keep working. The end state of this situation is that people starve because the economy has no room for them. Do you see any economic - not moral or social but economic- reason why people will not be allowed to starve?
Quote: Quote:If there is an abundance of labour then wages are lower People are competing against machines. Quote:Demographics say that as the boomer population ages the workforce will shrink, as it does so potential employers will have to compete for workers and you can expect wages to rise. In the USA. But not elsewhere in the world where half the population is under 15.
Saturday, June 30, 2007 8:19 AM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: Sarge- people are coming here for money not "freedon".
Saturday, June 30, 2007 2:17 PM
Saturday, June 30, 2007 3:18 PM
Quote:Originally posted by SignyM: What I DON'T want is (a) people who are in the country illegally who can't avail themselves of their legal rights and (b) people who are in ths country legally who don't know their rights.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL