A question??????

medicineman

medicineman

New Member
With the economy in the dumper, millions of unemployed, thousands losing their jobs monthly, this is my question: When will those at the top, [the elites, the factory owners, the business owners, the employers etc.,] be willing to take a little less profit to keep a few employees working? Seems like they will do anything to not lose a penny of their bottom line, regardless of the pain and suffering of their employees. Is this what conservatism is all about??
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Nah man, it is just reality.

I don't know much about you in real life. But to some people you may seem like you have everything. So to someone with far less, they may wonder why you don't give a lot of it up and give it to them so that they don't have flies in their eyes.

Businesses have a lot to deal with. When we move off of oil to the point that they are unsustainable, are we going to feel bad for Exxon when they collapse?

No, and we shouldn't. And the reason is that they will have moved onto something else, or at least tried to. How would it benefit their company long term to give up their profits for ten years, when they can use that money in the future to restructure their company?


And to be more cold, is it really doing that person better keeping them in a job, that is not being productive. Long term is it not better for society if that person has to retool himself in order to get a better job where he can actually have a positive impact in the economy instead of leaching profits in the name of social justice?

If by moving a factory overseas mean as a nation we can buy that product for 10x less than in America we should do it, and that way we can use those resources that were tied up in the factory to produce something more productive to society.

Because when they do an economic breakdown, like in the steel industry, it is entirely devastating to the community that the steel company has left, but the amount lost by those people is far outweighed by the gains in the rest of the country that is able to buy everything cheaper with the lower cost steel. So much that it is less expensive to pay the people their old salaries to do nothing, than it would have been to keep the company here.
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
hanimmal said:
Nah man, it is just reality.

I don't know much about you in real life. But to some people you may seem like you have everything. So to someone with far less, they may wonder why you don't give a lot of it up and give it to them so that they don't have flies in their eyes.

Businesses have a lot to deal with. When we move off of oil to the point that they are unsustainable, are we going to feel bad for Exxon when they collapse?

No, and we shouldn't. And the reason is that they will have moved onto something else, or at least tried to. How would it benefit their company long term to give up their profits for ten years, when they can use that money in the future to restructure their company?


And to be more cold, is it really doing that person better keeping them in a job, that is not being productive. Long term is it not better for society if that person has to retool himself in order to get a better job where he can actually have a positive impact in the economy instead of leaching profits in the name of social justice?

If by moving a factory overseas mean as a nation we can buy that product for 10x less than in America we should do it, and that way we can use those resources that were tied up in the factory to produce something more productive to society.

