Here we go. His name is Bob Basso, but he takes on the persona of Thomas Paine to show how those principles need to be applied today.

Interesting ...

The Second American Revolution
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKFKGrmsBDk&NR=1

We the People Stimulus Package
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jeYscnFpEyA

Open Letter to President Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxDwBYjL3Fc&feature=related

This is exactly how I feel.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

Thomas Paine on to Washington
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=le2OnDKqj3g&feature=channel_page

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

It's interesting - no one else has an opinion on what this guy is saying?

I would think what he is saying crosses a lot of boundaries - I am guessing he has a conservative/libertarian background based on what he is saying. But also, he is just talking Common Sense IMHO.

If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University

\



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 02:51PM by Alias.

Nothing makes an ignorant racist more credible than putting on a powder wig and costume.

What makes him ignorant, and a racist?

Funny how you made Alias's point :)

Why is it racist to not want illegal immigrants in this country? Why cant they stay in their own country or become legal immigrants. It is not racist to not want to help criminals out.

Well, that is the classic argument to discredit folks that want immigration enforcement - somehow you are a racist since obviously your only objection to them being here would be due to the color of their skin. The fact they are breaking the law, causing your taxes to be raised, and getting in line for services they don't deserve would never enter into your thinking.

Speaking of racist...........

LOL

Ruth Bader Ginsburg with the true reasons for Roe v Wade....
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=50819

Quote

...
In the 90-minute interview in Ginsburg’s temporary chambers, Ginsburg gave the Times her perspective on Judge Sonia Sotomayor, President Obama’s first high court nomination. She also discussed her views on abortion.

Her comment about her belief that the court had wanted to limit certain populations through abortion came after the interviewer asked Ginsburg: “If you were a lawyer again, what would you want to accomplish as a future feminist agenda?”

“Reproductive choice has to be straightened out,” Ginsburg said. “There will never be a woman of means without choice anymore. That just seems to me so obvious. The states that changed their abortion laws before Roe (to make abortion legal) are not going to change back. So we have a policy that only affects poor women, and it can never be otherwise, and I don’t know why this hasn’t been said more often.”

Ginsburg discussed her surprise at the outcome of Harris v. McRae, a 1980 decision that upheld the Hyde Amendment, which prohibited the use of Medicaid and other federal funds for abortions.
...

So frickin funny, and sadly the point of the left. So her thinking is the court wanted to limit "certain populations" seems contradicted by her later statement that women of means would never be left without a choice. Then she is "surprised" later that they limited federal funding... so was she surprised since she thought the point of Roe v Wade was to limit minorities? That one is going to be an interesting one to get to the bottom of I am sure.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/10/2009 05:13PM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well, that is the classic argument to discredit
> folks that want immigration enforcement - somehow
> you are a racist since obviously your only
> objection to them being here would be due to the
> color of their skin. The fact they are breaking
> the law, causing your taxes to be raised, and
> getting in line for services they don't deserve
> would never enter into your thinking.


The reason that is the classic argument is because historically, and contemporarily, this is the case.

The arguments about breaking the law (other than the original sin of crossing the border illegally), causing taxes to be raised and getting in line for services they don't deserve are all straw men and rather ill-informed.

If you have a more nuanced and educated understanding of immigration, illegal or otherwise, in this country, you would understand that the ones that come here illegally came here for work, and when they can no longer obtain work, they aren't, for the most part, going to stick around and commit crimes. They're going to head back home with whatever cash they have socked away. "Illegal immigrants" tend to come here solely to make as much cash as they can, and leave once they can retire comfortably back home where the costs of living are so much lower. (granted, there are some that come here and establish roots, and never go back, but they end up being better "non" citizens than many black and white "citizens" of this country who sit on welfare and deal small amounts of crack and weed and destroy their own neighborhoods, whether those neighborhoods are trailers or rowhouses.)

People who are rabidly against illegal immigration tend to conflate the crimes committed by legal, documented workers of the same race/ethnicity/national origin with the problem of illegal immigration. Yes, we all know there are a lot of crimes committed by hispanics, and we all know there are a lot of hispanics who are illegal aliens. BUT, that doesn't mean that all crimes are committed by illegal aliens. Just because some Joes are tall, and many guys named Joe commit crimes, doesn't mean that all crimes are commited by tall people.

Taxes being raised because of illegal immigrants? When? How? If anything, your taxes are lower, or at least your cost of living is lower because of all that cheap labor. Imagine if the dishwasher and the food prep at your local restaurant was making an average American's wages? Your food would cost a lot more.

