If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Russia Today)   Corporate CEO's have picked up on a trick of the Unions/Democrats, now turning their employees into Republican foot soldiers   (rt.com) divider line 190
    More: Spiffy, Republican, subsidiary  
•       •       •

1422 clicks; posted to Politics » on 16 Oct 2012 at 10:42 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



190 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-10-16 12:10:29 PM

Johnson: Bag of Hammers:

Last week, got three "Vote for Romney" e-mails (without actually mentioning Romney by name) e-mails. Still can't block them.

Can't you make a rule of some kind that marks the email as "read" and then deletes it?


If I was an Admin on my workstation, yes. They keep us peons pretty locked down (we can't even change our wallpaper)
 
2012-10-16 12:11:34 PM

tricycleracer: Just vote how you want and then lie to your employer tell your employer it's none of his damn business and maybe he should get back to his job. This isn't the Spanish Inquisition.

 
2012-10-16 12:13:27 PM

gearsprocket: Unions do threaten their members.

Have you ever wondered why businesses are outsourcing and leaving the United States? It is because of liberals. It is because of the government, the lawyers, the environmentalists, and other anti business groups. It is because of you that business will continue to leave the US. Prices will continue to rise as the cost of doing business here increases. It is funny to me that you complain of jobs and then turn around and demonize companies.


Cute.
 
2012-10-16 12:16:23 PM
And I, for one, welcome our new corporate overlords.
 
DGS [TotalFark]
2012-10-16 12:20:21 PM

nmemkha: It wasn't all that great when unions did it either.

What we need to return to one citizen, one vote. Everyone else from corporations to the Fraternal Lodge of Elks can go pound sand. No money from any entity except a citizen with a per-person cap of $10,000 per year in total political donations.

/problem solved


I'd support the shiat out of this.
 
2012-10-16 12:23:18 PM
Don't worry, Peons... Romney's for "100%" of Americans.

Don't worry about details and things like that... You can totally trust the Kochs, Sheldon Adelson, Karl Rove, Mitt Romney, and Paul Ryan. They are all honorable men who grew up in the Middle Class and always put the good of the people before their own personal well-being.
 
2012-10-16 12:28:10 PM

FarkedOver: Workers need to stop buying into this big corporate lie. Hard work will not make you rich. Your boss is not your friend. The only true friend of the working class is the socialist, anarchist or the communist. Yet most of the flak that these groups get comes from the very people they are trying to defend and promote. The working man has no greater ally than the far left. Don't trust your boss, don't trust democrats or republicans. When you see someone waving a red flag, a black flag or a red/black flag thank them for standing up for you. Thank them for going to jail for you. Thank them for getting pummeled by the police for you.


Oh, come off it. Workers didn't get a much better shake under communism, and anarchy looks like Somalia when applied to any group larger than about 50 people. Go talk to the flag-waving idiots. What you'll hear is a mixture of naivete, ignorance, and impractical, doctrinaire nonsense rigidly insisted upon. It's like talking to a typical Republican in mirror image.
 
2012-10-16 12:28:49 PM

Mithiwithi: Picked up on? Corporate CEOs were using this as a tactic against the labor movement from day one. They really are trying to bring back the days of the robber barons, aren't they?


Bring back?
 
2012-10-16 12:47:36 PM

Weaver95: what always confuses me is how Republicans can consider themselves 'good christians' while endorsing de facto slave labor practices...I just don't get that.


Jesus was pro slavery though. So it kind of makes sense when you look at the whole picture.
 
2012-10-16 12:57:56 PM

forgotmydamnusername: Oh, come off it. Workers didn't get a much better shake under communism, and anarchy looks like Somalia when applied to any group larger than about 50 people. Go talk to the flag-waving idiots. What you'll hear is a mixture of naivete, ignorance, and impractical, doctrinaire nonsense rigidly insisted upon. It's like talking to a typical Republican in mirror image.


It's nice that you when you think communism and socialism your knee-jerk response is "USSR". Real socialists don't endorse what the USSR did. Even the CPUSA (a stalinist organization) has worked as strike breakers and even endorsed democrats on a regular basis, which is weird for a supposed anti-capitalist organization.

