| Author |
Message |
Cyan~Fire
I'll count you!
Age:37
Gender:
Joined: Jul 14 2003
Posts: 4608
Location: A Dream
Offline
|
 Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 3:48 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
 |
 |
|
|
His pay was raised because of inflation. There is a long timespan between steps 1 and 2.
_________________
This help is informational only. No representation is made or warranty given as to its content. User assumes all risk of use. Cyan~Fire assumes no responsibility for any loss or delay resulting from such use.
Wise men STILL seek Him.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 8:13 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It just seems to me that brain is disregarding the entire unskilled labor force. Sure, employers will search for and pay more to people with skills, but what about agriculture, for example?
A white kid can't go to the next farm looking for a better wage or his job will be filled by the time he realises that a mexican will more gladly live in a trailor and eat canned food than him.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 9:31 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
It's not the government's job to regulate those kinds of things. By doing it half way, they're making the problem much worse.
_________________
Hyperspace Owner
Smong> so long as 99% deaths feel lame it will always be hyperspace to me
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyan~Fire
I'll count you!
Age:37
Gender:
Joined: Jul 14 2003
Posts: 4608
Location: A Dream
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:18 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Tsk Tsk Muskrat, you should know that conservatives don't care about those dumb poor people.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
SamHughes
Server Help Squatter
Joined: Jun 30 2004
Posts: 252
Location: Greenwich
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:30 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Cyan~Fire wrote: | | Don't be retarded. That's like saying v=at is "oversimplistic" because it doesn't take Lorentz factors into account. When discussing general principles, you don't need to include every minute detail. |
Don't be retarded. Economics is completely different from mechanics. When discussing general principles, you do need a grasp on the effects of the more powerful bodies. It'd be like trying to fire a projectile from Minneapolis to Mexico City by aiming at Mexico City. It doesn't work. Some people are thinking "Minimum wage means poor people get higher pay," and others are thinking "minimum wage means people lose jobs." Both are simplistic views of how a minimum wage increase affects things. And what about short- vs. long-term effects? The effect a high minimum wage has on worker productivity? The incentives that are created by these laws? It's not just the effect of changing the minimum wage that matters; what people do in reaction to the change has a powerful effect on the world. If you ignore human behavior, you'll end up thinking communism is a good idea.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 10:48 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Cyan~Fire wrote: | | Tsk Tsk Muskrat, you should know that conservatives don't care about those dumb poor people. |
No, that's not it at all. We just don't want the government to care (about anyone, not just poor dumb people). There's a huge difference.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:09 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
And the conservatives say they have morals!
The whole conservative rights of privacy thing, what happened to that? I like many parts of conservatism, I just wouldn't in the least call the Republican party today such a thing!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
K'
You can win any war if you start a year early
Gender:
Joined: Jul 13 2006
Posts: 271
Location: Southtown
Offline
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 5:40 am Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
How do you interpret raising minimum wage as?
Do you find it as a temporary solution which merely elevates the problem of the poor or do you find it as a final solution which helps them poor out of their poverty?
In refererence to Franklin who has said:
I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyan~Fire
I'll count you!
Age:37
Gender:
Joined: Jul 14 2003
Posts: 4608
Location: A Dream
Offline
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 12:34 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Sam wrote: | | And what about short- vs. long-term effects? The effect a high minimum wage has on worker productivity? The incentives that are created by these laws? It's not just the effect of changing the minimum wage that matters; what people do in reaction to the change has a powerful effect on the world. If you ignore human behavior, you'll end up thinking communism is a good idea. |
Yes, you're right, all that would be relevant if we were discussing whether minimum wage should exist in the first place. Sadly, that's not what we were discussing. My analogy still stands. If we're talking about a bicycle accelerating, then we can use the simple equations. In a different situation, such as dealing with really fast spaceships, we'd have to use the relativistic transformations. That's the point I was trying to make.
| Muskrat wrote: | | The whole conservative rights of privacy thing, what happened to that? I like many parts of conservatism, I just wouldn't in the least call the Republican party today such a thing! |
Hear hear!
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2006 10:03 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Can you show me the passage in the bill of rights where the right to privacy is outlined?
By the way, I wouldn't call the republican party conservative either, but for entirely different reasons.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 12:36 am Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Why would that be in the bill of rights, of course it needs SOME reform. I simply said that conservatism has some virtues, one of which is that they wish to hold back laws invading privacy more than other people.
