Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
This saves money?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="PobreCarlos" data-source="post: 625123" data-attributes="member: 16651"><p>klein;</p><p> </p><p>H.m.m.m.m.....so there are "60 Million Americans out there, without a job". What a wonder! Since the official unemployment rate is around 10% (9.8% last I read), that would mean that, on the basis of those working and "without a job" the workforce of the country would be around 600,000,000...around TWICE what the TOTAL population - including every man, woman, and child - is of the ENTIRE country.</p><p> </p><p>Of course perhaps you're saying that there are "60 million Americans" NOT working...to which I would say "so what!" Again, I point to that "every man, woman, and child" aspect of the situation. In short, please don't try to B.S. me. "60 million is an absolutely RIDICULOUS figure...and absolutely FALSE in any meaningful sense of the word.</p><p> </p><p>No doubt there are people who WOULD like to have a job. And no doubt the close to 3/4s of a million Teamsters who pissed their jobs away when de-regulation came in and they decided they didn't want to compete make up a segment of them as well. Maybe some of them lost their houses....house which, if REASONABLY purchased on the basis of their ACTUAL productive/buying power they could have kept...IF they had decided to be competitive. Note we're not talking minimum wage here, or anything like it....but one might also note that there are "minimum wage" jobs still available. Jobs individuals COULD survive on, UNLESS they're unwilling to survive on what they're economically worth and expect a handout instead.</p><p> </p><p>No, people "losing their homes" is NOT a "free lunch". Asking OTHERS to SUBSIDIZE their existence so they can keep those homes which they can't maintain on the basis of their OWN productivity *IS* asking for a "free lunch".</p><p> </p><p>You sound as though it's the responsibility of OTHERS to act as "parents" in a manner of speaking for those who aren't willing to earn their own way. Don't see it now...and doubt if I ever will.</p><p> </p><p>If "build it, and people will come", then why don't "the people" BUILD IT THEMSELVES? Is there some natural "right" that maintains their "betters" (in the economic sense) are somehow RESPONSIBILE for them? Wouldn't that be a form of slavery of the grossest sort? I.e. - demanding that OTHERS work involuntarily to subsidize YOUR existence?</p><p> </p><p>Again...60 MILLION!!!! S.h.e.e.e.e.s.s!!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="PobreCarlos, post: 625123, member: 16651"] klein; H.m.m.m.m.....so there are "60 Million Americans out there, without a job". What a wonder! Since the official unemployment rate is around 10% (9.8% last I read), that would mean that, on the basis of those working and "without a job" the workforce of the country would be around 600,000,000...around TWICE what the TOTAL population - including every man, woman, and child - is of the ENTIRE country. Of course perhaps you're saying that there are "60 million Americans" NOT working...to which I would say "so what!" Again, I point to that "every man, woman, and child" aspect of the situation. In short, please don't try to B.S. me. "60 million is an absolutely RIDICULOUS figure...and absolutely FALSE in any meaningful sense of the word. No doubt there are people who WOULD like to have a job. And no doubt the close to 3/4s of a million Teamsters who pissed their jobs away when de-regulation came in and they decided they didn't want to compete make up a segment of them as well. Maybe some of them lost their houses....house which, if REASONABLY purchased on the basis of their ACTUAL productive/buying power they could have kept...IF they had decided to be competitive. Note we're not talking minimum wage here, or anything like it....but one might also note that there are "minimum wage" jobs still available. Jobs individuals COULD survive on, UNLESS they're unwilling to survive on what they're economically worth and expect a handout instead. No, people "losing their homes" is NOT a "free lunch". Asking OTHERS to SUBSIDIZE their existence so they can keep those homes which they can't maintain on the basis of their OWN productivity *IS* asking for a "free lunch". You sound as though it's the responsibility of OTHERS to act as "parents" in a manner of speaking for those who aren't willing to earn their own way. Don't see it now...and doubt if I ever will. If "build it, and people will come", then why don't "the people" BUILD IT THEMSELVES? Is there some natural "right" that maintains their "betters" (in the economic sense) are somehow RESPONSIBILE for them? Wouldn't that be a form of slavery of the grossest sort? I.e. - demanding that OTHERS work involuntarily to subsidize YOUR existence? Again...60 MILLION!!!! S.h.e.e.e.e.s.s!! [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
This saves money?
Top