I ask you sir, to come off it. I ask you to actually read Das Kapital. Read Revolution Betrayed. Read State and Revolution. Most people in socialist/anarchist organizations are the most well read and bright people. There's a reasons intellectuals gravitate toward leftist politics, because capitalism is unsustainable. It's cute that you'll grasp at any straw to justify the exploitation of the majority over the minority. Just because all you've ever known and all you've ever been taught is "free market economics" doesn't make it any more correct than say mercantilism or feudalism.
 
2012-10-16 01:00:34 PM

FarkedOver: forgotmydamnusername: Oh, come off it. Workers didn't get a much better shake under communism, and anarchy looks like Somalia when applied to any group larger than about 50 people. Go talk to the flag-waving idiots. What you'll hear is a mixture of naivete, ignorance, and impractical, doctrinaire nonsense rigidly insisted upon. It's like talking to a typical Republican in mirror image.

It's nice that you when you think communism and socialism your knee-jerk response is "USSR". Real socialists don't endorse what the USSR did. Even the CPUSA (a stalinist organization) has worked as strike breakers and even endorsed democrats on a regular basis, which is weird for a supposed anti-capitalist organization.

I ask you sir, to come off it. I ask you to actually read Das Kapital. Read Revolution Betrayed. Read State and Revolution. Most people in socialist/anarchist organizations are the most well read and bright people. There's a reasons intellectuals gravitate toward leftist politics, because capitalism is unsustainable. It's cute that you'll grasp at any straw to justify the exploitation of the majority over the minority. Just because all you've ever known and all you've ever been taught is "free market economics" doesn't make it any more correct than say mercantilism or feudalism.


He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.
 
2012-10-16 01:02:24 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.


Have I advocated violence? I may have missed that.
 
2012-10-16 01:06:29 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.

Have I advocated violence? I may have missed that.


So you reject the violence Lenin supported in State and Revolution?
 
2012-10-16 01:07:04 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.


oi49.tinypic.com
 
2012-10-16 01:09:12 PM

dinomyar: Ctrl-Alt-Del: So, it all comes down to labor costs. That sure was a lot of words to say "You're right, Weaver95"

No. Weaver95 said it is because businesses would "rather pay labor .30 cents". It is not about how much they are willing to pay. It is about costs to be competative. If labor was the same overseas as here, and materials were cheaper, they would still be sending work overseas to stay competative.


This is definitely true. I've never understood how we can, as a country, just allow this to happen. We have such high standards for what workers must be paid and the conditions that they are allowed to work in compared to many parts of the world, which is definitely a good thing, so I don't understand how we can be so OK with free trade with countries like China who treat their workers in a way that we would find abhorrent if it were American workers being treated in the same way. Why do we not have tariffs on importing cheap goods from China and elsewhere? The reason that corporations keep sending work overseas is because it is so much cheaper and, honestly, how can we expect them to compete when they have to pay people so much more, pay overtime for over 40 hours a week, have reasonable safety standards, and reasonable environmental protections? Even an extremely innovative company that is as streamlined as it can get is going to find it impossible to compete with a Chinese company who is paying 50 cents an hour and dumping toxic waste wherever they like. It's one thing to have free trade with European countries and places that treat their workers in a way that is comparable to the US, but there are a lot of places that don't meet that standard. I keep using China because it's so common, but obviously there are several others.

Why don't we impose a tariff that levels the playing field for our own companies. If we basically said, "OK, we can't stop you from paying your workers 50 cents an hour but in America our minimum wage is X dollars so we will have a tax of Y amount to make your product cost the same as if you had paid them at the same rate we pay our workers," it would remove the incentive for our companies to ship jobs there and might even benefit the people working in those countries at the same time.
 
2012-10-16 01:11:20 PM

Citrate1007: Unions endorse candidates, but cannot fire employees regarding how they vote.....there is a difference. Again though, any liberal working for the Koch brothers obviously cares more about money than their convictions so deep down they are republican anyways.


Or, they own a house in the area, and they cannot move because they'd take a huge loss in the housing market. Koch took over their business, and there are no other employers in the area.

/Know someone in a similar situation
 
2012-10-16 01:13:32 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.

Have I advocated violence? I may have missed that.

So you reject the violence Lenin supported in State and Revolution?