The only "services" these illegal immigrants are receiving is, maybe the local emergency room of a privately owned, for-profit or church or charity owned non-profit hospital, in the event of a catastrophic injury that would force them to risk encountering an authority that might deport them. Don't forget, they are illegal. They aren't getting food stamps, they aren't getting welfare, they aren't going to get the services that poor white and black people get, like social security and welfare, they aren't getting disability or unemployment benefits. BECAUSE THEY ARE ILLEGAL, LACK DOCUMENTATION, RISK DEPORTATION ANYTIME THEY PRESENT THEMSELVES TO A GOVERNMENT AGENCY.


The reason people accuse the "anti-immigration" people of being racist is because anyone who is not a racist understands that it is a highly complex issue with many implications. Besides, the anti people don't help their case when they come across sounding like they aren't against illegal mexicans, but really just against all mexicans, or when they make generalizations that have nothing to do with legal or illegal visa status. Especially since most illegals are not even Mexican, but probably from a more impoverished central American country, and even from Eastern Europe, Africa, and Asia. I'm pretty sure that most of the "patriots" who rant and rave about illegal immigration have no idea that there are quite a large number of illegal immigrants from Asia in this country. Though, if they ever do figure this out, that will only mean bad times for all the American born and naturalized asians in this country.


okay, and that being said, at the level of a rant, I'll try to get back to the original question of why people like this don't gain more traction:

I agree with a lot of what Thomas Paine and this neo movement are about. However, they need to play down the easily criticized aspects. I also agree with a lot of what Ron Paul says, but his arguments against the Federal Reserve and Taxation are easy targets for his detractors.

If you could form a group based on the common denominators of all these "strict constitutionalist" or "libertarian" or "founding fathers" groups, MINUS all the hot-button, easy to criticize (or hard to grasp or that threaten people's core misconceptions about the world) positions, you'd probably have a group that 75% of the people in this country could get behind.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 01:16AM by Thurston Moore.

I had a conversation here once with Vince... ugh thanks for making me remember it... in any case, I deal with a lot of Hispanic folks in the area fairly frequently. I had some do some work for me, I have some that are friends, and I know many that are just here trying to find a job, cannot, and instead drink themselves stupid and get into a lot of fights.

I have had a LOT of conversations with these folks on various occasions on the reasons why they come here, why it is a problem for them to come here legally, and what do they think should happen. The folks that sit on their high horse and say we are all just racists are truly ignorant motherfuckers in my point of view. They don't take the time to realize that it isn't just about the Hispanics, it is about all of them. I have other friends that DID immigrate legally - it was years of constantly submitting paperwork over and over again, thousands of dollars in fees, and eventually, after years of hard work, getting the opportunity to stand up and swear their allegiance to our country. You know what - those folks wanted to come here too - and they worked here LEGALLY the entire time they have been here - they jumped through all the hoops and did everything our laws asked of them. Those people actually get it - they give a shit not only about themselves, but also about our country. Maybe you should ask people who come here and do it legally why they do it and how they feel about the folks that come here illegally.

As for the ones that come illegally, sure, they come for an opportunity to make money, and some of them come for the right reasons, and they do ok here even if they are here illegally. In many cases they couldn't get VISAs from their home countries without paying large bribes - seems there is a price to pay if you want to get out from under oppressive governments in Central and South America in some cases. Again though, common sense tells you that at some point you have to limit immigration to your country for a number of reasons. Social services, jobs, housing - they don't just all make themselves available because 20 million new people show up on your doorstep that you didn't plan for. Funny, then you have a lack of good jobs, housing begins to get very expensive since it can't meet demand, and social services outstrip your ability to pay for them since you never figured on having to collect taxes or fees to cover all these people you didn't account for. Sound familiar?

I believe in common sense to figure out most of our problems. Unfortunately common sense says we need to slow down the rate of immigration to our country for a variety of reasons, the least of which the fact that these folks that come in illegally are subject to exploitation by various groups for a variety of reasons. Wanting to have border enforcement and at least some kind of system to deal with immigration, and folks that want to come and work here is not racist. But folks that want to have a way to quickly stir up their base can throw out that word - racism - and get all sorts of blind response to it since only those evil nasty conservative/republicans can be racists, right?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 01:56AM by Registered Voter.

Immigration policy has and always will be the fuel for racism. When we were primarily a white protestant country...catholics were restricted...when we were primarily northern european based country, southern eupeans and asians were restricted. It is a long history of racism and discrimination and nothing has changed. The rule is simple..those that have want more...and people we believe are "different" then us evil.

