Is Nevada rancher a freeloader?

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#344 Apr 26, 2014
Real Tea Party wrote:
<quoted text>
They pay their wages, when they underpaid they seek government assistance which cost us.
Are you suggesting that wage for a specific position should be based on family size, or living situation?

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#345 Apr 26, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you suggesting that wage for a specific position should be based on family size, or living situation?
That was a New Deal policy, though I can't imagine any liberals would defend that today

http://profam.org/pub/fia/fia_1605.htm
Real Tea Party

Reynoldsburg, OH

#346 Apr 26, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you suggesting that wage for a specific position should be based on family size, or living situation?
I'm suggesting that any employer with morals would pay their workers enough to support their family so that they will not have to depend on government assistance nor living on the street working 60 hours a week! Is that too much to ask? When I milk 2 billions a year profit as a CEO do I really need to drain every production out of my worker paying them $2 an hour? You would love working in India I heard they don't even pay their workers on time!

“I'm right”

Since: Oct 12

Rolla, MO

#347 Apr 26, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>I'm not sure what your point(s) is(/are).

I said that if that's what the citizens of Nevada (and other similarly situated western states) desire, they should elect representatives who are willing to work to build consensus in Congress and advocate for their desires and interests. They haven't.

As for secession, I disagree. I think that race has been run and decided well over 150 years ago.

woof
My point relates to your comment that we just elect a new guy.

If the founders found the perfect balance of representation, why not explicitly forbade secession? Why did we need a Bill of Rights if all we had to do was elect a new guy?

Thomas Jefferson thought a little rebellion now and then was a good thing.

Here's a little further reading if you are up to it...

Madison quickly dismisses the idea that constitutional provisions alone will prevent an abuse of political power. He argues that mere "parchment barriers" are not adequate "against the encroaching spirit of power."{11}

He also believed that the legislature posed the greatest threat to the separation of powers. "The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex."{12} The framers therefore divided Congress into a bicameral legislature and hoped that the Senate would play a role in checking the passions of popular majorities (Federalist Paper #63).
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#348 Apr 26, 2014
killa_the_compassionate wrote:
<quoted text>
My point relates to your comment that we just elect a new guy.
If the founders found the perfect balance of representation, why not explicitly forbade secession? Why did we need a Bill of Rights if all we had to do was elect a new guy?
Thomas Jefferson thought a little rebellion now and then was a good thing.
Here's a little further reading if you are up to it...
Madison quickly dismisses the idea that constitutional provisions alone will prevent an abuse of political power. He argues that mere "parchment barriers" are not adequate "against the encroaching spirit of power."{11}
He also believed that the legislature posed the greatest threat to the separation of powers. "The legislative department is everywhere extending the sphere of its activity and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex."{12} The framers therefore divided Congress into a bicameral legislature and hoped that the Senate would play a role in checking the passions of popular majorities (Federalist Paper #63).
By "rebellion", Jefferson was referring to protests (specifically, Shay's Rebellion), not the complete overthrow of government.

http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer/let...

woof

“I'm right”

Since: Oct 12

Rolla, MO

#349 Apr 26, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>By "rebellion", Jefferson was referring to protests (specifically, Shay's Rebellion), not the complete overthrow of government.

http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer/let...

woof
I noticed you didn't respond to most of what I wrote. I'm used to it because isn't easy to change the truth.

You are right that Jefferson was referring to Shay's Rebellion. One of the reasons for Shay's Rebellion was "fiscally harsh government policies instituted in 1785". You fell right into my trap. "Now and then" implies more than Shay, my friend.

Publius
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#350 Apr 26, 2014
killa_the_compassionate wrote:
<quoted text>
I noticed you didn't respond to most of what I wrote. I'm used to it because isn't easy to change the truth.
You are right that Jefferson was referring to Shay's Rebellion. One of the reasons for Shay's Rebellion was "fiscally harsh government policies instituted in 1785". You fell right into my trap. "Now and then" implies more than Shay, my friend.
Publius
I didn't respond to the rest of what you wrote because I really am not sure what you are trying to say, beyond quoting Madison.

woof

“I'm right”

Since: Oct 12

Rolla, MO

#351 Apr 26, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't respond to the rest of what you wrote because I really am not sure what you are trying to say, beyond quoting Madison.

woof
Madison, the Father of our Constitution,
was expressing his concerns about those who seek power. He writes specifically of his worry of the legislature and the potential power they can gain and they might seek.

If it were as simple as voting them out, why would he still have concern of government? You wrote that they should simply change politicians in Nevada. Even to suggest that shows a huge naivety that politicians are unable to manipulate the outcome of elections. How close was Reid's election? What concerns were there in the results? Madison has been vindicated yet again.