I reject violence. Do I reject the suppression of the capitalist class? No. Upon reading State and Revolution what made the most sense is if you do not smash the "State" as we know it today, it will come back. It will be more vile than ever. He says something to the effect that we need to get rid of everything that was once used to oppress us, i.e. religion, i.e. owners.

Now, what would happen if there was a workers revolution and there was no suppression of the ruling class? I kindly ask you to look at the Paris Commune. Thousands of communards were murdered for their efforts. Look at what happened when Spain elected a leftist government in the 30s (not even a radical leftist government), the capitalist backlash caused a civil war and was the precursor to WW2.

What is the point of having a workers "state"? I mean he even goes on to say that a workers "state" isn't even really a "state" as we've come to know it today. the workers state is a means to the end of no state at all. It withers away when all forms of the old state (which is set up to oppress and protect the monied class, as we know) is gone.

Suppression does not have to equal violence.
 
2012-10-16 01:14:10 PM

Weaver95: oh that's the best part! see, they won't know for sure who voted for whom. I suppose if they wanted to make an effort, they could get a hold of the voter rolls and find out who is registered democrat and if they voted in the election. it's a matter of public record after all. then use THAT list to decide who gets fired and who doesn't. But again...that's effort. I think it far more likely that these guys will simply fire people as they often do and use Obama as the excuse.


Unless they start telling employees that they have to vote absentee. Then they can require the employee mail the ballot from work. I am waiting for that one.
 
2012-10-16 01:16:04 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: He'll be one of the first against the wall when the Glorious Worker's Revolution comes, right? Just like your hero Lenin would have wanted.

Have I advocated violence? I may have missed that.

So you reject the violence Lenin supported in State and Revolution?

I reject violence. Do I reject the suppression of the capitalist class? No. Upon reading State and Revolution what made the most sense is if you do not smash the "State" as we know it today, it will come back. It will be more vile than ever. He says something to the effect that we need to get rid of everything that was once used to oppress us, i.e. religion, i.e. owners.

Now, what would happen if there was a workers revolution and there was no suppression of the ruling class? I kindly ask you to look at the Paris Commune. Thousands of communards were murdered for their efforts. Look at what happened when Spain elected a leftist government in the 30s (not even a radical leftist government), the capitalist backlash caused a civil war and was the precursor to WW2.

What is the point of having a workers "state"? I mean he even goes on to say that a workers "state" isn't even really a "state" as we've come to know it today. the workers state is a means to the end of no state at all. It withers away when all forms of the old state (which is set up to oppress and protect the monied class, as we know) is gone.

Suppression does not have to equal violence.


So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?
 
2012-10-16 01:19:34 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?


So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)
 
2012-10-16 01:21:25 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)


I thought you reject violence? That sounds a whole lot like violence...
 
2012-10-16 01:22:42 PM

runin800m: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)

I thought you reject violence? That sounds a whole lot like violence...


Self defense sucks. We should just let the ruling class run roughshod all over us because hey that's the way it's always been and we should accept it like good little drones.

I've seen the error of my ways. You're a wise man.
 
2012-10-16 01:23:13 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)


I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?
 
2012-10-16 01:24:34 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?


That's the million dollar question. It all depends on what the reaction of the ruling class is.
 
2012-10-16 01:25:52 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?

That's the million dollar question. It all depends on what the reaction of the ruling class is.


So you don't reject violence any more than Lenin did.
 
2012-10-16 01:26:35 PM
Sure are a lot of Marxists on Fark during working hours.
 
2012-10-16 01:26:53 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?

That's the million dollar question. It all depends on what the reaction of the ruling class is.

So you don't reject violence any more than Lenin did.


When it comes to defending yourself I do not reject violence.

"Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery"

--Malcom X
 
2012-10-16 01:27:39 PM

Weigard: Sure are a lot of Marxists on Fark during working hours.


It's my little way of hurting the capitalists bottom line :)
 
2012-10-16 01:30:54 PM

FarkedOver: runin800m: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)

I thought you reject violence? That sounds a whole lot like violence...

Self defense sucks. We should just let the ruling class run roughshod all over us because hey that's the way it's always been and we should accept it like good little drones.

I've seen the error of my ways. You're a wise man.


So, to you, self defense is taking up arms and stealing shiat from people who you think have too much, and killing them if they try and prevent that?

