Discussion in 'SouthWest Region Discussion' started by wardenx, Jul 9, 2003.
Call me a Libertarian
OK you Libertarian! You crack me up.
I aim to please, Princess.
To that I say..... Nay
Free Market only works in the abstract. In reality it just means that there is no regulation, not more choices. Read "The Jungle" by Sinclair to see what "free market" meant to the meat packing industry before governmental regulation.
Ask any Centenarian who was forced to work 12 hours a day as a child, so their families could have enough money to buy bread.
Ask the coal mining families what it was like to have get paid by the ton and forced to purchase all their goods from company stores because even when they did get paid, it was in script (worth 50 cents on the dollar usually).
Free Market is a myth, one perpetuated by the same businessmen who are now raping the globe with their current business practices. There would have to be honor in business for the theory of a free market society to work. And as we all know, Business Ethics is an oxymoron at best.
Well said, ZOO. I agree. I, of course, was refering to a Free Market with the restraints that the Federal government would actually impose on it were we to have a Federal government that was run the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be run. Not what we have now. During the time you refer to, the federal government only had a half-assed grasp of their role in big business and were in the midst of dishing off many of their Constitutionally mandated responsiblilities to public market. A very bad move.
When I was growing up in the east coast, we still had blue laws . . . businesses on the whole were closed Sundays. One pharmacy in town was open, etc.
Now it's sell, sell, sell, buy, buy, buy. Who needs it? Business market anything and everything through sex. I dont need to hear about how yogurt is better than sex. (enough said on that one, don't want an RSA busting a blood vessel).
People are still working 12 - 16 hour days just to make it. Even children are still having to pitch in to make ends meet in families.
Our society is way to concerned with who has what, do I have what my neighbor has, etc.
Forget the car, horses were more efficient!
Nothing wrong with businesses being open every day, Jada. If the demand wasn't there the supply would wither away. Great system, supply and demand. Works every time.
The club I worked for was only open 6 days a week because they believed everyone deserved a day of rest for spiritual, physical reasons, to spend with family etc. This was members as well as employees.
The club was then bought by a former Walmart executive and is open on Sundays. People are being coerced into working (I refuse! just on the basis that any other day the childcare is open to employees. If I can't bring the kid, I'm not working. I also won't because for me Sunday is the Lord's day.) People are burning out, one employee's kids told her they were sick and tired of her working everyday because nobody else would teach and they gave her a month to tell management that she wouldn't work Sundays.
I don't think every business has to be open. Is it convenient? Yes. Is is necessary, no. Mostly, it's greed driven.
Doesn't make nany difference if it's greed-driven, Jada. If you don't want to work there or patron the place because of their business practices, then that's what living in a free and democratic society means: you don't have to. If this person gets enough negative response or no response then he won't be able to stay open on certain days or at all. If he can't get people to work there on Sundays, then he won't be able to be open on Sunday unless he's willing to do it himself. I have no problem with it. We make choices and have to live with them. You can want the job for whatever reason but you decide if you're willing to make sacrifices to stay there. No one forces you to. Free choice. Like him being able to keep the business open on Sundays. Free choice. You go ahead and take Sunday as the Lord's day. Your choice. Can't expect others to abide by what you see as right.
Sure, free society, democratic, market demand, etc.
I just read an article about a bill that was in the House (or was it the senate?) that would have given an employee a choice as to whether or not when they worked over 40 hours a week they could opt to either get time and a half or vacation time. The unions squashed it. They didn't really consider that this might force companies to hire people instead of ordering them to work overtime. I've been in a situation where I was told either you work the overtime (or work Sunday and yes, I know that's technically against the law but . . .) or find another job.
American work weeks, vacation time, even pay is a joke to Europeans who have longer vacations and shorter days. Only in America and Japan are the work days as long and the vacations as short. And the health of the workers is so bad.
So, a day of rest or greed? HUM . . .
No response on that one from WardenX. I guess the CAT got his tongue.
Sorry Jada. I edited that message. I'll try to remember to keep the names straight.
Has anyone read anything on the latest developments in Fourth Generational Warfare? It's one of my favorite areas of study with Strategy and Tactics. The implications for the loss of freedoms inplicit in the tenets of strategical enforcement of 4GW are frightening. Where are our freedoms and how do we keep them when laws (like the Patriot Act) are designed to slowly whittle away those freedoms in lieu of security (or percieved security)?