Because when they do an economic breakdown, like in the steel industry, it is entirely devastating to the community that the steel company has left, but the amount lost by those people is far outweighed by the gains in the rest of the country that is able to buy everything cheaper with the lower cost steel. So much that it is less expensive to pay the people their old salaries to do nothing, than it would have been to keep the company here.
Click to expand...
Maybe You should tell this to the displaced worker, the one that has had his unemployment run out, (Millions of them) the one that has lost everything because his job moved away and left him unemployed and without hope of employment, (There are only so many burger flipping jobs and they also decline with loss of primary jobs). To be so imbued with profit at the expense of everything civil and just is just evil. My thesis is: Capitalism is an evil system. It could be much better if the human element was more inclusive. To just say, well that's the way it is and oh well, is just wrong.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
With the economy in the dumper, millions of unemployed, thousands losing their jobs monthly, this is my question: When will those at the top, [the elites, the factory owners, the business owners, the employers etc.,] be willing to take a little less profit to keep a few employees working? Seems like they will do anything to not lose a penny of their bottom line, regardless of the pain and suffering of their employees. Is this what conservatism is all about??
Click to expand...
What the hell does greed have to do with conservatism? Hell, I know plenty of liberals who make a lot of money and aren't giving up their salaries. I'm not defending the fatcats but think about it for a minute. If you have 4 houses, a boat, lots of expenses and cost of maintaining toys, houses etc., you need to keep making the big $$ in order to maintain your lifestyle. These people who have all of this money are trying to maintain a lifestyle. It's that simple. Does it make them greedy? Perhaps, but I am willing to bet you don't want to lose your house and vehicle. Keep in mind that most of these rich people give a lot of money to charities and what not. :weed:
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
doc111 said:
What the hell does greed have to do with conservatism? Hell, I know plenty of liberals who make a lot of money and aren't giving up their salaries. I'm not defending the fatcats but think about it for a minute. If you have 4 houses, a boat, lots of expenses and cost of maintaining toys, houses etc., you need to keep making the big $$ in order to maintain your lifestyle. These people who have all of this money are trying to maintain a lifestyle. It's that simple. Does it make them greedy? Perhaps, but I am willing to bet you don't want to lose your house and vehicle. Keep in mind that most of these rich people give a lot of money to charities and what not. :weed:
Click to expand...
I'm sticking to my thesis that greed is inherent in conservatism. All one has to do is read the conservatives views on this site, listen to conservative radio, watch FOX news etc. to see these examples of blatant greed. Are there rich liberals that are greedy, I'd have to say yes. I do believe though, from my personal experience, the burden lies more heavily on the conservatives.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
I'm sticking to my thesis that greed is inherent in conservatism. All one has to do is read the conservatives views on this site, listen to conservative radio, watch FOX news etc. to see these examples of blatant greed. Are there rich liberals that are greedy, I'd have to say yes. I do believe though, from my personal experience, the burden lies more heavily on the conservatives.
Click to expand...
It's funny how our environment shapes our views. Experiences, the people around us, family all shape how we think. I know you're an old cat and you've been around a while and seen a lot of shit. But you still haven't seen it all my friend. Your opinion is that greed is inherently conservative. I don't see it that way. I try to keep a more open mind and I've been around a while too. My opinion is that greed is human. Our system has flaws, I don't think anyone will deny that but it's still the best system out there. Capitalism rewards innovation and hard work. Unfortunately there are a lot of politicians (lib and con) who are preventing regular people like you and I from excelling and innovating. It's still possible to come up with a "Better mousetrap" and become rich in this country. We need to fix the system not throw the baby out with the bath water. ;-)
 
figtree

figtree

Active Member
Med, i agree with you to an extent. greed is inherant in consevatism, well maybe not "greed" but maybe only thinking of ones self in general. too busy looking after #1 to give help to a person in need?
also what i see in conservatism is the old "i can have it or do it, but you cant because....... " whats good for the goose isnt good for the gander. thats the main thing i see is the hypocrocy, they want what they have but dont want you to have the same thing they have. i guess would be a better way of stating it.
 
Antidisestablishmentarian

Antidisestablishmentarian

Well-Known Member
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
It's the old Liberal VS conservative ideaology thingy. I never realized I was a liberal untill I started posting on this site., I just thought I was a human being. I've seen a few things in nigh on to seventy years, been to a rodeo or two, probably think like most people, that I know best. I'll be candid, I don't have any answers to our dillema. The more I know, the more I realize that I don't know shit. Arguing with conservatives is just horseplay, there will never be anything resolved from that. If there is a God/Jesus out there, it will take that kind of power to really make a difference and change the hearts of man. It is certain that left unchanged, it is only a matter of time untill he (Man) self destructs. It really boils down to a simple thesis: do you believe in God/Jesus/Mohammid/Budda/etc, or do you believe in the power of Man?
Do you believe Man can pull this worldly crises out of the fire? If so, I'd be interested in any intelligent solutions by man, to the state of the world.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
It's the old Liberal VS conservative ideaology thingy. I never realized I was a liberal untill I started posting on this site., I just thought I was a human being. I've seen a few things in nigh on to seventy years, been to a rodeo or two, probably think like most people, that I know best. I'll be candid, I don't have any answers to our dillema. The more I know, the more I realize that I don't know shit. Arguing with conservatives is just horseplay, there will never be anything resolved from that. If there is a God/Jesus out there, it will take that kind of power to really make a difference and change the hearts of man. It is certain that left unchanged, it is only a matter of time untill he (Man) self destructs. It really boils down to a simple thesis: do you believe in God/Jesus/Mohammid/Budda/etc, or do you believe in the power of Man?
Do you believe Man can pull this worldly crises out of the fire? If so, I'd be interested in any intelligent solutions by man, to the state of the world.
Click to expand...
Are you familiar with Democratic senator R.C. Soles? He shot an intruder who broke into his home last August. He was recently indicted for aggravated assault. Anyways, he is a staunch anti-gun advocate. The reason I bring this up is because this is what we are up against. The "Us vs. Them" mentality. I am 100% in support of the senators actions (If you break into my house you are gonna get a chest and face full of buckshot). What I take issue with is the fact that it's o.k. for him to own a gun and use it in defense of his property, life and family, but it's not ok for you and I to have the right to do the same. It's bullshit and we need to remind these people that they aren't separate. They are not special and they work for you and me. Here is a link to the story:

http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1250437.html
 
medicineman

medicineman

New Member
doc111 said:
Are you familiar with Democratic senator R.C. Soles? He shot an intruder who broke into his home last August. He was recently indicted for aggravated assault. Anyways, he is a staunch anti-gun advocate. The reason I bring this up is because this is what we are up against. The "Us vs. Them" mentality. I am 100% in support of the senators actions (If you break into my house you are gonna get a chest and face full of buckshot). What I take issue with is the fact that it's o.k. for him to own a gun and use it in defense of his property, life and family, but it's not ok for you and I to have the right to do the same. It's bullshit and we need to remind these people that they aren't separate. They are not special and they work for you and me. Here is a link to the story:

http://www.thesunnews.com/news/local/story/1250437.html
Click to expand...
I don't know where you live, but here in the wild wild west, Nv. anyone can pack a gun on his hip, (Except in certain places like banks, casinos, tourist areas, etc.). In my case, I have a concealed carry permit, allowing me to carry a concealed weapon most anywhere except a few isolated areas. Most all people have weapons in their homes, cuts down on home invasions. The fallicy of anti-gun laws is ignorance. If everyone carried a gun, we'd have a much more polite society, less crimes and less need for police. This has been proven time after time. The thing comes down to the same old thing. individual responsibility. One must keep guns out of the reach of children, teach their children about the destructive power of guns, and allow them to be properly trained in their use. I have taken my grandaughter to the firing range and to the desert to show her about guns in which she shows a great interest. I also have a huge gun safe to keep them secure. I will be enrolling her in a gun class this summer. I do not hunt, but have a supreme sniper rifle, (Deer rifle), an AK47, for gangers, a few other rifles and a variety of pistols, mostly semi-autos.. Let the good times roll. I am a vet and have a decent knowledge of guns.
 
I

ilkhan

Well-Known Member
Well I'm not in buisness or economics,
but it seems to me that when companies move overseas,
they are taking advantage of lower wages and fewer regulations.
This makes them more competitive in the global marketplace.

However, if we want to take advantage of this freeing up of resources
we must make it more profitable to do buisness in the US.
That means loosening regulations and competitive wages.
Boeing for example, is moving its new factory from Washington state to South? Carolina, Why?
Unions in Washington have gone on strike 3 times in the last 5 years.
You can't pay your workers if they arn't turning a profit.
That IMO is why Georgia is building cars and Detroit isn't.

Greed is not just a rich mans disease.
It infects all levels of sociaty rich and poor.
Honestly I don't like the word greed.
Its not really accurate to describe stock holders, executives or union employees as greedy. (in most cases)
It is more fair to describe it as self intrest.
We all try to look out for number one if we don't knowbody else will.

What do you think the solution is medman?
To keep unprofitable buisnesses in buisness?
Who will make up their budget shortfalls?
Indeed why should we make up their budget shortfalls for potentially inferior products?
What your going to get with this line of thinking
is a massive net drain on the economy and eventual breakdown.

The solutions are Free Markets, resonable regulations and redused tax burdons.
This will stimulate growth and innovation.
Otherwise you end up stagnate and unproductive.

