Lurker > TheMikh

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, DB2, DB3, Database 4 ( 07.23.2018-12.31.2018 ), DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear
Board List
Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17
TopicImagine having student loans. Imagine having credit card debt.
TheMikh
12/14/18 12:23:51 PM
#76
Balrog0 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Zero sympathy for people with credit card debt though. They just have really **** time preference.


I'm in credit card debt because student loans and other scholarships still weren't enough to pay for the cost of housing in D.C. for a summer. I would definitely do it again. It was a big boost for my career.

I'd personally consider that situation an extension of the student loan debt predicament, but that does make a lot of sense.
---
TopicWhat do you find unattractive in a romantic partner?
TheMikh
12/14/18 12:19:11 PM
#57
vapidity
laziness
narcissism
sociopathy
indiscretion
manipulative
psychopathy
single parent
unclassiness
poor presentation
poor health choices
poor impulse control
lack of critical thought
poor verbal intelligence
public sector employment
---
TopicImagine having student loans. Imagine having credit card debt.
TheMikh
12/14/18 12:12:37 PM
#74
I can feel sympathy for folk with student loan debt.

The way the economy and education system has been set up (see: rigged) over the past several decades, it's a terrible investment strategy to invest in folk without any semblance of either relevant experience or the prerequisite fundamentals of the occupation.

What's more, public school sucks in a lot of places and yet mandatory for a significant amount of youths' formative years, and government subsidies and government-guaranteed zero collateral loans in conjunction with skyrocketing demand have led to a ballooning of college prices - because what kind of entity wouldn't take advantage of that kind of market zeitgeist to maximize earnings?

Also, not everyone was born into a rich family like me where paying for college was never an issue.

Zero sympathy for people with credit card debt though. They just have really **** time preference.
---
TopicDeVos cancels $150M in student loan debt after losing court battle.
TheMikh
12/14/18 9:37:34 AM
#37
i wonder how that's all being paid for
---
TopicAmid mass starvation and disease in socialist Venezuela, burial too costly
TheMikh
12/14/18 12:40:44 AM
#25
Lonestar2000 posted...
Why do idiots try to blame socialism for Venezuela's problems?

this is how every state socialist regime ends up

every counterexample is (a) currently rotting from the inside out, (b) actually involves more voluntary forms of coordination that are more constructive than central planning, or (c) both
---
TopicThe President of the United States cheated on his 3rd wife with a porn star
TheMikh
12/13/18 10:00:43 AM
#54
despicable thing to do imo

the ass wasn't even fat
---
TopicThe bodily function you'd most like to get over and done with for life
TheMikh
12/13/18 6:43:54 AM
#19
as a chronic insomniac

sleep
---
TopicIYO, what kind of Democrat would be best suited for defeating Trump in 2020?
TheMikh
12/12/18 11:18:49 AM
#31
Antifar posted...
ThyCorndog posted...
CE seems to be split on whether the democrats are better off trying to fire up the left, or to try and take votes from the right

Democrats explicitly tried the latter strategy in 2016 and it did not work.

There are more dimensions to politics than "left" and "right." Clinton may have been more "moderate" than Bernie, but on the issues that mattered to voters, Bernie had a lot in common with Trump.
---
TopicIYO, what kind of Democrat would be best suited for defeating Trump in 2020?
TheMikh
12/12/18 11:04:31 AM
#25
RoadsterUFO posted...
Tulsi Gabbard or Jim Webb. A standard cliche neoliberal is just asking for a second Trump term.