You seem like an awesome person. :)

Philip Francis Queeg: I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?


I think he made it pretty clear. He talks about them taking up arms and seizing control of the means of production, obviously he would intend to kill anyone who tried to defend their property and in some crazy way would believe that to be "self defense". Basically, he's a lunatic.
 
2012-10-16 01:31:58 PM
JESUS CHRIST. the Koch brothers are some evil ass mother farking villains.

Please know that the above statement was not made out of surprise, but out of outrage. Those farkers are just about comically 'Monty Burns' evil. Except, ya know... real.
 
2012-10-16 01:32:54 PM

runin800m: So, to you, self defense is taking up arms and stealing shiat from people who you think have too much, and killing them if they try and prevent that?

You seem like an awesome person. :)


Thanks man! But yeah, when that capital and property is used to exploit an entire class of people, they have forfeited the right to "ownership"
 
2012-10-16 01:35:13 PM

runin800m: I think he made it pretty clear. He talks about them taking up arms and seizing control of the means of production, obviously he would intend to kill anyone who tried to defend their property and in some crazy way would believe that to be "self defense". Basically, he's a lunatic.


You want to talk lunacy?

How about nets that surround Apple factories in China because people are throwing themselves from buildings protesting working conditions? All in the name of money. Mmmmm sweet delicious money!
cache.gawkerassets.com
 
2012-10-16 01:38:39 PM

FarkedOver: Thanks man! But yeah, when that capital and property is used to exploit an entire class of people, they have forfeited the right to "ownership"


So, when they don't use their property and money in a way that you think they should, you just want to take up arms and take it from them? That seems like the logical thing to do, in your opinion, like a good long term strategy? If you just take from those bastards and evenly distribute it things will be all peachy keen from then on, just like in all of the other communist/socialist countries that are a paradise where everyone is equal and the common man is so well off. You know, like China or Somalia, etc.. Now it's your turn to say how it doesn't work in Somalia or USSR or China or wherever else because it just wasn't implemented correctly and if it were just implemented the way you want then it would work perfectly.

What are you, like a college freshman or something?
 
2012-10-16 01:41:06 PM

FarkedOver: runin800m: I think he made it pretty clear. He talks about them taking up arms and seizing control of the means of production, obviously he would intend to kill anyone who tried to defend their property and in some crazy way would believe that to be "self defense". Basically, he's a lunatic.

You want to talk lunacy?

How about nets that surround Apple factories in China because people are throwing themselves from buildings protesting working conditions? All in the name of money. Mmmmm sweet delicious money!
[cache.gawkerassets.com image 300x400]


If you read upthread I actually already made my feelings on that pretty clear. Somehow I think my solution might be a litter better and more practical than civil war. Obviously you disagree, but then you seem pretty gung ho on the violent revolution thing.
 
2012-10-16 01:42:15 PM

runin800m: So, when they don't use their property and money in a way that you think they should, you just want to take up arms and take it from them? That seems like the logical thing to do, in your opinion, like a good long term strategy? If you just take from those bastards and evenly distribute it things will be all peachy keen from then on, just like in all of the other communist/socialist countries that are a paradise where everyone is equal and the common man is so well off. You know, like China or Somalia, etc.. Now it's your turn to say how it doesn't work in Somalia or USSR or China or wherever else because it just wasn't implemented correctly and if it were just implemented the way you want then it would work perfectly.

What are you, like a college freshman or something?


I know this idea is CRAZY, but imagine a work place that was run democratically..... without *gasp* OWNERS!!! THE HORROR!!! We need to be told what to do, because we are incapable of it without someone with power and money telling us what needs to be done.

Your defending a small cabal of people who dominate you and your fellow man on a daily basis. Feel proud of that.
 
2012-10-16 01:47:27 PM

runin800m: If you read upthread I actually already made my feelings on that pretty clear. Somehow I think my solution might be a litter better and more practical than civil war. Obviously you disagree, but then you seem pretty gung ho on the violent revolution thing.


Your ideas would never sit with the capitalists class either my friend. Tariffs? HA! If they cared it would have been done by now. It just gets in the way of profits. They only way things are going to change is through mass class awareness of the working class on an international scale.
 