It may not seem fair but its the only thing that works.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
Maybe You should tell this to the displaced worker, the one that has had his unemployment run out, (Millions of them) the one that has lost everything because his job moved away and left him unemployed and without hope of employment, (There are only so many burger flipping jobs and they also decline with loss of primary jobs). To be so imbued with profit at the expense of everything civil and just is just evil. My thesis is: Capitalism is an evil system. It could be much better if the human element was more inclusive. To just say, well that's the way it is and oh well, is just wrong.
Click to expand...
I would tell it to one, and have. See it is just the truth.

Why are they displaced? Because they cost to much to employ, it is not an evil thing, it is just the truth.

And you cannot blame the business for trying to maximize their business, because at any point, when we don't want their product, we can vote them out by not buying their stuff.

But what I am saying is that if americans as a whole are better off for not having this company producing here, and it would then mean it is worse off for the entire country if they continue to produce here, then we should do the right thing and allow them to leave right?

And if that difference is large enough (And it almost always is, otherwise they would stay here) it would be better to pay the people that lost their jobs for a couple years until they were able to build up new work skills (nurse, police officer, air conditioner repair, doctor, w/e field they wish to enter). And it is not the companies fault if those people do not try to get new skills.

And for the most part this is how our society works, with unemployment, school loans, grants, ect, people have ample opportunity to change their situation. They may need to tighten up for a while if they got over their heads, but they will survive and be better off if they struggle through it and take advantage of the system that is there to get them through it.

The problem arises when people that lose their jobs expect everything to suddenly go back to where it was. These people that don't want to change, either the way they have always worked, or their level of lifestyle, well there is nothing that can be done to help them until it is too late.

At any point has there not been years notice before major industries left overseas? Look at the auto makers in the 80's, I was just a thought, but even I know there were signs for years that they would be moving (early 70's oil shock for one). Those people were devastated in flint in the 80's, but they had to know before things where coming to an end, they just did not adjust.

And when things like that happen, they had unemployment, insurance, and enough time to do what was needed. Many people are never able to get that, but as a society we still are better off paying less for our cars and using some of that money to continue to help them out, than we would be paying an extra $5k per car here because they were produced here in the us.

And the people that left and started new careers (vs the ones that just moved to a different sector and did not get a technical degree of some sort) are producing more for the economy than they would have if those cars continued to be a drain on the economy.

And their children, a lot of who wrongly thought that they would be able to make a great living being a factory worker or a construction worker, well we were wrong. The lack of specialization we have makes it harder for us to find a job, because there are plenty of us, and more difficult to be irreplaceable in that job (again because there are several others of us waiting in the wings). We for sure had enough time to become better educated and specialized to be more irreplaceable in our careers.

So at the end the businesses although it would be great if they were altruistic and gave us their profits, there really is no point, because in the end we still end up unemployed, either the business is hit later with something that sinks them and they have no money to stabilize themselves, or they move production and we end up losing our jobs. At least with option 2 they will be there to continue to pay taxes on that profit, and personal salaries to help out the people that lost their jobs.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
However, if we want to take advantage of this freeing up of resources
we must make it more profitable to do buisness in the US.
That means loosening regulations and competitive wages.
Boeing for example, is moving its new factory from Washington state to South? Carolina, Why?
Unions in Washington have gone on strike 3 times in the last 5 years.
You can't pay your workers if they arn't turning a profit.
That IMO is why Georgia is building cars and Detroit isn't.
Click to expand...
Although I agree burdensome regulations is bad, most companies here in the us have very little to worry about. Most of the stuff we hear about it blown out of proportion. And the cost of doing business in a cheap country far outweighs doing it here under regulations. Think of payoffs, crime, the fact they pay over there and what they pay here too, ect. Their actual costs of those regulations is probably less here when you add up all the costs of moving the business.