I endorse this post wholeheartedly.
---
TopicWhy isnt Birth Control available for free?
TheMikh
12/11/18 8:17:57 PM
#31
TopicGirl kills herself after experiencing racist bullies.
TheMikh
12/11/18 8:17:40 PM
#46
The deep south's got issues.
---
TopicNY Mom CANCELS her BABY SHOWER after her Family MOCKS the NAME!! Is it Dumb??
TheMikh
12/11/18 10:46:55 AM
#52
Sebastian and Senator are kickass names, but Squire? **** that.
---
TopicBrawl is what Melee failed to be
TheMikh
12/10/18 9:01:56 PM
#3
Brawl introduced some interesting new features but its mechanics left much to be desired.
---
TopicLast time you screamed at or scolded a woman?
TheMikh
12/10/18 2:30:33 PM
#4
Probably when my psycho ex drunkenly hit me. Dumped her soon afterward. That was going on six years ago.
---
Topic"There's a difference between a black person and a n-word"
TheMikh
12/09/18 3:10:54 PM
#14
HenryAllbright posted...
Isn't this a Chris Rock bit from the 90s?

yes, but he stopped doing it because he felt it led racists to feel that they could use it
---
TopicWe need the 2nd Amendment to protect us from the government
TheMikh
12/09/18 1:12:15 PM
#55
Civilians need military grade weapons not just as a bulwark against government tyranny, but also to defend themselves against other civilians with military grade weapons.

Remember Greenwood.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/09/18 3:30:35 AM
#64
Favorite posted...
TheMikh posted...
They may not be paid much, but they're paid at at fair market rates, given whatever constraints on economic conditions. That they are not paid enough is a subjective assertion with this in mind, unless the goalpost is shifted to the problem of livability.

what do you think about police pay? i mean ones with big unions behind them.


Police officers and other public sector employees are on the payroll of the state, and are not really subject to normal market forces.

With that said, they're shielded from economic and often legal accountability for their behavior, save for when something gets so out of hand that it invites significant public scrutiny - though I'd like to believe there are responsible departments that maintain standards. Their pay varies dramatically from place to place, presumably based on some decision balancing departmental financial constraints and hiring incentive, but either way, they tend to receive handsome pensions at the end of their careers, all paid for by taxes.

They have the authority - and thus incentive - to look for potential crimes to prosecute (for revenue as is the case when ticketing, seizing property, or otherwise), rather than responding to, behaving, and being paid in accordance with genuine demand for their presence (aside from the municipality funding them). That is to say, there are communities where their presence is simply tolerated by most individuals, moreso than genuinely appreciated for rendering outstanding service, which they are not particularly obligated to do - and thus, some just don't.

Police departments, and perhaps society itself, would be structured very differently if they were not funded by tax dollars and their officers were not seemingly above the law.

I've been giving serious thought as of late as to how a more democratized private sector security-as-a-service "system" might work in order to "compete" with this paradigm to encourage higher standards through a competitive alternative, for lack of better words. The police would still have their funding, but if certain aspects of their roles were carried out more effectively by private citizens within their own communities, municipalities might think twice when making budget decisions.

I'm not a fan of public sector unions. While I'm a little ambivalent about private sector unions, they're at least voluntary (save for where they've gained significant influence over local governments). Public sector unions, on the other hand, exist to demand favorable pay from governments which pay public sector wages - and as such, drive up tax rates, debt, or both.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/09/18 1:24:53 AM
#61
Anteaterking posted...
TheMikh posted...
It is reasonably sound from an economic standpoint, unless you're moving to addressing the issue of livability.


You seem to be arguing a completely tangential point to mine.

The question of what drives the value of labor has been thoroughly discussed and addressed in this topic, so I was hypothesizing about where you might have been heading with:

I'm just explaining that "A lot of people can do those jobs" is not exactly a counterargument to "those jobs are underpaid".

They may not be paid much, but they're paid at at fair market rates, given whatever constraints on economic conditions. That they are not paid enough is a subjective assertion with this in mind, unless the goalpost is shifted to the problem of livability.
---
TopicThis is what a modern day GODDESS looks like.
TheMikh
12/09/18 1:14:04 AM
#53
PepperoniMaster posted...
With her lack of ass, she makes it up with heavenly legs.