On the topic of supply and demand, there is a flaw with it. Demand is not always in the best interest of the people. For example: I have seen time and time again that a child will continually ask for candy or treats over an actual meal of substanance and nutrition. It is not in the child's best interest and must therefore be regulated by the parent, the child is denied because it is best for the child. Is this not an accurate analogy? Do we not often ask for those things which are not in our best interest? I feel that as a society we all need to think more in the long term rather than seeking immediate gratification. What is really good for us in the long term? Anyone see the movie "Gladiator"? The new emperor instituted the gladiator games because the people wanted it, not because it was in the best interest of the people. Most of the Senators wanted to uphold the principles of an ideal society. Do we not all want an ideal society, didn't the founding fathers of our nation want that? Then why do we as adults continue to do things which are contrary to our long term happiness? Why do we become addicted to harmful substances? Why do we subject our senses to violence and degrading imagery which does nothing more than errode our sense of right and wrong and desensitizes our minds? Why do we fail as parents to raise moral responsible children? Why do we not spend time with our families, and seek to serve one another and work for the benefit of all? I admit that no one is perfect, and an ideal society cannot exist until we all become such, but trying to become that and trying to have that ideal is what makes the difference. It is the determination to uphold truth and right that makes heroes and legends of ordinary people. Supply and demand allows corruption to enter in. The voice of the people is prone to wander from justice to vengence, from need to want, from long term happiness to immediate gratification. It was wise of our founding fathers to somewhat limit the power of the voice of the people.
I think the no working on Sunday thing is a good idea for no other reason than to give everyone a break and to provide more opportunity for families to spend time together. (The degradation of the family has in itself led to more social problems than anything I can think of.) We work hard and long, and stress is high in almost everyone's life, and it is a good thing to have a society designated day of rest. If we spend too much time at work, if we have too much stress, what will that do to us over time? What will that do to the next generation? Now, wouldn't society as a whole benefit from a bit more family time? If the pace of life slowed for just one day, wouldn't that be nice?
Yeah, for any of the above to happen society en masse would need to change. I know its a nice idea but not practical. It won't happen from the bottom up, but it could happen from the top down, just as a child doesn't mend its ways without a bit of parenting. But do we listen, no. We're are no better than teenagers that tell the government "Don't tell me what to do, I know what I'm doing!" or even "you're not the boss of me!" I know that the government is also not perfect and is equally prone to corruption, but it should be the best of the best of us all. (Key word: should) But our parents weren't perfect either, but they still corrected us when necessary.
So, let me ask this, is the US government responsibly to uphold a moral standard for its people? Is the government just in denying us certain things that are indeed bad for us or is it "unconstitutional" to deny us these things?
MYO: In a nutshell... NO. But very well said. The government should have nothing to do with what I consider right or moral. They can establish laws that provide for the smooth and continuous running of society (by laws which are mandated by the people) but they should keep their self-righteous fingers out of my mind. There is nothing wrong with violence in the media and on TV and in the movies, etc. There is nothing wrong with porn on the internet and sex as a vehicle for sales. There is nothing wrong with a child wanting sweets instead of a good meal. The parents should regulate this, as you said, and I agree with you on that account. But I am not a child and the government is NOT my parents. There should be no sanctions against my freedom of speech or frredom of religion or freedom to bear arms, et al.
Supply and demand is the only way our market can work. Who is to say what we are and aren't allowed to buy or choose to buy? Who will dictate what I can WANT to buy? If you want something and I can make it for you for a price, then what's wrong with that? If you don't want it, don't buy it. If you didn't want it, someone else probably will. If you don't want children eating crap or getting their hands on guns, then make sure that yours do not and lobby for better parenting skills in the people instead of gun control (not saying that you believe these things, just using them as examples).
Supply and demand is merely the theory that goods and services and the desire to have them will balance each other out in the long run. When Supply is too high, it drives prices down. When Demand is too high, it drives prices up. In order to maintain a profitable and equitable system of trade, for not only the providers, but also the consumers, these two must be kept in balance.