The current situation with undocumented workers from Mexico is from the same well. There is only one reason they are here...we need them. As our society ages...as our home grown young people move up the economic pyramid we need people to do the real work.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Immigration policy has and always will be the fuel
> for racism. When we were primarily a white
> protestant country...catholics were
> restricted...when we were primarily northern
> european based country, southern eupeans and
> asians were restricted. It is a long history of
> racism and discrimination and nothing has changed.
> The rule is simple..those that have want
> more...and people we believe are "different" then
> us evil.
>
> The current situation with undocumented workers
> from Mexico is from the same well. There is only
> one reason they are here...we need them. As our
> society ages...as our home grown young people move
> up the economic pyramid we need people to do the
> real work.

Fuel - no doubt. But being against illegal immigration is NOT, by definition, RACISM. Yet that is the argument we see constantly as the knee-jerk answer by folks. I find it interesting that Ruth Bader Ginsburg made the comment that she thought abortion rights established in Roe v Wade was done to limit "undesirable" populations. Sounds like racism to me. And yet only conservatives can be racist hmm? BS.

In any case, if we actually acknowledged the common sense as to why some of these policies need to be in place, we could maybe get past all the "fuel" that is used by opportunists to advance their agendas as well.

Thomas Paine was the greatest Englishman ever. The Age of Reason is one of the most amazing books considering when it was written and it reads like it was written yesterday.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Reason

Nothing makes an ignorant racist more credible than putting on a powder wig and costume.

A person who would make such an absurd statement about Thomas Paine has revealed himself to be an abject idiot. Go back to whining about Mike O'Meara moron, you are out of your depth here.

Pretty insightful, that is for sure. If we all lived this way, politcal correctness would be a thing of the past...

From the Wiki:

Quote

...
At the beginning of Part I of the Age of Reason, Paine lays out his personal creed:

I believe in one God, and no more; and I hope for happiness beyond this life.
I believe in the equality of man; and I believe that religious duties consist in doing justice, loving mercy, and endeavouring to make our fellow-creatures happy.
But, lest it should be supposed that I believe many other things in addition to these, I shall, in the progress of this work, declare the things I do not believe, and my reasons for not believing them.
I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.
All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.
I do not mean by this declaration to condemn those who believe otherwise; they have the same right to their belief as I have to mine. But it is necessary to the happiness of man that he be mentally faithful to himself. Infidelity does not consist in believing, or in disbelieving; it consists in professing to believe what he does not believe.[15]

Paine's creed encapsulates many of the major themes of the rest of his text: a firm belief in a creator-God; a skepticism regarding most supernatural claims (here the afterlife, later in the text, miracles); a conviction that virtues should be derived from a consideration for others rather than oneself; an animus against corrupt religious institutions; and an emphasis on the individual's right of conscience.[16]

...

He would be as condemned today as he was then for such statements regarding the divinity of god...and organized religion.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

What? Why, because he was a Deist? He had his own private belief in God, but he also believed that if folks wanted to be in a religion that was THEIR choice. Also he didn't want religion to play a part in government, but certainly your morals should be shaped by your belief in God - a God. He just didn't want to see religios persecution over a single religion, or the total absence of religion that was being promoted in France at the time he was writing this stuff.

Which way do you want it Vince? Do you actually believe in ANYTHING, or do you just tear down things you don't understand or don't know how to believe in?

Seriously, sometimes you should just not say anything unless you have a clue. Most times you just spout shit that requires some kind of cypher to even figure out what you are saying.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 07:05PM by Registered Voter.

Anyone publically not believing in the trinity of god would be condemned by all established christian religions as not being a christian.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Which is why he almost got thrown in jail while he was in England and later was jailed in France for bit.

Today obviously we are so much more enlightened...some of us anyway. Today his words are even more timely.

You would judge someone for this Vince? I mean that is so... um.. unlike you... NOT.

lol



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 08:17PM by Registered Voter.

All organized christians religions believe in the trinity today. As I said earlier...Thomas Paine would be as condemned today as he would in his own time. While today organized religion does not have the power to throw someone in jail for their personal beliefs...they'd certainly like to.

And let me try to clarify...by recognizing the truth I am not espousing it...quite to the contrary. I hope you can understand that...if not we can try again.

What exactly do you think I am saying? And please try to leave your anger at the door.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 08:52PM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He would be as condemned today as he was then for
> such statements regarding the divinity of
> god...and organized religion.

Lets go back to your first statement - back in the day, religions held sway, and if you were accused of heresy you could go to jail or be killed, etc.

While most Christian religions today do believe in the trinity (and not all of them so strongly as Catholics) - there are many religions that don't. For example Jews and Muslims, etc. Catholicism tends to be the most intolerant of other Christian religions as they seem to think they have some mandate to be THE religion of Christ, but most rational, thinking people are tolerant of others. Its not like the majority of Christian religions setup as Madrases and preach death to non-believers. If we are to believe that we should all be tolerant of others, as even their own religions teach them, then we need to leave religion at the door, or at the home in this case, or perhaps a private school. At the same time, you should be able to carry your bible or other religious books or items with you if you so desire. Believe in your God(s), but don't base laws of exclusion or inclusion on religion. Use common sense when you have to come up with solutions that will allow for compromise.