The bill of rights means nothing, you should know that. Why are you always harping on the constitution anyways? 
And you're right, the republican foreign policy certainly isn't conservative. 
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 7:21 am Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Muskrat wrote: | | The bill of rights means nothing, you should know that. Why are you always harping on the constitution anyways? |
Because it's the foundation for all laws in the country?
| Muskrat wrote: | | And you're right, the republican foreign policy certainly isn't conservative. |
WTF?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:14 am Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Disregard the past 35 years and you will find that the Democratic(and more liberal) party was traditionally tougher and more ambitious in their foreign policy. Remeber Truman? FDR?
Eisenhower stuck to pretty conservative values and stayed out of Vietnam.
And if you discredit the historical significance of the above, how can you continue to cite the constitution as if it was written with the insanity of today's America in mind?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 2:51 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
FDR? Wasn't he the guy that waited so long to get into the war that Brittan was nearly overrun? Oh, and Truman only got the job because FDR died. IIRC, he wasn't reelected.
If JFK ran for office today, he'd be a Republican.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Mine GO BOOM
Hunch Hunch
What What
Age:42
Gender:
Joined: Aug 01 2002
Posts: 3616
Location: Las Vegas
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 3:42 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Dr Brain wrote: | | FDR? Wasn't he the guy that waited so long to get into the war that Brittan was nearly overrun? Oh, and Truman only got the job because FDR died. IIRC, he wasn't reelected. |
Been reading the wrong newspapers, have we?
And he waited so long because US is a democracy. The people didn't want to go to war, so they elected people who promised them to say out of the war. FDR always wanted to enter the war, but ran by saying he'd keep us out. The History Channel ran some long documentaries on FDR a while ago.
Deweytruman.jpg - 37.04 KB
File downloaded or viewed 9 time(s)
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 5:33 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Muskrat said that the democrats were traditionally strong on foreign policy, and cited FDR and Truman. Campaigning on a desire to stay out of the war doesn't change my counterpoint at all. Yes, I happened to know the reasons behind FDR's reluctance, and was merely oversimplifying.
My recallection on Truman's term wasn't up to par, but I'd qualified it as possibly untrue in my own statement (and I try to do that with any statement I make that I know may be false).
And for the record, MGB, the United States is not a democracy. It's a constitutional republic.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyan~Fire
I'll count you!
Age:37
Gender:
Joined: Jul 14 2003
Posts: 4608
Location: A Dream
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 8:41 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Brain wrote: | | Can you show me the passage in the bill of rights where the right to privacy is outlined? |
The fourth amendment?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 9:51 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
Brain, if you still don't believe that democrats were traditionally tougher on foreign policy, try remembering Teddy, Wilson, and even better, Johnson.
You could never make the claim that Pearl Harbor was FDR's motivation, it was only what convinced the country.
Look up the Truman Doctrine. That kept us at war for many a year...
But, back to the matter at hand.... oh bugger, I forgot.
PS. Would the Republicans let a Catholic run?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Brain
Flip-flopping like a wind surfer
Age:39
Gender:
Joined: Dec 01 2002
Posts: 3502
Location: Hyperspace
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 10:16 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Quote: | | The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. |
Whether or not privacy should be a right isn't in question. The fact is that it currently isn't.
It's true that the fourth provides you with some measure of privacy in certain cases, but it doesn't provide it in all cases, and it certantly doesn't define it as a right.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Wed Aug 30, 2006 11:34 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
What you're arguing there seems prety obscure to me... but nevertheless, stronger rights of privacy and rights of contract were always one of the main points of any conservative platform, and please consult any authority on history for this before arguing the point.
Today those things don't mean a damn of course, because Politics has become a fight of "issues". People will vote for or against abortion before any policy concerning privacy is ever brought to the table.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cyan~Fire
I'll count you!
Age:37
Gender:
Joined: Jul 14 2003
Posts: 4608
Location: A Dream
Offline
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:41 am Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| Muskrat wrote: | | Today those things don't mean a damn of course, because Politics has become a fight of "issues". |
To be fair, this has almost always been the case. Consider the Prohibition Party, for example.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Muskrat
Server Help Squatter
Age:38
Joined: Aug 24 2004
Posts: 829
Location: Swamp
Offline
|
| Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:52 pm Post maybe stupid Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
| True enough, but I do feel that more widespread communications have increased the occurence of this sort of thing.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Statistics
Register
Profile
Login to check your private messages
Login
Internet at its finest 