Best in the industry for sure.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/09/18 1:03:35 AM
#58
Anteaterking posted...
TheMikh posted...
Police officers and other public sector employees are on the payroll of the state, and are not really subject to normal market forces. The there's a similar case to be made for workers in sectors rife with cronyism or heavy regulation, but that's another discussion.

For workers who are in the private sector, there is an intrinsic value to their labor, but it must be negotiated. Some are overpaid and some are underpaid as such.

Ultimately, the discrepancy between the value of their work and their pay is the cost they pay for working for an organization rather than themselves - part of that value goes to compliance and tax lawyers, accountants, middle and executive management, sales, marketing, consultants, maintenance, supplies/materials, etc., never mind to the government as taxes.

If a worker instead opts to assume all the specialized roles required to run a successful enterprise, I see no reason why they shouldn't receive every dollar they earn - minus any remaining costs associated, of course.


I understand that it's not nearly as simple as value in = value out. I'm just explaining that "A lot of people can do those jobs" is not exactly a counterargument to "those jobs are underpaid".

It is reasonably sound from an economic standpoint, unless you're moving to addressing the issue of livability.

The options in that case are (a) find a better paying job, (b) foster economic conditions which reduce the cost of living, or (c) bargain for a higher income in the existing role. Mandating higher pay is also an option if layoffs and killing small businesses are acceptable consequences.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/09/18 12:55:42 AM
#102
Exactly, so why are we talking about communism again?

You claimed "SJWs" (Conflict Theory -> Culture) and "Communists" (Conflict Theory -> Economics) are at odds with each other, insinuating that as such, they're not both derivatives of Marxist thought.

The manifesto gives answer to several questions some of which are extremely detailed. The demands of the communist party of Germany are listed near the end and as I said most nations already have them, which they would considering that times have changed. If they are not intrinsically communist (not sure what this means) then the term "communist" is irrelevant.

People want the same basic things. Different ideological systems promise the same basic things as ends, but realized through different means.

To go off on a tangent and offer an illustration, Capitalists and Communists both wish to applaud when their respective heads of state make an appearance, and then to stop applauding at some point. The length of the applause varies dramatically, from a matter of seconds to several hours, and the consequences for the first person to stop applauding are also quite different. Just because the applauding inevitably comes to an end doesn't mean the systems are the same, or that the differences are irrelevant.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/09/18 12:32:07 AM
#53
Anti-245 posted...
averagejoel posted...
Anti-245 posted...
So, then collective ownership rather than state ownership?

in the final stage of socialism (i.e. Full Communism) the worker's state becomes obsolete and ceases to exist. so yes, eventually.

But the transition period is not worker controlled?


A party spokesman announces, Communism is on the horizon! A worker asks, What is horizon? To which the party spokesman responds, a horizon is an imaginary line that gets further and further away the closer you get to it.

That is to say, no - and the ugly transition period never ends until the system collapses (see: Russia) or evolves into some sort of hybridized monstrosity (see: China). In the end, full communism - and statelessness, for that matter - is never achieved. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

...which is why Communists should stop idealizing about the empirically flawed system of Marxism-Leninism(-Maoism) and experiment with alternatives like Anarcho-Syndicalism if they believe there's a chance in hell that Communism is possible.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/09/18 12:22:18 AM
#52
Anteaterking posted...
Lorenzo_2003 posted...
You admit that it doesn't take much to be able to do the jobs in your examples and that lots of workers do, in fact, do those jobs, yet you still think they have more value than what is currently paid to them.

Are you sure you've really thought this through?


I don't think you're understanding what he's saying.

You're divorcing the "value" of the work from the "value" of what the work produces.

To use his example of police officer, you derive a certain amount of value from the presence and work of the police in your area, and your personal valuing of that should be relatively independent of how much they are paid.

Police officers and other public sector employees are on the payroll of the state, and are not really subject to normal market forces. The there's a similar case to be made for workers in sectors rife with cronyism or heavy regulation, but that's another discussion.

For workers who are in the private sector, there is an intrinsic value to their labor, but it must be negotiated. Some are overpaid and some are underpaid as such.

