This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - More Than Mortal
Pages: 1 ... 264265266 267268 ... 502
7951
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:56:31 PM »
Further regulations will kill the economy and force hundreds of thousands of people out of work. Nobody's talking about that. And I'm not disagreeing that humans impact the climate, but I don't beleive we're the sole cause of it We are.
7952
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:54:00 PM »
This thread is turning into a bit of a quagmire, so you'll both excuse me if I step out and leave you to it >.>
7953
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:52:04 PM »
When that service, from religious churches or not, directly impacts government services on you (Tax returns, ability to adopt a child, spousal rights) - it can be classified as discrimination.
Oh yeah, I completely agree with that. I agree with a State-recognised form of "marriage" which confers all the benefits, but when it comes to spiritual/religious/ceremonial 'consecrations' of marriage then it ought not be coerced.
7954
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:48:51 PM »
Even vested interests have a hard time keeping global warming at bay. Especially when researches funded by the Koch Brothers affirm its existence.
7955
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:43:58 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
So you're saying poorly made hats in China which are visibly worse looking and more uncomfortable than the American made ones isn't fucking the consumer over?
Come on now.
At which point the consumer buys better quality hats. All of the hats are obviously not made in China, and if the consumer values the quality of the hat enough then he will pay for products by different companies or from different countries.
It's actually the majority of hats made in China. Roughly 80%.
That's the thing, they're the official makers of the on field baseball caps. And the American made ones are literally the same thing the players on field wear, they're extremely light weight, breathable, colors are correct and don't fade, the brim bends and stays bent properly, it looks like a normal hat and not square and douchebag looking.
So it's really fucked up that they're doing this to cut costs and fucking over Americans (employees and consumers) and they're still $35 dollar hate when the quality is far lower in the Chinese made ones.
Outsourcing is terrible.
You seem to be misunderstanding the fact that producers wouldn't outsource if there was a demand for domestic, high-quality hats. Capitalists don't conspire to make people as poor as they can; they respond to the demand of the consumers as cheaply as they can, wherever it leads.
7956
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:33:29 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
So you're saying poorly made hats in China which are visibly worse looking and more uncomfortable than the American made ones isn't fucking the consumer over?
Come on now.
At which point the consumer buys better quality hats. All of the hats are obviously not made in China, and if the consumer values the quality of the hat enough then he will pay for products by different companies or from different countries.
7957
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:31:57 PM »
 shrekt
7958
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:28:04 PM »
Like I said, the Chinese made ball caps suck dick. The consumer is getting fucked.
None of what you're saying makes any sense in light of pretty much all the economic trends.
7959
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:24:53 PM »
Produces the most value for who?
As if their interests are divergent. But if you want an answer, then the consumers.
7960
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:17:10 PM »
Climate change has been happening before humans even industrialized. Ever hear of the Medieval Warm Age and Little Ice Age?
 Why yes. . . Yes I have. So what?
7961
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:11:08 PM »
Any amount of time on welfare is negative.
When you come up with an economy which means people can stay in the same job for their entire lives, let me know.
7962
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:10:27 PM »
Now, I can't think of much that's produced in America.
. . . Good. at its core outsourcing is the practice of shifting labour to where it produces the most value
7963
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:08:42 PM »
need to cash in on their unemployment benefits before finding a new job.
So? About three million jobs are lost each year in the United States. However long a lot of people have to temporarily remain on the dole, it obviously isn't having a significant negative impact, especially not since we can see unemployment reach highs of 10pc and still recover.
7964
« on: January 29, 2015, 01:06:47 PM »
There's no positive to getting rid of jobs.
You can keep saying it but the evidence is against you. We've seen increased consumer surplus, increased GDP, increased living standards and virtually no change in average unemployment. How does any of this point to a poor economic situation because of outsourcing? It doesn't, because at its core outsourcing is the practice of shifting labour to where it produces the most value.
7965
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:58:57 PM »
You're not looking at the bigger picture. Like those 400 people recently layed off, there are thousands like them. That isn't good for economy no matter how you spin it.
The point is that this isn't happening. You can have a situation wherein 400 people are laid off and permanently end up on benefits, but it's certainly not the norm and, even if it were, clearly has no substantial negative effect.
7966
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:55:12 PM »
The headteacher gave it, predictably, and at the end essentially made it clear why he was doing it. The government has been making a lot of noise recently of the need to stop the potential for radicalisation in schools and prisons. The whole assembly wasn't as serious as I'd have liked, but it brings up an important point about British--and by extension Western--values. When he was being serious, he mentioned things like the rule of law, liberty, tolerance and the moral values that underlie our society. Disappointingly, quite a few people I know didn't like the assembly and found it irrelevant; I do wish more people appreciate the philosophical foundations of our society, handed down during the Enlightenment by people such as David Hume, Adam Smith and later individuals like Bertrand Russell. I also wish, even more strongly, that people could appreciate the clear superiority of Western culture--even assuming all of its flaws--and I say that unabashedly and without hesitation. I won't capitulate to barbarism, and not just militants, but those who would foist their socio-religious codes of behaviour on our society. He played this song at the end: And in the spirit of Voltaire he pointed out that it's not the content of his propositions which necessarily matter, but the fact that he has a right to say them.