Perhaps you would like to elaborate on why you would be unwilling to accept what he is saying? Maybe that would let us understand why your broad statement makes sense today. All I see when you make a statement like that is a blindly arrogant response, in line with most of your previous crap.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 10:06PM by Registered Voter.

Sorry..I dont respond to anger. But let's get one thing straight...all Christian religions believe in the trinity. If you don't..you are not accepted by the body of other christian faiths. And anyone claiming to be christian and holding such beliefs would be condemned by the body of christian faiths.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

The only anger I see is with you Vince. You appear to have deep seated anger over many issues. Perhaps that is why you are on medication(s)? If you want to come and put your 2 cents in, at least bring real coin to the table. You have these one line shticks that are somehow supposed to just explain everything. Honestly your non-answers are just a pile of troll turds.

such anger...unsubstantiated claims...relax...

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> such anger...unsubstantiated claims...relax...read the Nicean Creed

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince - maybe when you learn to actually have a conversation about issues people (like me) would not lash out at you when you post your tripe.

It is people like you that ensure no progress will be made on coming to common solutions because you let your race hatreds (ie white people are evil bigots) get in the way of your common sense. Whitey is not the big bad guy anymore dude, get over it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/11/2009 10:50PM by Registered Voter.

wow..you are all over the place tonight! The truth may be hard to hear..in fact it always is!

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

No, I am not all over anything. I offered my solutions, and thoughts on the subject. All you have done is your usual - come in, make some wide open statement that somehow is supposed to refute everything that has been presented or said. You decided to jump into the conversation, so either put up, or shut up. I have seen many of your posts in the past, and it is pretty obvious where your belief in prejudices are. They color every discussion you have here - and you are the biggest spouter of racial BS in response to what folks post here.

First you implied racism in the issues with immigration, then when I refuted/questioned your racism comments, you turned around and said that Christians would condemn his ideas. Got a better solution? Lets hear it. I rarely see you put forth anything positive - what a sad miserable life you must lead. Grow a pair and stick your neck out for once - and stand up FOR something, instead of just ripping apart things you "don't get"

jesus christ..stop with all the anger...

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

No anger Vince. Your perceptions are off. I am just tired of your "usual" response - all you know how to do is tear down, you seem to have no clue how to move forward. You are one of these people that has nothing to offer for a positive outcome.

Wow..I just listened to those videos...and you buy into that crap? It's all hog wash designed to enflame. Did you make the call he wants you to? If you didnt...you are..as he claims...a traitor.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> No anger Vince. Your perceptions are off. I am
> just tired of your "usual" response - all you know
> how to do is tear down, you seem to have no clue
> how to move forward. You are one of these people
> that has nothing to offer for a positive outcome.

So not true! You just dont agree with them. The big issue behind your "Thomas Paine" is illegal immigrants. I have espoused a solution for that problem. Give them all legal status...put them on the road to citizenship...get them on the tax rolls...unionize them. There my solutions.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Bush proposed giving them legal status with guest worker passes. He proposed putting them on the path to citizenship, paying taxes, etc. Didn't you hate all of his ideas?

Why Unionize them? Current labor laws don't protect them adequately?

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bush proposed giving them legal status with guest
> worker passes. He proposed putting them on the
> path to citizenship, paying taxes, etc. Didn't you
> hate all of his ideas?
>
> Why Unionize them? Current labor laws don't
> protect them adequately?

No I didnt..though I do not believe his proposals had them on the road to citizenship..rather a permanent under working class category...that I didnt like. But I supported it's totality.

As far as unionization. Part of the problem we have is that we have turned labor into a commodity...to be bought and sold at the cheapest price possible. With that business strategy...it is just a matter of time until home based and off shore sources of cheap labor are used. If this country reinstilled it's faith in the working man and his union elected representatives maybe...just maybe this trend could be reversed. I am very anxious to see how the union ownership of the "new" GM will work out...perhaps that is another mpdel to bring back the respect to labor that it justly deserves.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Unions are going to kill us in the end. We cannot produce goods and services to compete globally if we continue to embrace unionism. If you look at the whys of the motor company failures it was two-fold. One was the lack of planning and adapting to car trends by the management, but the other is the per-vehicle cost of the exorbitant benefit packages the unions negotiated. There is no fighting that issue - the Chinese don't allow, and won't have, unions any time in the near future, so their cost to produce the same goods is much lower than ours.