2012-10-16 01:49:16 PM

runin800m: If you read upthread I actually already made my feelings on that pretty clear. Somehow I think my solution might be a litter better and more practical than civil war. Obviously you disagree, but then you seem pretty gung ho on the violent revolution thing.


One could simply do the same thing the capitalists have done and engage in mass social engineering. Would it be horrible to rescind corporate charters and move to a system that promotes cooperative and labor ownership rather than one that promotes hierarchical corporate structures? Would it be infeasible to migrate local governance to horizontal public councils rather than elected "representative" governments? Your proposed "reforms" are a compromise of a compromise and will solve nothing (assuming, given that you're starting your negotiation from the furthest right position you can accommodate, that you somehow ever managed to see them implemented).

Further to that, when, in your opinion, is it okay to engage in violence? When the state inevitably starts killing leftist agitators again, can we defend ourselves?
 
2012-10-16 01:56:35 PM

A Dark Evil Omen: Further to that, when, in your opinion, is it okay to engage in violence? When the state inevitably starts killing leftist agitators again, can we defend ourselves?


Funny, when socialists and anarchists are protesting who usually shows up looking for a fight? 10 times out of 10 it's the police, in full riot gear. I know people with red flags and black bandanas are scary, but we never show up armed...
 
2012-10-16 01:59:43 PM

FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?

That's the million dollar question. It all depends on what the reaction of the ruling class is.

So you don't reject violence any more than Lenin did.

When it comes to defending yourself I do not reject violence.

"Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery"

--Malcom X


So which leads us back to the question, will forgotmydamnusername be one of the first up against the wall during your glorious workers revolution? If he or I oppose your policies can we expect summary execution?
 
2012-10-16 02:06:41 PM

The Why Not Guy: LeftOfLiberal: ...the Right would be calling for an end to unions.

Wow, you should write speculative fiction. Your ability to imagine an alternate world so vastly different than our own is amazing.


Predicting the reaction of the right is not hard, just think unjustified outrage and run from there. The left, pissed at Obama's weak performance in the debate. The right spends a week making excuses for Ryan. Yes, predictable.
 
2012-10-16 02:07:20 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: So which leads us back to the question, will forgotmydamnusername be one of the first up against the wall during your glorious workers revolution? If he or I oppose your policies can we expect summary execution?


If there is a class struggle and there is armed conflict people will probably die. If he hires a bunch of goons and mercs to storm a democratic work place and dies in the ensuing battle, yes there will be violence. If he comes up to a democratic work place run by workers and is like "Hey guys! Give it back and come work for me again! I'll be a better boss this time!" He'll probably just be laughed at.
 
2012-10-16 02:41:44 PM

runin800m: dinomyar: Ctrl-Alt-Del: So, it all comes down to labor costs. That sure was a lot of words to say "You're right, Weaver95"

No. Weaver95 said it is because businesses would "rather pay labor .30 cents". It is not about how much they are willing to pay. It is about costs to be competative. If labor was the same overseas as here, and materials were cheaper, they would still be sending work overseas to stay competative.

This is definitely true. I've never understood how we can, as a country, just allow this to happen. We have such high standards for what workers must be paid and the conditions that they are allowed to work in compared to many parts of the world, which is definitely a good thing, so I don't understand how we can be so OK with free trade with countries like China who treat their workers in a way that we would find abhorrent if it were American workers being treated in the same way. Why do we not have tariffs on importing cheap goods from China and elsewhere? The reason that corporations keep sending work overseas is because it is so much cheaper and, honestly, how can we expect them to compete when they have to pay people so much more, pay overtime for over 40 hours a week, have reasonable safety standards, and reasonable environmental protections? Even an extremely innovative company that is as streamlined as it can get is going to find it impossible to compete with a Chinese company who is paying 50 cents an hour and dumping toxic waste wherever they like. It's one thing to have free trade with European countries and places that treat their workers in a way that is comparable to the US, but there are a lot of places that don't meet that standard. I keep using China because it's so common, but obviously there are several others.

Why don't we impose a tariff that levels the playing field for our own companies. If we basically said, "OK, we can't stop you from paying your workers 50 cents an hour but in America our minimum wage is X dollars so we will ...