I agree with you about unions though. They have had a great run, but they are now a dinosaur.
 
doc111

doc111

Well-Known Member
medicineman said:
I don't know where you live, but here in the wild wild west, Nv. anyone can pack a gun on his hip, (Except in certain places like banks, casinos, tourist areas, etc.). In my case, I have a concealed carry permit, allowing me to carry a concealed weapon most anywhere except a few isolated areas. Most all people have weapons in their homes, cuts down on home invasions. The fallicy of anti-gun laws is ignorance. If everyone carried a gun, we'd have a much more polite society, less crimes and less need for police. This has been proven time after time. The thing comes down to the same old thing. individual responsibility. One must keep guns out of the reach of children, teach their children about the destructive power of guns, and allow them to be properly trained in their use. I have taken my grandaughter to the firing range and to the desert to show her about guns in which she shows a great interest. I also have a huge gun safe to keep them secure. I will be enrolling her in a gun class this summer. I do not hunt, but have a supreme sniper rifle, (Deer rifle), an AK47, for gangers, a few other rifles and a variety of pistols, mostly semi-autos.. Let the good times roll. I am a vet and have a decent knowledge of guns.
Click to expand...
Yes, yes, we all know how you feel about guns medman. You're missing the point. You are still thinking the problem is conservatives when it is in fact govt. This particular senator is against guns. Would like to see them outlawed outright I believe. Yet he not only owns one but exercises his right to protect his property. Seems a little hypocrictical don't you think? What do they call it? Oh yea, a double standard. It's no longer about libs vs. cons. It's about you and me vs. "Them". It's time to stop the partisan bickering (as I'm convinced this is a ruse to keep us fighting amongst ourselves) and exercise the few rights we still have and get shit changed. We have to get the assholes in washington scared enough to actually remind them that they work for us and they are no better than us. If that won't work then it's time to vote for a 3rd party candidate. Most of the politicians in washington are so out of touch with reality these days that it's scary. :fire:
 
ViRedd

ViRedd

New Member
medicineman said:
this is my question: When will those at the top, [the elites, the factory owners, the business owners, the employers etc.,] be willing to take a little less profit to keep a few employees working?
Click to expand...
^^^ And here we have the typical thinking of a devout Progressive: Profit is evil. Businessmen are piggish. Bosses are successful at the expense of the worker. Have I missed anything, Med?

The lack of a basic understanding of economics is rife in the ranks of the Progressive movement. Here's what they don't understand: If a business doesn't earn a profit, there is no reason to stay in business. Therefore, there will be no need for employees. Conversely, the more profit earned, the more opportunity for business expansion there is. With more business expansion, there are more opportunities for new hires. Jobs depend on profits.

Med-'O-Mao, its amazing that someone like yourself can post in this forum for the past several years and not come away with an understanding of basic economics. Why do you continue to be cemented into Marxist statism?
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
With all the calls to end the fed, that government cannot help the economy, that gold is the only thing that is money, that we should go back to the economic standards for the 1800's. I really do not that it is a bad thing that he did not learn econ from all the crazies that post here.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
hanimmal said:
With all the calls to end the fed, that government cannot help the economy, that gold is the only thing that is money, that we should go back to the economic standards for the 1800's. I really do not that it is a bad thing that he did not learn econ from all the crazies that post here.
Click to expand...
The government is the single biggest obstacle most people face in life to their economic success. Ever try to swim with a weight on your back? That is government.
 
hanimmal

hanimmal

Well-Known Member
The government is the single biggest obstacle most people face in life to their economic success. Ever try to swim with a weight on your back? That is government.
Click to expand...



We are so repressed, I mean driving on highways, using internet, having electricity, rules for investing, I mean jesus, why can they just not get off our backs right?


I mean hell even the west was settled because of government programs.


I know when I went to school got my highschool education that the government was really trying to hold me down, even allowing me to take a car to work onto the highways that is stagnating my ability to make money, jesus, I don't even feel like doing this anymore. This is retarded, you guys are so afraid of your own shadow.

You all seem like those stupid little dogs that yap and yap, but can't do shit.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Hannimal - Does your beloved government rely upon voluntary or involuntary participation to exist?

I do not object to you and others having your government and wouldn't think of FORCING you into my beliefs.
Your government and apparently you, do not offer me the same courtesy? Why?

Why do you support an institution that relies upon force to make me a subject of your government? What is it that makes you feel that the use of force is just?

I bet you cannot answer my questions directly. I bet you will either ignore me, insult me or shift the questions around.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top