Ron Paul on the Verge of Going Third Party?

Judged:

Bear _ Dog _ Rose wrote:

<quoted text>
Much work is outsourced, sent out of the country, because other countries do not have the rules and regulations which protect employees from abuses. In my great-grandfather's time, no child labor law existed. If one's father was shot, there was no welfare system to provide for the orphans. If one did not work, one did not eat. Steel mills used children in the North, while propertied people used children to pick cotton in the South. Child labor laws now protect people from abuse. Not so in places like India, where very small children toil at near-slave wages in the silk industry and other industries. Corporations profit by outsourcing labor so that they can get away with not abiding by the laws of the United States.

Is it then a coincidence that America didn't start out-sourcing jobs until the unions and gov't regulations made it less profitable to produce goods here?

Rich people let us use their money in the form of factories and businesses, but they don't want to do it for free.
When Carter raised the Capital Gains tax to 70%, righ people took their money out of the economy.
A similar situation exists today (and is likely to get worse if "Cap and Trade is passed).

In some countries it is an "eat or starve" economy...would you rather the children in those places give up their near-slave wages for starvation?

I'm not advocating child or slave labor, but America was back then, similar to the emerging markets in India.

BTW Thomas Friedman's "The World Is Flat", is a dry but interesting read on India and globalization.

Marilyn

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
You say that it is "no comfort to the victim
to point out the source of the problem," but
it does provide excuses and a target for anger.
Are you so overwhelmed with "white guilt" that
you would maintain that we are responsible for
a young person joining a gang or choosing to
become involved in criminal activity? Are
white people responsible for the miserable
problem of young black men fathering children
with a series of women, leaving each to fend
for themselves, depend on family, or rely on
the government? I can't believe you would
believe such things unless you took a \graduate course in Victimology.
But more than that, to suggest that a poor
person is left with a choice between crime
or suicide is also absurd. With all due
respects to your grandfather for making the
decision he did, there are more choices than
crime or suicide.

Then give me an example of the other options available to him at that time period before social programs? Or even encouragement to hire the handicapped?

I don't suffer from 'white guilt' or guilt from the history....but by acknowledging it I see how structuring the solutiins lead to additional problems and I also see solutions...

To deny the history or to ignore, or to diminish it does not change it...but it can change future choices....how to address the problems in a better way...

And poverty and opportunity or even disfunctional sub culture attitudes are not limited to blacks....it is also present in the subculture of rural areas of west virginia or kentucky where jobs and other opportunity is limited...

Where they were 'washed in Goldwater and polished with Johnson wax"

Marilyn

Judged:

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
You say that it is "no comfort to the victim
to point out the source of the problem," but
it does provide excuses and a target for anger.
Are you so overwhelmed with "white guilt" that
you would maintain that we are responsible for
a young person joining a gang or choosing to
become involved in criminal activity? Are
white people responsible for the miserable
problem of young black men fathering children
with a series of women, leaving each to fend
for themselves, depend on family, or rely on
the government? I can't believe you would
believe such things unless you took a \graduate course in Victimology.
But more than that, to suggest that a poor
person is left with a choice between crime
or suicide is also absurd. With all due
respects to your grandfather for making the
decision he did, there are more choices than
crime or suicide.

The policies and the way in which they were carried out contributed to the problems that you describe....

Knowing that one should change the policy...not by eliminating assistance or opportunity.

Along with an effort to change the mindset but not by blaming the victim.

And while I am educated, I also have a variety of first hand life experience.....and influence by some great minds such as Simon Dinitz...

LocalBoy

Marilyn wrote:

<quoted text>LOL...well...alright but a gerbil is tangible....gistory is more of an illusive allegory...
But you are right, it does not call for gerbil abuse, nor do I support animal cruelty.... it was just a kneejerk reaction not to be taken seriously....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =mGA_6ejsOcI

Marilyn

LocalBoy wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =7fqCS7Y_kME&feature=relat ed

*smile*

Much better than the last link you posted....