If we did this, it would raise the cost of living, and that would impact the poor more than the not poor, and we cant have that. "roll eyes".. But I agree that that is about the only option that would level the playing field.
 
2012-10-16 03:04:17 PM
Ahh thank you, Farked Over, for having amply proven my point. Marxism doesn't work because Marx was insufficiently street-wise. He didn't account for how people actually behave. It's much the same problem as Milton Friedman has, actually.
 
2012-10-16 03:07:38 PM

forgotmydamnusername: Ahh thank you, Farked Over, for having amply proven my point. Marxism doesn't work because Marx was insufficiently street-wise. He didn't account for how people actually behave. It's much the same problem as Milton Friedman has, actually.


Marx never predicted when a workers revolution would take place. Most of his work was a critique of capitalism. If you have read Capital there isn't one thing he says about capitalism that isn't true.
 
2012-10-16 03:25:18 PM

forgotmydamnusername: Ahh thank you, Farked Over, for having amply proven my point. Marxism doesn't work because Marx was insufficiently street-wise. He didn't account for how people actually behave. It's much the same problem as Milton Friedman has, actually.


Individual Fascism vs Collective Democracy.
 
2012-10-16 03:31:26 PM

FarkedOver: forgotmydamnusername: Ahh thank you, Farked Over, for having amply proven my point. Marxism doesn't work because Marx was insufficiently street-wise. He didn't account for how people actually behave. It's much the same problem as Milton Friedman has, actually.

Marx never predicted when a workers revolution would take place. Most of his work was a critique of capitalism. If you have read Capital there isn't one thing he says about capitalism that isn't true.


The only point you've proven is that you don't like Lenin (who I have been quoting most of this time). I have yet to quote Marx in detail! MUHAHAHA.

Though if you feel so inclined here are some links you might enjoy:

State and Revolution: Link

Das Kapital: Link

Monthly Review: Link

Revolution Betrayed: Link
 
2012-10-16 03:41:20 PM

LeftOfLiberal: Predicting the reaction of the right is not hard, just think unjustified outrage and run from there. The left, pissed at Obama's weak performance in the debate. The right spends a week making excuses for Ryan. Yes, predictable.


My point was that the Right is calling for an end to unions NOW... you don't have to speculate "what if?" for that to be true.
 
2012-10-16 03:47:58 PM

FarkedOver: madgonad: USSR did have a ruling class - the party and party leaders. There is always going to be a ruling class. Just like there will always be managers. If you get rid of the old bosses there will just be new bosses. Far better to create rules and barriers that shift the wealth away from the top (insert FDR). The problem is that most people don't vote in their own interest. They vote based upon abortion or wanting a big tax break when the become millionaires next year.

You believe there will always be class divisions? You really don't think much of the human race do you? There will be life after capitalism, I know it's hard to fathom but it will happen.


Preach it, comrade.
 
2012-10-16 03:51:59 PM

Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)

I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?


He'll eat you. That's the bottom line:

imageshack.us
 
2012-10-16 03:55:38 PM

Leeds: Philip Francis Queeg: FarkedOver: Philip Francis Queeg: So how are you planning on suppressing me if I disagree with your Glorious Workers Revolution? The Gulag?

So it's ok for the ruling class to suppress the working class? Ok, glad we go that straight.

Workers should be armed to protect their interest. Is the ruling class going to give up their power without a fight? Probably not.

When workers seize the means of production it is in their and society's best interest to defend that against their former exploiters. If there is a workers revolution, you are more than welcome to try and regain control of your old means of exploitation. :)

I am asking you how you propose to suppress me if I disagree with your policies. Do you propose to use the same methods of suppression as the running dog capitalist stooges? Shall I be shot, imprisoned, tortured? Please tell us what lengths you will go to to ensure that those you view as exploiters are destroyed?

He'll eat you. That's the bottom line:

[imageshack.us image 451x800]


Nah, just advocating a dictatorship of the proletariat and the eventual withering away of the "state" into a classless stateless society.

What a terrible thing. Maybe I should just give up and accept my lot in life as a wage slave who should feel lucky just to lick the boot of my corporate masters. Ahhh the path of least resistance is so much easier. Living in moderate comfort while workers are oppressed so that I can live my hedonistic American lifestyle! USA! USA! USA!
 
Displayed 50 of 190 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report