The time for unions is over for now - maybe in the future if we can get businesses back in the country to produce goods - but right now unions will keep most businesses away from the US due to the high costs involved. Unions may sound wonderful, but right now they are not helping the US produce a better product, or lower costs - and to compete globally we are going to need to do that. Having Congress raise the minimum wage isn't solving the problem either - they need to figure out ways to provide inexpensive, safe, decent housing for younger and low wage earners - that would actually be a more concrete step in helping our workforce. Just raising the minimum wage makes it harder for small businesses to compete, raises taxes they have to pay, and the prices consumers have to pay for goods and services. Since we don't live in a utopia, attempting to make everyone equal is really counterproductive - and it just doesn't work. Eventually if there is no incentive for innovation (when we all become equal, why improve), none will occur unless we have wars (usually the best catalyst for technological advancement).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2009 01:28AM by Registered Voter.

Doesn't anyone find it just a little bit unsettling that in this country, unions are conflated with "communism" while in Communist China, they won't allow unions?

Turns out, "communism" in practice is just authoritarianism, and in concept is something entirely different.

But, also, it isn't that Unions as a concept are bad, it's the in practice part.

Unions serve a purpose. But they have been corrupted and abused.

Give anything enough time, and it will be corrupted and abused.

(sad news for the pretty 20 year old blonde virgin, if such exists.)

Hell, anyone who thinks unions represent workers should take a walk past the AFL-CIO headquarters at 16th and I st, within view of the white house, across the street from the Motion Picture Association of America. They are a lobbying group, just like the MPAA. They don't serve the worker, they serve their organization, furthering its powers and influence.

I mean, that is some really nice digs. These guys are now like a county board, or a senator, or any special interest group, like the AARP, they have the numbers of unwitting simple folk to have enough clout to create their own power establishment.

I think seeing a dozen Ridgewells catering trucks pull up to cater a party a few years ago made me realize, these aren't "union guys", these are Washington Establishment guys, sucking off the teet of the taxpayer.

[]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/29/2012 03:32PM by Alias.

Alias Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Stop with the stupid racism shit and look up the
> word, "illegal."


"illegal", fine. People who are in this country without a valid visa or resident alien card. They don't have a proper work permit.

But you have to admit, the most vocal people ranting about "illegals" are unable to differentiate between illegal and legal residents. They make generalized comments about going into a restaurant or store and seeing "mexicans" and then go off on their tirades about how the illegals are ruining this country. They never get into the details of how they were able to ascertain the legal status of the "mexican" (and don't forget, they aren't all mexican, some come from Honduras, or El Salvador, or Guatemala, etc.). The overwhelming majority of these "mexicans" are legal. There is only about 10%, maybe 12% that are illegal, so anytime some fool or idiot makes a comment about "those mexicans" and then goes off about illegal immigration, he proves himself to be not concerned about illegal immigration, but a racist.

The people who comment on the interwebz about illegal aliens are mostly ranting about not being comfortable seeing brown people doing jobs that high school kids used to do. They'll claim it's about stealing jobs from hard working Americans, or that they use up public services, or that they are here illegaly, but what really bothers them is that they are brown.

Really. There might be that one guy who is so vehemently against illegal immigration because it really bothers him that they broke the law to get here, but he is no more sane than the people who get pissed off at someone who speeds.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2009 02:32AM by Thurston Moore.

Alias Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Immigration policy has and always will be the fuel
> for racism. When we were primarily a white
> protestant country...catholics were
> restricted...when we were primarily northern
> european based country, southern eupeans and
> asians were restricted. It is a long history of
> racism and discrimination and nothing has changed.
> The rule is simple..those that have want
> more...and people we believe are "different" then
> us evil.
> _________________
>
> Stop with the stupid racism shit and look up the
> word, "illegal."

Illegal is a status that can be changed with the stroke of a pen.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Thurston Moore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hell, anyone who thinks unions represent workers
> should take a walk past the AFL-CIO headquarters
> at 16th and I st, within view of the white house,
> across the street from the Motion Picture
> Association of America. They are a lobbying
> group, just like the MPAA. They don't serve the
> worker, they serve their organization, furthering
> its powers and influence.
>
> I mean, that is some really nice digs. These guys
> are now like a county board, or a senator, or any
> special interest group, like the AARP, they have
> the numbers of unwitting simple folk to have
> enough clout to create their own power
> establishment.
>
> I think seeing a dozen Ridgewells catering trucks
> pull up to cater a party a few years ago made me
> realize, these aren't "union guys", these are
> Washington Establishment guys, sucking off the
> teet of the taxpayer.