Ultimately, the discrepancy between the value of their work and their pay is the cost they pay for working for an organization rather than themselves - part of that value goes to compliance and tax lawyers, accountants, middle and executive management, sales, marketing, consultants, maintenance, supplies/materials, etc., never mind to the government as taxes.

If a worker instead opts to assume all the specialized roles required to run a successful enterprise, I see no reason why they shouldn't receive every dollar they earn - minus any remaining costs associated, of course.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/08/18 11:52:08 PM
#99
Dash_Harber posted...
TheMikh posted...
The fundamental difference between its use by Nazis and its use by opponents of conflict theory today is that the former used it to refer to anything they didn't like in society


This is exactly what Peterson does with Cultural Marxism, though. Remember when he said he didn't think he could support gay marriage legalization in Australia because it would be giving to much ground to the 'Cultural Marxists'?

The most telling feature is that he can't identify a single group or entity that actively claims to be Cultural Marxists. It's just a label he applies to anyone he doesn't agree with to try and discredit them ad-hominem.

Touch.

His claim is indefensible in that context, and you are correct that his use of the term is vague with respect to a concrete definition, aside from the occasional namedropping with questionable accuracy, as far as I know.

Furthermore, his trademark bogeyman "the bloody postmodern neomarxists" is loaded with inaccurate assertions about poststructuralism and its thinkers, which to my understanding quite is distinct from Marxism and its derivatives, despite some overlap here or there.

I maintain that his opposition to antisemitism and to racial identitarianism of any kind (the latter in particular, as there are some otherwise terrible alt-right figureheads that are not antisemitic) is the primary litmus test with respect to whether he falls under the category of the alt-right, or at least its post-2016 incarnation. But he certainly uses the term "cultural marxism" inappropriately.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 10:46:34 PM
#48
tennisdude818 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Anteaterking posted...
TheMikh posted...
Wage stagnation seems to have occurred around the same time as (1) the death of Bretton Woods


Connect those dots for me, please.

Pure fiat did not benefit the working class, but rather the government and its cronies. The longer issued money is in circulation, the less it is worth as prices adjust accordingly - and those who receive it last tend to be the working class. The working class is also more inclined to have their savings in fiat, rather than inflation-resistant equity.


You can't have endless growth of the welfare/warfare state without fiat currency backed by nothing. It's also why the financial sector is so bloated and "too big to fail".

When I say "cronies," I'm primarily referring to the financial sector and to contractors for the government and military.

But yes, absolutely correct.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 10:10:34 PM
#45
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Anti-245 posted...
gan after the new deal itself passed as the business community never once wanted to give away such power. They even proposed a takeover of the country similar to hitler's regime to gain "their" wealth back. I think global competition was just a facade they pulled for when they pulled the trigger.

That sounds an awful lot like a grand conspiracy theory.

It's what happened so you can it a conspiracy if you'd like.

The opposition to the New Deal was real, and I'm also acquainted with claims of a secret plot to implement Fascism, but as far as I know the latter remains unsubstantiated.

But to claim the entire malaise era of the 1970s was a plot by "the elites" is over the top.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/08/18 10:07:42 PM
#97
Marx used communist and socialist interchangeably in his day. Contemporary socialists and communists do not.


Communists were not the only socialists in the 19th Century, and socialists were most certainly not entirely communists; there were many schools of socialism that emerged during that century. Communism was but one of them, and it was intrinsically applied - on paper, anyway - Marxist thought.

And have you actually read the manifesto? Because most of the things he proposes most nations have anyway and they're certainly not communist or even socialist(which is how he used it).


The proposals are not intrinsically communist, but anyone can make hollow proposals that reflect more universal concerns. The devil is in the details of execution - which, to my vague recollection, the manifesto was lacking with respect to.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/08/18 9:40:17 PM
#95
Anti-245 posted...
Also, every communist isn't a Marxist. I'm not sure how we got to communism anyway.