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

Judged:

LocalBoy wrote:

<quoted text>They...They ?
You mean the whole freaking nation prospered from slavery, not just some elusive they.
Hello, it was an economic boom for the US, dont deny that. As much as you disrespect all who prospered, remember, all prospered in way or the other from slave labor.
Even my ancestors, the Scottish coal miners ended up with a better life, after their personal servitude ended.
Where is this "general welfare" clause ? Which Article is it in ?

Don't kid yourself, LocoBoy. My Scottish ancestor was murdered when he tried to open a foundry in Philadelphia. His son worked in a steel mill since he was nine years old, until his adulthood, when he became a city manager. Despite hardships, many of his descendants prospered. Not all people prospered from slavery. Some prospered from years of hard work. Everyone who uses the Brooklyn Bridge "prospers" from the forced child labor of the past, since Roebling, the company across the street from where my great-grandfather worked, also exploited a child labor force, and it was Roebling's labor force that built the Brooklyn Bridge.

*****

You've called me "Beerchugger." I found the misnomer amusing, but irritating, since I don't drink alcohol.

*********

I never used a "general welfare" clause. You've misquoted me. I'd made mention of "the Common Wealth." Feel free to read the U.S. Constitution and find it for yourself, if you are not familiar with that phrase.

Marilyn

LocalBoy wrote:

<quoted text>http://www.youtube.com/watch...

That one didn't work.... try again.

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

"In some countries it is an "eat or starve" economy...would you rather the children in those places give up their near-slave wages for starvation?" Eristotle asked.

I'd rather they passed a child labor law for India, as the United States had passed such a law many, many years ago. Those children should be in school, not slaving in gruelling conditions so that their industrious employer can make big bucks by paying those kids barely enough to exist with.

Bill R

Lebanon, OR

Marilyn wrote:

<quoted text>Take it anyway you want....I don't tell you to produce data to support your opinion like this is an official report being presented...though there has been plenty of research done showing the changes that have happened in income levels etc...
There was no 'bluff' and you know it.....

I raised the same point with Localboy on another
issue not long ago and it applies here as well.
You cannot prove any linkage whatsoever between
busing and any of the "improvements" you have
described. There is no way to do that because
you cannot isolate all the other variables that
influenced the flow of economic, social, and
racial history. Nor can you prove that the
changes or improvements that took place would
not have happened without busing.

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

"Rich people let us use their money in the form of factories and businesses, but they don't want to do it for free."

Rich people "let us use their money?"

No. I think not. We let bankers use our money, and we don't want to do it for free. We'd like interest, but they don't pay any, hardly. They charge interest.... lots of it.

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

In my most recent post above, the quote at the top was from Eristotle's comment.

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

Also, please amend the punctuation. It should've read as follows.

"Rich people let us use their money"?

Marilyn

Judged:

Bear _ Dog _ Rose wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't kid yourself, LocoBoy. My Scottish ancestor was murdered when he tried to open a foundry in Philadelphia. His son worked in a steel mill since he was nine years old, until his adulthood, when he became a city manager. Despite hardships, many of his descendants prospered. Not all people prospered from slavery. Some prospered from years of hard work. Everyone who uses the Brooklyn Bridge "prospers" from the forced child labor of the past, since Roebling, the company across the street from where my great-grandfather worked, also exploited a child labor force, and it was Roebling's labor force that built the Brooklyn Bridge.
*****
You've called me "Beerchugger." I found the misnomer amusing, but irritating, since I don't drink alcohol.
*********
I never used a "general welfare" clause. You've misquoted me. I'd made mention of "the Common Wealth." Feel free to read the U.S. Constitution and find it for yourself, if you are not familiar with that phrase.

Fascinating... I would love to hear more about that family history... while people recoginise the rather 'mob' like quality of the insider benefits of political office by some...they overlook how those former 'captians of industry' or 'robber barons' accomplished their wealth using both political connections and mob like tatics....the Johnstown flood and the Carnigie connection for example...that hunt club at the top of the damn and a competing steel mill below....

Bear _ Dog _ Rose

Eristotle wrote, "BTW Thomas Friedman's "The World Is Flat", is a dry but interesting read on India and globalization."

Thanks.