The labor movement is responsible for all major improvements in the working mans work life in the last 150 years. Youd all be working 60 or more hours a week if they didnt exist. Given the people the AFL-CIO leadership deals with they should have fancy digs.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Thurston Moore Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Doesn't anyone find it just a little bit
> unsettling that in this country, unions are
> conflated with "communism" while in Communist
> China, they won't allow unions?
>
> Turns out, "communism" in practice is just
> authoritarianism, and in concept is something
> entirely different.
>
> But, also, it isn't that Unions as a concept are
> bad, it's the in practice part.
>
> Unions serve a purpose. But they have been
> corrupted and abused.
>
> Give anything enough time, and it will be
> corrupted and abused.
>
> (sad news for the pretty 20 year old blonde
> virgin, if such exists.)


As if any and every organization couldnt be accused of the same thing..from governments to religions. Most people in VA are brainwashed against unions..I ghuarantee you this...if VA wasnt a Right to Work state..you wouldn't have undocumented workers taking union jobs.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/12/2009 07:03AM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Immigration policy has and always will be the fuel
> for racism. When we were primarily a white
> protestant country...catholics were
> restricted...when we were primarily northern
> european based country, southern eupeans and
> asians were restricted. It is a long history of
> racism and discrimination and nothing has changed.
> The rule is simple..those that have want
> more...and people we believe are "different" then
> us evil.
>
> The current situation with undocumented workers
> from Mexico is from the same well. There is only
> one reason they are here...we need them. As our
> society ages...as our home grown young people move
> up the economic pyramid we need people to do the
> real work.


Sure i believe about 50% of the argument about illegal immigrants may be based in some sort of racism and or xenophobia. I and many other Americans however do not. If these people were white and invading our country by the millions each year I would still have a problem with it. It just so happens that a poor country who happens to be comprised of people with darker skin tone than ours is in close proximity to us. Look at the economic impact that is caused by them coming in Mass. You say a majority are well to do and pay taxes. Well I believe a majority are well to do individuals, but i doubt even 10% of them pay any kind of taxes (outside of making purchases).

You cannot call it anything but semi-slave labor that does nothing but help out businesses. Who should be paying a decent livable wage and giving health benefits, but instead they have a large selection of people who have no rights what so ever, basically competing to accept the lowest wage.

Like I've said before, a nation has a right to know who and why someone comes into their country. Again, like I've said before, if you want to fix the real problem, these people need to stand up and make their own government accountable for these problems. Greed and corruption have ravaged their country, and they need to revolt against their government. The American citizens should not have to carry the burden of this countries problems.

The answer to that problem isnt to kick these people out of the country...deny them access to basic safety net programs. The solution to that problem is to have an immigragtion policy that equals the need for lower cost labor. Document them...give them the resources to come out from the shadow pool of labor.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:

>
> As if any and every organization couldnt be
> accused of the same thing..from governments to
> religions. Most people in VA are brainwashed
> against unions..I ghuarantee you this...if VA
> wasnt a Right to Work state..you wouldn't have
> undocumented workers taking union jobs.

No, instead you would have Unions making sure the undocumented workers got no work at all. Nothing like a little union-ized prejudice, hmm? And they wouldn't give them the option to join the union without some steep bribes.

> No, instead you would have Unions making sure the
> undocumented workers got no work at all. Nothing
> like a little union-ized prejudice, hmm? And they
> wouldn't give them the option to join the union
> without some steep bribes.

Ridiculous comments.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Which is why organizations like these exist - and even hold seminars on the problem

AUD Conference: Confronting Corruption in Labor Unions
http://www.uniondemocracy.org/Education/audconffightingcorruption.htm

Seriously Vince - seriously, sometimes you just need to say nothing.

There's are people giving seminars on anything for a buck. Unions are a favorite target for those who try to turn human labor into a commodity bought at the cheapest price.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's are people giving seminars on anything for
> a buck. Unions are a favorite target for those
> who try to turn human labor into a commodity
> bought at the cheapest price.


Latinos are the ones who make labor cheap.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There's are people giving seminars on anything for
> a buck. Unions are a favorite target for those
> who try to turn human labor into a commodity
> bought at the cheapest price.

A page from Vince...

ridiculous comments

Seriously.

Al Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Vince(1) Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There's are people giving seminars on anything
> for
> > a buck. Unions are a favorite target for those
> > who try to turn human labor into a commodity
> > bought at the cheapest price.
>
>
> Latinos are the ones who make labor cheap.


No..in the state of VA...the Right to Work laws are designed to weaken trade unions thus diminishing the ability of labor to negotiate equally with management. Once anything is turned into a commodity...the price drives all decisions.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

Thank god we have labor laws huh? Thank god you have free choice to look for a new job if you don't like the one you are in.