7967
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:29:26 PM »
Be realistic.
I am. I don't care if 300 people end up on welfare if the total economic wealth is increased. It's as close to a fact as you can get in economics that free trade is a massive boon, and controls on imports and exports (including capital) retard economic growth. If you want more jobs in the country, you make it a more competitive place to put your capital. Now, since the natural rate of unemployment hasn't massively altered since 1950 and our wealth has increased substantially, claiming outsourcing hurts the domestic economy doesn't hold up to scrutiny.
7968
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:16:58 PM »
And when New Era shuts down a factory in New York resulting in 400 people being layed off and opens up more factories in China, people are losing jobs.
Right, and then they go and find other jobs which create more wealth than their old ones because it was more economical for their old jobs to be done in China.
7969
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:06:24 PM »
Far more jobs
Outsourcing doesn't result in job losses.
Wait, is that chart trying to tell me that unemployment only topped 6%? That doesn't seem right..
The natural rate is the average or 'usual' rate considering the state of the economy--a sort of base-line. It's possible for the unemployment rate to be exacerbated or ameliorated by a number of factors.
7970
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:01:33 PM »
Far more jobs
Outsourcing doesn't result in job losses.
7971
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:57:53 AM »
Funny how he's so quick to blame Obama for all the economy's woes, then.
Yeah, I agree with you there. Obama is largely irrelevant, with the exception of certain structural questions.
7972
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:54:13 AM »
I'd use it with my left even if I weren't left-handed, because I'm not a fucking plebian.
7973
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:51:13 AM »
>Reagan didn't have anything to do with the economy
This is the only part I'm going to jump into, but Kinder didn't say that. He said the President doesn't have total control. Which is true. In fact, they don't even have most of the control; that title belongs to the Fed Chairman.
7974
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:25:04 AM »
Outsourcing is destroying our countries. Instead of all these jobs being in our own countries The pool of jobs isn't fixed. . . Having things produced elsewhere for cheaper frees up labour to pursue more economically beneficial activity, and helps consumers by making goods cheaper. Conservatism in America = Republicans Not true; Republicans would never criticise Bush for not being a conservative, as many do, if that were explicitly the case. I'm not talking about fiscal conservatism. Neither am I, I'm talking about economic policy wholly.
7975
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:14:27 AM »
Freedom is for the freedom loving.
Great, all we need to do know is find some freedom-loving people willing to take away other people's freedoms because they don't deserve them. . .
7976
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:09:30 AM »
Can't exactly run around calling itself the land of the free when it doesn't combat discrimination.
Can't do it if it's forcing people to perform services they don't want to perform, either.
7977
« on: January 29, 2015, 11:05:12 AM »
He's damning of how America has shipped its jobs overseas and it's living off false prosperity. Outsourcing isn't a problem; actually it's a benefit. You don't usually here claims of false prosperity except from hard-money, free-market Austrians--which I know you aren't. His whole idea of false prosperity is based on monetary inflation, which isn't an issue again. The Republicans especially have destructive policies. I'll grant you that, sure. But you criticised conservatism. The most destructive Republican policies have come from abandoning conservative prescriptions.
7978
« on: January 29, 2015, 10:57:48 AM »
And Clinton was/is a Democrat so I don't know why you're bringing him up.
Because he followed conservative economic policies, which is what you're criticising. It's entirely possible for a Republican (like Nixon, funnily enough, who declared himself to be a Keynesian in '71) to not follow conservative policies. Your 'insider' is also an apparent gold-bug who's criticising Reagan for not being conservative enough. . .
7979
« on: January 29, 2015, 10:47:22 AM »
It's discrimination if you refuse service to somebody because of their sexuality or skin color I know, I'm just saying it really isn't worth worrying about. Consumers need to have a sense of responsibility if they don't like certain business practices. I'd like to see churches marry gays, whether forced or not, but it just isn't worth it.
7980
« on: January 29, 2015, 10:43:04 AM »
This "insider" you're disregarding is David Stockman
Stockman sees a class-rebellion, a new revolution, a war against greed and the wealthy. Soon. Considering he's equally dismissive of Democratic economics, I'd be interested to know just what this guy believes.
Pages: 1 ... 264265266 267268 ... 502
|
Show Posts