GqHrT1O
---
TopicMeryl Streep's daughter is PREGNANT. Is she HOT or NOT?
TheMikh
12/08/18 9:27:42 PM
#11
she makes margaret thatcher look like a victoria's secret model
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 9:25:24 PM
#42
Anti-245 posted...
gan after the new deal itself passed as the business community never once wanted to give away such power. They even proposed a takeover of the country similar to hitler's regime to gain "their" wealth back. I think global competition was just a facade they pulled for when they pulled the trigger.

That sounds an awful lot like a grand conspiracy theory.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/08/18 9:20:21 PM
#92
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Anti-245 posted...
scar the 1 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Dash_Harber posted...
TheMikh posted...
The former for refusing to buy into their antisemitism,


Yeah, he just calls it 'Cultural Marxism' instead.

Six or seven years ago when use of the term was confined to basement dregs, this claim might have held water, but it has since entered mainstream terminology on the right while stripping itself of the old baggage and implications with respect to those using it, except among those who see everything as a dog whistle.

Go ahead and elaborate what "cultural Marxism" means

It's a continuation of Nazi propaganda.

That's the baggage I was referring to, though the Nazis did not use the phrase "cultural marixsm" itself, but rather "cultural bolshevism," but I'm needlessly splitting hairs.

Nowadays "cultural marxism" a reference to the application of conflict theory (which originated in Marxist thought) to the cultural realm. Regardless of whether or not you believe the theory itself is valid, it has become quite visibly pervasive in every kind of relation in modern society - between cultures, ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations, gender identities, and even generations.

Critics of this trend and those who proliferate it refer to this ideological phenomenon with the umbrella term "cultural marxism."

The fundamental difference between its use by Nazis and its use by opponents of conflict theory today is that the former used it to refer to anything they didn't like in society, whereas the modern use has a clear and quite accurate definition that is as applicable to the identitarian left (see: "SJWs") as it is to the identitarian right (see: the post-2016 alt-right).

All of those "conflicts" were built into America in its foundation and that was noted, which predates any Marxist thought so I'm not sure why Marx is tied to this.
And I disagree with your second point as Peterson and the like clearly know this, yet label any critiques of the U.S. as such. It doesn't even make sense as Marxists and so called sjws rebuke each other every chance they get.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_theories

Karl Marx is the father of the social conflict theory, which is a component of the four major paradigms of sociology.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/conflict-theory.asp

The conflict theory, suggested by Karl Marx, claims society is in a state of perpetual conflict because of competition for limited resources. It holds that social order is maintained by domination and power, rather than consensus and conformity.

SJWs and Communists, despite having common ideological roots, are perennially at odds because Communists maintain focus on the class struggle, and believe identity takes a backseat to economic class.

Conflict may have been baked into the United States since its founding, especially economic and ethnic, but the weaponization of conflict along every possible line is a comparatively recent phenomenon.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 9:00:29 PM
#40
Anti-245 posted...
Boy, I love this. Wages kept up with production until economists like Sowell and Friedman came in with their theories, which, of course, destroyed the "middle class" in America. Then they use colorful language to do what all elites do: shift the blame. Incredible, really.

Global competition and economic strangulation by the government created a double whammy in the 1970s. Fact of the matter is, the middle class was already experiencing difficulties well before the New Right took control in the 1980s. Economic liberalization began under Carter because it was necessary given the circumstances.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:54:21 PM
#38
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Anti-245 posted...
Questionmarktarius posted...
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
clearaflagrantj posted...
"Labor is worth what it produces. No wait it's worth however saturated the labor market is. Oh no I can't even stay logically consistent in one post!"


why not both

labor is worth what value it can deliver relative to other labor or lack thereof delivering the same value within the same or similar context

So, how come labor isn't compensated for what it's worth? I thought no one was owed other people's money?

Labor is a thing to be bought and sold just like anything else that is exchanged, thus its value is the price agreed upon by a laborer and whoever purchases that labor.