Publius

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#352 Apr 26, 2014
killa_the_compassionate wrote:
<quoted text>
Madison, the Father of our Constitution,
was expressing his concerns about those who seek power. He writes specifically of his worry of the legislature and the potential power they can gain and they might seek.
If it were as simple as voting them out, why would he still have concern of government? You wrote that they should simply change politicians in Nevada. Even to suggest that shows a huge naivety that politicians are unable to manipulate the outcome of elections. How close was Reid's election? What concerns were there in the results? Madison has been vindicated yet again.
Publius
Reid was almost certainly elected in 2010 by fraud.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#353 Apr 26, 2014
-The-Artist- wrote:
<quoted text>
That was a New Deal policy, though I can't imagine any liberals would defend that today
http://profam.org/pub/fia/fia_1605.htm
I don't know...they keep complaining that low/minimum wage won't support a family..... what else could they be angling for?

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#354 Apr 26, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't know...they keep complaining that low/minimum wage won't support a family..... what else could they be angling for?
The left has their own 1950s mythology

After blowing up most of the world's industry in WWII, you could be functionally illiterate and still get a middle class industrial job in what we now call the Rust Belt.

The left thinks this is because of unionization. And they think it is the norm if the eeevil rich people don't use the "trickle down" voodoo economics.

At its inflation adjusted highest, you still couldn't support a SAHM and two kids on minimum wage.

It serves as a nice talking point to economically ignorant voters, and is also tied into certain union contracts driving raises.

Similar to the "gender pay gap", which would be a good thing if it actually existed, as it would increase marital stability.

“Ludibrium est onus genio”

Since: Dec 11

Planet Earth

#355 Apr 26, 2014
Real Tea Party wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm suggesting that any employer with morals would pay their workers enough to support their family so that they will not have to depend on government assistance nor living on the street working 60 hours a week! Is that too much to ask?
And we're back to you holding an employer responsible for something he has no control over (unless he were to illegally not hire people with families). The low wage job is fine for many people. and those who aren't fine with it have the choice to either have more than one breadwinner, or to not apply for the low wage job. In either case it's not the employer's problem. In fact, it isn't even any of his business, as several states bar him from even asking family status.

By the way, we're talking about a small number of families. Nationwide 78% of minimum wage workers had no children. and only 16% of them live at or below poverty level (because they are living with another wage earner). On the other hand, maybe you believe that workers who are living with other workers should be paid less so the others can be paid more. That sounds about right for a redistributionist.
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#356 Apr 26, 2014
killa_the_compassionate wrote:
<quoted text>
Madison, the Father of our Constitution,
was expressing his concerns about those who seek power. He writes specifically of his worry of the legislature and the potential power they can gain and they might seek.
If it were as simple as voting them out, why would he still have concern of government? You wrote that they should simply change politicians in Nevada. Even to suggest that shows a huge naivety that politicians are unable to manipulate the outcome of elections. How close was Reid's election? What concerns were there in the results? Madison has been vindicated yet again.
Publius
Madison was a pragmatist as well, who was wise enough to know that no system of governance, no matter how well constructed, devised, and planned, was immune to the foibles of man's desire for power.

He not only feared concentration of power within the legislature, but in the judiciary and executive, as well as across all three simultaneously.

http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa48.htm

I believe he wrote on at least two occasions of the benefits of term limits for elective office.

Now regarding the power inherent in Nevada voters, Harry Reid, and any particular politician's ability to "manipulate the outcome of an election", and how all of that might relate to changing the current state of public land as a percentage of the state of Nevada, I am not sure what you are suggesting.

I am merely suggesting that within the system of representative government Madison and his contemporaries set up, the people of Nevada (and other western states) have the ability to elect someone to their Congressional delegations that will advocate for their interests in Congress. One major problem for them is their small population, and hence, their small delegation. And regardless of what you and Karl imply, Reid's re-election has been certified.

What would you, or Madison for that matter, suggest that the people of Nevada do??

woof
They cannot kill a Spook

Toledo, OH

#357 Apr 26, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
Madison was a pragmatist as well, who was wise enough to know that no system of governance, no matter how well constructed, devised, and planned, was immune to the foibles of man's desire for power.
He not only feared concentration of power within the legislature, but in the judiciary and executive, as well as across all three simultaneously.
http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa48.htm
I believe he wrote on at least two occasions of the benefits of term limits for elective office.
Now regarding the power inherent in Nevada voters, Harry Reid, and any particular politician's ability to "manipulate the outcome of an election", and how all of that might relate to changing the current state of public land as a percentage of the state of Nevada, I am not sure what you are suggesting.
I am merely suggesting that within the system of representative government Madison and his contemporaries set up, the people of Nevada (and other western states) have the ability to elect someone to their Congressional delegations that will advocate for their interests in Congress. One major problem for them is their small population, and hence, their small delegation. And regardless of what you and Karl imply, Reid's re-election has been certified.
What would you, or Madison for that matter, suggest that the people of Nevada do??
woof
Through Reid out in the dessert with nothing except his skin. No food no water no clothing. When the system is rigged such as in Nevada and Chicongo the decent Citizens are forced to use some far more powerful than a ballot.