Unions have their time and place. Right now in the US they are more of a detriment than a help. Not that management in many of these companies (like the automakers for instance) helped their causes any, but at this point if the cost of our labor stays so high no one will want to open any new large manufacturing businesses here without a lot of tax incentives from the government.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Thank god we have labor laws huh? Thank god you
> have free choice to look for a new job if you
> don't like the one you are in.
>
> Unions have their time and place. Right now in the
> US they are more of a detriment than a help. Not
> that management in many of these companies (like
> the automakers for instance) helped their causes
> any, but at this point if the cost of our labor
> stays so high no one will want to open any new
> large manufacturing businesses here without a lot
> of tax incentives from the government.


Yeah..I guess we should pay people $10 a day to compete! In the US only 6% of the labor force is represented by a union. One of the lowest in any industrial country. Unions are not the problem.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/13/2009 08:12PM by Vince(1).

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>Unions are not the problem.


yeah, illegal aliens are the problem.

Vince(1) Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Thank god we have labor laws huh? Thank god you
> > have free choice to look for a new job if you
> > don't like the one you are in.
> >
> > Unions have their time and place. Right now in
> the
> > US they are more of a detriment than a help.
> Not
> > that management in many of these companies
> (like
> > the automakers for instance) helped their
> causes
> > any, but at this point if the cost of our labor
> > stays so high no one will want to open any new
> > large manufacturing businesses here without a
> lot
> > of tax incentives from the government.
>
>
> Yeah..I guess we should pay people $10 a day to
> compete! In the US only 6% of the labor force is
> represented by a union. One of the lowest in any
> industrial country. Unions are not the problem.

Then what is the answer oh Union Swami? Tell us how Unions can change the practices of businesses in the US so they can compete with overseas products - other than figuring the cost of shipping products here to the US (ie the shipping costs is the only place they might make up some ground in costs).

The steel industry, shipbuilders, automakers, etc have all been affected by this right? It seems that most of the industries/businesses that are currently flourishing with unions in the US are ones that don't have to compete or perform globally (US telecoms, government, health care, etc) - I don't see how that can be sustainable in the long term.

Here Vince - your hero comes through for you.

Did Obama require that all infrastructure jobs in the stimulus bill go to union workers?
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_require_that_all_infrastructure_jobs.html

Quote

...
It's not often that we receive chain e-mails that actually check out, but this one, while exaggerated, is largely right. On Feb. 6, Obama issued Executive Order 13502 that encourages federal agencies to "consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in Federal procurement." A project labor agreement requires contractors and subcontractors to pay union wages and to recognize collective bargaining agreements. The order "does not require" project labor agreements, but it's reasonable to say that "encouragement" from the president is likely to carry considerable weight with federal agencies.
...

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Unions are going to kill us in the end. We cannot
> produce goods and services to compete globally if
> we continue to embrace unionism. If you look at
> the whys of the motor company failures it was
> two-fold. One was the lack of planning and
> adapting to car trends by the management, but the
> other is the per-vehicle cost of the exorbitant
> benefit packages the unions negotiated. There is
> no fighting that issue - the Chinese don't allow,
> and won't have, unions any time in the near
> future, so their cost to produce the same goods is
> much lower than ours.

Do you believe the average American worker should have to receive pay cuts? How do you envision pay cuts happening without a reduction in the American worker's standard of living?

I suspect these changes will affect the non-college educated far, far more than the college educated, but I am uncomfortable with degrading the lifestyle of the working poor even further ...

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Here Vince - your hero comes through for you.
>
> Did Obama require that all infrastructure jobs in
> the stimulus bill go to union workers?
> http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/did_obama_re
> quire_that_all_infrastructure_jobs.html
>
>
> ...
> It's not often that we receive chain e-mails that
> actually check out, but this one, while
> exaggerated, is largely right. On Feb. 6, Obama
> issued Executive Order 13502 that encourages
> federal agencies to "consider requiring the use of
> project labor agreements in connection with
> large-scale construction projects in order to
> promote economy and efficiency in Federal
> procurement." A project labor agreement requires
> contractors and subcontractors to pay union wages
> and to recognize collective bargaining agreements.
> The order "does not require" project labor
> agreements, but it's reasonable to say that
> "encouragement" from the president is likely to
> carry considerable weight with federal agencies.
> ...
>

I have no problem with that executive order. Unionized labor should get first crack at a job vs. commodised labor.