Absolute nonsense. No laborer today has as much control as you insinuate.

Laborers lack control as they've been complacent with the state filling the role that collective bargaining was intended to, resulting in far less freedom and opportunity as a direct consequence.

It is not a coincidence that the decline of the old left came hand in hand with state-provided social services/policy, such as Bismarckian state socialism in Germany, or the New Deal in the United States. Not only has the state made such collective activities seemingly irrelevant in the eyes of most workers, but it has also made such activities far more difficult from a legal standpoint, while simultaneously strangling the economy more and more. This has created increasing dependence on (you guessed it) the state, rather than more voluntary social mechanisms.

On a related note, proponents of the "Scandinavian model" of economics are often surprised to learn that countries like Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have no minimum wage - because they have collective bargaining. Whether unionization is economically optimal is another discussion.

So, you're saying that laborers gaining laws to protect themselves against business abuse is why they lost their bargaining power? Not the fact that the elite came in and overturned most of these laws in U.S. and spread propaganda to convince laborers that this was best for them? Talk about revisionist history.

I'm saying that when they delegated their responsibilities to a centralized monopolistic entity run by psychopaths that they had no control over, they got screwed accordingly.

It was a deal with the devil.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:50:14 PM
#36
Anteaterking posted...
TheMikh posted...
Wage stagnation seems to have occurred around the same time as (1) the death of Bretton Woods


Connect those dots for me, please.

Pure fiat did not benefit the working class, but rather the government and its cronies. The longer issued money is in circulation, the less it is worth as prices adjust accordingly - and those who receive it last tend to be the working class. The working class is also more inclined to have their savings in fiat, rather than inflation-resistant equity.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:43:01 PM
#35
FLUFFYGERM posted...
a period of historic inflation and women entering the labor force. Slowing down from historic inflation and having to compete with more people in the labor market both suppress wages.

Ah, that slipped my mind, but it was another major factor.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:39:55 PM
#33
Anti-245 posted...
averagejoel posted...
Anti-245 posted...
averagejoel posted...
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
clearaflagrantj posted...
"Labor is worth what it produces. No wait it's worth however saturated the labor market is. Oh no I can't even stay logically consistent in one post!"


why not both

labor is worth what value it can deliver relative to other labor or lack thereof delivering the same value within the same or similar context

So, how come labor isn't compensated for what it's worth? I thought no one was owed other people's money?

because the means of production are owned privately rather than publicly, allowing the owner to garnish people's wages as they see fit and affording them a massive amount of control over their workers' lives

I'd rather the workers own them than the state but sure.

owned by everyone and operated by the workers is ideal imo

So, then collective ownership rather than state ownership?

If "collective" ownership isn't voluntary, it's basically state ownership of the worst kind. Inevitably, "delegation" mechanisms emerge, and you end up with a Soviet style oligarchy with total control of the economy.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:36:45 PM
#31
I can't even decipher your word salad.


My condolences.

The point I'm making is being something like a police officer, emt, soldier, teacher, day care workers, hospice care, clerical, secretarial, and 90% of blue collar work is demanding and provides an invaluable service to the community, yet since they are relatively low skilled and the labor market is oversaturated with people capable of working these jobs they are paid absolute dogs***. Not enough for a living wage. Their salaries aren't fair based on the value they produce, they are a reflection of the s***ty job market.


Wage stagnation seems to have occurred around the same time as (1) the death of Bretton Woods and (2) the loosening of immigration policy in the mid-to-late 1960s. Just a thought.

That aside, are their wages really too low, or are prices too high?

"But Clear! That's the free market at work! If there are that many people competing for the work that is the amount their work is worth!"

Okay then, let's get rid of minimum wage and have 100% globalism. Cops can make $4/hr, teachers $2.50, no worker protections, 7 12 hour shifts a week, no health insurance, no vacation, no retirement contributions, let the invisible hand of the free market fist our asses, go f***ing wild.