Applying the theory of Supply and Demand to social degradation seems a little off the mark for me. Besides the fact, the government has no control over the system that operates under the Supply and Demand theories. So, giving that kind of power over to the government goes against everything that this country was formed over. When we were told by the Crown that we could only purchase imported goods from UK dealers, and that we were not allowed to manufacture our own goods as well, we became rebellious. We fought to overthrow such an oppressive governmental body. Are you suggesting that we revert back to what we fought so hard to overcome more than 200 years ago?
Amen, ZOO. The government (ours or anyone elses) has no place restricting the flow of commerce. I'd rather see a Free Market, personally.
And yet hasn't our society seen decay since the inundation of availablity of violence, porn, sex through the media, cable, internet and video games?
Is it really necessary for people to have to view some one getting their brains blown out especially if that person is a young child? Too many children are exposed to images of violence because their parents are smart enough to put limits on what they watch.
I fault the parents and yet I also fault our society for being preoccupied with needless images of violence, etc.
As I've said before, I think people should have to have a license before they are allowed to raise a child. The ability to procreate does not automatically equate with the ability to raise a child.
I can agree w/ the last part of your statement. Parenting is seriously lacking in todays's culture... As for the first part...
Civilization, throughout history has gone through periods of rise and fall. It is the nature of the beast. The prevalence of violence et al is not the cause, but a symptom of the decay. But as with all things in life, it is a cyclical pattern. In order for new life to commence, the old must die, providing the nourishment of the new with its decay.
Just throwing this out there cause I like it!
You never know how much you really believe anything until its truth or falsehood becomes a matter of life or death to you ~A Grief Observed, C.S. Lewis
I'm reading the book Where's God when it hurts by Phillip Yancey and he quotes Lewis often. Lewis watched his wife suffer and die from cancer.
Hiding the truth from our children hurts them more in the long run than showing them what is really going on and educating them on the realities of life and how to deal with them in the interests of a better society. Keeping our kids from seeing what's happening isn't going to alter what's happening. It'll only keep our future generation ignorant, perhaps fatally so.
Parenting is the start of fixing the problem. You can't blame anything on "society." That's such a ubiquitious term that it has little meaning when you deal with the raising of a child. The raising of a child will depend on the stability of the foundation (a.k.a. their homelife) and the reference viability for the child when faced with the vagaries of life.
Point taken, WardenX. I still stand firm that too many parents are irresponsible with what they allow their children to do. They let the children parent the parent instead of the parent stepping up, sucking it up and saying "I chose to procreate and now I'm taking responsibility to help shape this offspring to be a productive and healthy member of society".
I'm certainly not going to start showing images of needless violence to my child (such as letting her watch some R rated horror flick). However, I didn't hide 9-11 from her. Sat down and explained it to her, she saw it on TV 1 time (to me, that was enough) and we talked about why it happened and what we could do to help the people who suffered.
She knows about Iraq and she knows that her Uncle and cousin are in Kosovo on a peace keeping mission. To me, exposing a child to the reality of violence, to the consequences of violence is appropriate. I am saying that exposing them to needless violence is unnecessary.
hmmm....you got kids wardenx?
JADA I agree completely with that attitude. I wouldn't show any child of mine that crap either. But, should they ask or see something, I would never hide the truth from them.
Princess I have no children that I am aware of. You?
nope. just interesting your viewpoint, with no kids and all
curious to see how it all turns out, should you have some little rugrats in the future
Probably why I'm not having any. I'd be afraid to raise kids in the world today. Just my opinion, though. lol
While normally I take people who have no children (and yet offer their opinions on how to raise) and I smacked 'em around a few times, put them through three weeks of sleep deprivation, line a room with barbie shoes and legos then blindfold them and tell them to walk through the room without screaming when they step on an object . . .
I have to say WardenX, that your opinions for a non-offspringed person, are fairly decent.
My opinions on childrearing have changed radically since becoming a parent. Last week the family went out to dinner at CoCos. The wee one was acting up, pouncing me in the booth. I finally said (I guess loud enough for more than just her to hear) "Sit down, be quiet and draw until your food gets here". Reasonable, so I thought. A woman 2 tables down looked at me as though I had just hauled off a backhanded the wee one into next year. I felt like saying "If you think you can do a better job, come try it. You don't have to deal with a kid with ADD 24/7!
In other words, this was a compliment to WardenX.