Registered Voter...a Big talking coward..big man on FFXU...little man in life.

formerhick76 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Registered Voter Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Unions are going to kill us in the end. We
> cannot
> > produce goods and services to compete globally
> if
> > we continue to embrace unionism. If you look at
> > the whys of the motor company failures it was
> > two-fold. One was the lack of planning and
> > adapting to car trends by the management, but
> the
> > other is the per-vehicle cost of the exorbitant
> > benefit packages the unions negotiated. There
> is
> > no fighting that issue - the Chinese don't
> allow,
> > and won't have, unions any time in the near
> > future, so their cost to produce the same goods
> is
> > much lower than ours.
>
> Do you believe the average American worker should
> have to receive pay cuts? How do you envision pay
> cuts happening without a reduction in the American
> worker's standard of living?
>
> I suspect these changes will affect the
> non-college educated far, far more than the
> college educated, but I am uncomfortable with
> degrading the lifestyle of the working poor even
> further ...

No - I don't think we have to look at pay cuts (yet). The average full-time American worker outside of unions generally has access to "affordable health care" but makes choices between convenience and costs as to what they want to pay short and long term. I think you need to have some reining in on executive compensation for publicly held companies. Sole proprietorship and maybe limited partnerships can do whatever - if you are the owner and can make a profit on what you produce, more power to you. If all publicly held companies had to adhere to the same "standards" of compensation (some formula based on number of employees vs operating costs and profit), then for US based companies the playing field would be level - we might lose jobs overseas to countries that don't adopt similar standards, but honestly I think that is one thing everyone would eventually agree on after the kind of fiscal fiasco we are going through now. So in a way it would be akin to taxing the rich, but not really, in that it would only affect publicly held companies - which would generally then apply to the larger corporations. We might see some kind of return to companies that keep employees more long-term (like the IBM of old) - the likelihood is there would be some form of percentage capped employee stock ownership as well as an incentive for lower high level and executive salaries, thus making the company more dependent on everyone working together to keep their stock values up (and the ability to pay dividends).



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/16/2009 05:03PM by Registered Voter.

Registered Voter Wrote:
> No - I don't think we have to look at pay cuts
> (yet). The average full-time American worker
> outside of unions generally has access to
> "affordable health care" but makes choices between

Actually, the percentage of workers covered through their jobs has declined over the past 10 years.

> convenience and costs as to what they want to pay
> short and long term. I think you need to have some
> reining in on executive compensation for publicly
> held companies.

It's a good PR move at the least.

> Sole proprietorship and maybe
> limited partnerships can do whatever - if you are
> the owner and can make a profit on what you
> produce, more power to you. If all publicly held
> companies had to adhere to the same "standards" of
> compensation (some formula based on number of
> employees vs operating costs and profit), then for
> US based companies the playing field would be
> level - we might lose jobs overseas to countries
> that don't adopt similar standards, but honestly I
> think that is one thing everyone would eventually
> agree on after the kind of fiscal fiasco we are
> going through now. So in a way it would be akin to
> taxing the rich, but not really, in that it would
> only affect publicly held companies - which would
> generally then apply to the larger corporations.
> We might see some kind of return to companies that
> keep employees more long-term (like the IBM of
> old) - the likelihood is there would be some form
> of percentage capped employee stock ownership as
> well as an incentive for lower high level and
> executive salaries, thus making the company more
> dependent on everyone working together to keep
> their stock values up (and the ability to pay
> dividends).

Maybe. I know we'd hear howling from businesses, but as far as I'm concerned -- in the 2000s they didn't hire anyone (anemic employment growth) and they nearly drove the economy off the cliff. I've pretty much lost any sympathy I might have had for Big Business.

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's interesting - no one else has an opinion on
> what this guy is saying?
>
> I would think what he is saying crosses a lot of
> boundaries - I am guessing he has a
> conservative/libertarian background based on what
> he is saying. But also, he is just talking Common
> Sense IMHO.

You must've just read Glenn Beck's book, which is a supposed re-write of Thomas Paine's original version. I don't think a majority of Americans would agree with those basic principles today. Perhaps 100 years ago.

§ Wrote:

> You must've just read Glenn Beck's book, which is
> a supposed re-write of Thomas Paine's original
> version. I don't think a majority of Americans
> would agree with those basic principles today.
> Perhaps 100 years ago.

I must've just formed my own opinion. I don't watch Beck or O'Reilly or Hannity. I am just sick of both political parties, period. I lean more conservative in basic beliefs, but probably would qualify as a libertarian in reality.

I don't get it - why do you think that the principles of common sense - true common sense - would be disagreeable to folks today?

Registered Voter Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I must've just formed my own opinion. I don't
> watch Beck or O'Reilly or Hannity. I am just sick
> of both political parties, period. I lean more
> conservative in basic beliefs, but probably would
> qualify as a libertarian in reality.
>
> I don't get it - why do you think that the
> principles of common sense - true common sense -
> would be disagreeable to folks today?

I agree. It would be nice to get a candidate in office that fostered those beliefs.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Being vague is almost as fun as that other thing.