Just because we're not living in Venezuela doesn't mean we have any semblance of a free market.

With that said, globalism is a joke, as most countries have some form of protectionism or another, and even "free trade" deals are big corporate shams.
---
TopicAre Thomas Sowell's books any good?
TheMikh
12/08/18 8:06:05 PM
#27
Anti-245 posted...
Questionmarktarius posted...
Anti-245 posted...
TheMikh posted...
clearaflagrantj posted...
"Labor is worth what it produces. No wait it's worth however saturated the labor market is. Oh no I can't even stay logically consistent in one post!"


why not both

labor is worth what value it can deliver relative to other labor or lack thereof delivering the same value within the same or similar context

So, how come labor isn't compensated for what it's worth? I thought no one was owed other people's money?

Labor is a thing to be bought and sold just like anything else that is exchanged, thus its value is the price agreed upon by a laborer and whoever purchases that labor.

Absolute nonsense. No laborer today has as much control as you insinuate.

Laborers lack control as they've been complacent with the state filling the role that collective bargaining was intended to, resulting in far less freedom and opportunity as a direct consequence.

It is not a coincidence that the decline of the old left came hand in hand with state-provided social services/policy, such as Bismarckian state socialism in Germany, or the New Deal in the United States. Not only has the state made such collective activities seemingly irrelevant in the eyes of most workers, but it has also made such activities far more difficult from a legal standpoint, while simultaneously strangling the economy more and more. This has created increasing dependence on (you guessed it) the state, rather than more voluntary social mechanisms.

On a related note, proponents of the "Scandinavian model" of economics are often surprised to learn that countries like Sweden, Finland, and Denmark have no minimum wage - because they have collective bargaining. Whether unionization is economically optimal is another discussion.
---
TopicWhat particular statements by Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson make them alt righ
TheMikh
12/08/18 7:50:21 PM
#90
Anti-245 posted...
scar the 1 posted...
TheMikh posted...
Dash_Harber posted...
TheMikh posted...
The former for refusing to buy into their antisemitism,


Yeah, he just calls it 'Cultural Marxism' instead.

Six or seven years ago when use of the term was confined to basement dregs, this claim might have held water, but it has since entered mainstream terminology on the right while stripping itself of the old baggage and implications with respect to those using it, except among those who see everything as a dog whistle.

Go ahead and elaborate what "cultural Marxism" means

It's a continuation of Nazi propaganda.

That's the baggage I was referring to, though the Nazis did not use the phrase "cultural marixsm" itself, but rather "cultural bolshevism," but I'm needlessly splitting hairs.

Nowadays "cultural marxism" a reference to the application of conflict theory (which originated in Marxist thought) to the cultural realm. Regardless of whether or not you believe the theory itself is valid, it has become quite visibly pervasive in every kind of relation in modern society - between cultures, ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations, gender identities, and even generations.

Critics of this trend and those who proliferate it refer to this ideological phenomenon with the umbrella term "cultural marxism."

The fundamental difference between its use by Nazis and its use by opponents of conflict theory today is that the former used it to refer to anything they didn't like in society, whereas the modern use has a clear and quite accurate definition that is as applicable to the identitarian left (see: "SJWs") as it is to the identitarian right (see: the post-2016 alt-right).
---
TopicA civil war has broken out between Bernie and Beto supporters
TheMikh
12/08/18 2:36:29 PM
#20
bernie was well meaning but ultimately sold out

beto has been an empty suit from the get-go
---
TopicThe Purge makes no sense...
TheMikh
12/08/18 1:45:38 PM
#12
EliteC posted...
Southernfatman posted...
Haven't seen the movies, but I don't see that happening so well in the south.

God only knows what these people will do to us if they catch us. These southerners, they probably pray for a home invasion every single day. They can't wait to get their hands on home invaders, so they can blast them with shotguns and do God knows what to them,


Very true quote. Where is it from?

always sunny according to google
---
Board List
Page List: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 ... 17