“I'm right”

Since: Oct 12

Rolla, MO

#358 Apr 26, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>Madison was a pragmatist as well, who was wise enough to know that no system of governance, no matter how well constructed, devised, and planned, was immune to the foibles of man's desire for power.

He not only feared concentration of power within the legislature, but in the judiciary and executive, as well as across all three simultaneously.

http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa48.htm

I believe he wrote on at least two occasions of the benefits of term limits for elective office.

Now regarding the power inherent in Nevada voters, Harry Reid, and any particular politician's ability to "manipulate the outcome of an election", and how all of that might relate to changing the current state of public land as a percentage of the state of Nevada, I am not sure what you are suggesting.

I am merely suggesting that within the system of representative government Madison and his contemporaries set up, the people of Nevada (and other western states) have the ability to elect someone to their Congressional delegations that will advocate for their interests in Congress. One major problem for them is their small population, and hence, their small delegation. And regardless of what you and Karl imply, Reid's re-election has been certified.

What would you, or Madison for that matter, suggest that the people of Nevada do??

woof
You are, perhaps, the smartest lib I have dealt with. That is a compliment of the highest order because I have dealt with a lot. Your arguments are actually very well thought out.

Harry Reid:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/tea-partier-did-ha...

Did you know that the UN monitors were surprised that we didn't require id when voting? I would think that would surprise a 6 year old, but apparently not most Dems.

“I'm right”

Since: Oct 12

Rolla, MO

#359 Apr 26, 2014
Publius
Duke for Mayor

Akron, OH

#360 Apr 26, 2014
killa_the_compassionate wrote:
<quoted text>
You are, perhaps, the smartest lib I have dealt with. That is a compliment of the highest order because I have dealt with a lot. Your arguments are actually very well thought out.
Harry Reid:
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/tea-partier-did-ha...
Did you know that the UN monitors were surprised that we didn't require id when voting? I would think that would surprise a 6 year old, but apparently not most Dems.
I don't believe a word that comes out of Ms. Angle's mouth.

woof
Reality Speaks

Columbus, OH

#361 Apr 27, 2014
Duke for Mayor wrote:
<quoted text>
By "rebellion", Jefferson was referring to protests (specifically, Shay's Rebellion), not the complete overthrow of government.
http://www.earlyamerica.com/review/summer/let...
woof
can you not spell revolution?

see Thomas Jefferson famous quotes.

see why the 2nd amendment was written.

google it, and enlightenment is a click away.
Real Tea Party

Reynoldsburg, OH

#362 Apr 27, 2014
TonyD2 wrote:
<quoted text>
And we're back to you holding an employer responsible for something he has no control over (unless he were to illegally not hire people with families). The low wage job is fine for many people. and those who aren't fine with it have the choice to either have more than one breadwinner, or to not apply for the low wage job. In either case it's not the employer's problem. In fact, it isn't even any of his business, as several states bar him from even asking family status.
By the way, we're talking about a small number of families. Nationwide 78% of minimum wage workers had no children. and only 16% of them live at or below poverty level (because they are living with another wage earner). On the other hand, maybe you believe that workers who are living with other workers should be paid less so the others can be paid more. That sounds about right for a redistributionist.
So maybe you support no wage at all, why stop there, hire child labor to cut corners and bring in illegal workers to lower the wages even more.

That is exactly why middle class is disappearing in the past 30 years no question about it. US had a strong middle class due to corporations actually paid tax in the 50s and 60s and you telling me we are better off now?

“Tenured Marxist Radical”

Since: Jan 13

Ivy League-ISIS

#363 Apr 27, 2014
Real Tea Party wrote:
<quoted text>
So maybe you support no wage at all, why stop there, hire child labor to cut corners and bring in illegal workers to lower the wages even more.
That is exactly why middle class is disappearing in the past 30 years no question about it. US had a strong middle class due to corporations actually paid tax in the 50s and 60s and you telling me we are better off now?
During the 1950s-1960s the US was the only major industrial base left standing after WWII

It was an unusual period of prosperity, not the norm.

Since 1965, the bigger factor driving down wages isn't tax cuts, it's Third World Immigration

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Columbus Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
MLS Will Loose But Columbus Will Wins 5 min Soccer Schmoccer 1
Leeann Tweeden v. Al Franken 31 min Pam 84
BO Arrested for Treason 55 min d pants 252
Roy Moore 2 hr Reality Speaks 41
Trump and Republicans Work against Working clas... 2 hr Reality Speaks 27
TESLA: Electric Truckerland 🚛 3 hr fat tired old and... 3
Creepy Joe Biden | Serial Young Girl-Toucher 3 hr fat tired old and... 5

Columbus Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Columbus Mortgages