Marilyn

Judged:

Bill R wrote:

<quoted text>
I raised the same point with Localboy on another
issue not long ago and it applies here as well.
You cannot prove any linkage whatsoever between
busing and any of the "improvements" you have
described. There is no way to do that because
you cannot isolate all the other variables that
influenced the flow of economic, social, and
racial history. Nor can you prove that the
changes or improvements that took place would
not have happened without busing.

Bill...stop it! I said AA helped and said education opportunity for the disavantaged was improved...

But fine it was all magic...just coincidence that after those changes income disparity improved etc... and Bill....you don't need stats to see that things have improved in our society as far as less racism...not if you lived then and now.....this efforts did bring about improved social conditions for blacks just as other efforts did for women...

But there is still room for improvement...

Marilyn

Bear _ Dog _ Rose wrote:

"In some countries it is an "eat or starve" economy...would you rather the children in those places give up their near-slave wages for starvation?" Eristotle asked.
I'd rather they passed a child labor law for India, as the United States had passed such a law many, many years ago. Those children should be in school, not slaving in gruelling conditions so that their industrious employer can make big bucks by paying those kids barely enough to exist with.

I can certainly agree with that but there is a difference in that country not only cultural, over population, but even their place in the world economy that effects their ability to make changes....

But I was pleased when the President of Mexico pushed to outlaw children begging in the streets reminding them they were the decendents of the Mayans....

I do think we should address our own issues before we judge other cultures....

Marilyn

Eristotle wrote:

<quoted text>
Is it then a coincidence that America didn't start out-sourcing jobs until the unions and gov't regulations made it less profitable to produce goods here?
Rich people let us use their money in the form of factories and businesses, but they don't want to do it for free.
When Carter raised the Capital Gains tax to 70%, righ people took their money out of the economy.
A similar situation exists today (and is likely to get worse if "Cap and Trade is passed).
In some countries it is an "eat or starve" economy...would you rather the children in those places give up their near-slave wages for starvation?
I'm not advocating child or slave labor, but America was back then, similar to the emerging markets in India.
BTW Thomas Friedman's "The World Is Flat", is a dry but interesting read on India and globalization.

When they send their jobs overseas treat them as foreign goods with appropraite taxes to prevent profiting from that choice here....when they send their money overseas to avoid paying their share of taxes then send them to be with their money....

LocalBoy

Bear _ Dog _ Rose wrote:

<quoted text>
Don't kid yourself, LocoBoy. My Scottish ancestor was murdered when he tried to open a foundry in Philadelphia. His son worked in a steel mill since he was nine years old, until his adulthood, when he became a city manager. Despite hardships, many of his descendants prospered. Not all people prospered from slavery. Some prospered from years of hard work. Everyone who uses the Brooklyn Bridge "prospers" from the forced child labor of the past, since Roebling, the company across the street from where my great-grandfather worked, also exploited a child labor force, and it was Roebling's labor force that built the Brooklyn Bridge.
*****
You've called me "Beerchugger." I found the misnomer amusing, but irritating, since I don't drink alcohol.
*********
I never used a "general welfare" clause. You've misquoted me. I'd made mention of "the Common Wealth." Feel free to read the U.S. Constitution and find it for yourself, if you are not familiar with that phrase.

All in good fun, Beerchugger - LocoBoy...?

When in Rome and all that jazz...
I did in fact misquote you earlier on that trash you put on what Marilyn said, how you felt about it, who's head hurt and what to do with migraines.
I was wrong to barge in on what was obviously a gender specific communication.
I stand corrected, again

Eristotle

Bear _ Dog _ Rose wrote:

"In some countries it is an "eat or starve" economy...would you rather the children in those places give up their near-slave wages for starvation?" Eristotle asked.
I'd rather they passed a child labor law for India, as the United States had passed such a law many, many years ago. Those children should be in school, not slaving in gruelling conditions so that their industrious employer can make big bucks by paying those kids barely enough to exist with.

I can only assume that when they can afford to they will, like America did.

Maybe those kids can hold their appetite until their economy catches up with the 21st century.

It's funny that those kids can do the same job that American union members wanted big bucks to do.

LocalBoy