Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old September 17th, 2009 #61
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Yes, you're a Nazi until they get you up at 5am to join the slave gang building the Great Patriotic Aryan Super Highway. Then you start to realize the implications of your position.
You have the talent of creating more unconnectable dots than anyone I have known.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #62
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,436
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richyrichard View Post
Is that statement deserving of a response?

We both know the national government does wrong things and right things poorly.
No, it does everything poorly.

Quote:
That does not mean that everything else the government does is also wrong or poorly administered.
Name one thing that isn't.

Quote:
Government is a root of order and it has the POWER to maintain that order. Free market offers self-regulation but not order, nor can free market enforce order. Do you suppose the TV network broadcasters might form their own group to assign broadcast frequencies? They might. But who is going to stop those independents who violate their private agreements?
Either the victim or some posse he raised. What makes you think the government does anything now? Most criminals are never caught. Most violent criminals, even if caught and convicted, hardly do any time. All government does is tax everybody and chase drug users.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #63
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,436
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richyrichard View Post
You have the talent of creating more unconnectable dots than anyone I have known.
No, you're just too stupid to perceive the connection. I'll spell it out for you in stupid-people terms, that you might understand.

YOU think being a "Nazi" is all about dressing in cool blowsy pants and waving around your riding crop and fingering your holster.

But when the real thing takes power, you turn out to be a loser-everyman-schlub who doesn't figure in the big picture beyond being impressed into a labor gang to do this or that public works project.

What I have described is the REALITY of nazism for a schlub on your level. I know it conflicts with your imagination, but that's the way it is.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #64
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Your unquestioned default is that every failure belongs to the market, which can be corrected by more/different regulation, or more/better regulators. This is the standard government line, and it is wrong.
No. You are too far over on the right side of your brain.

Some failures belong to the free market and some can be corrected by government regulation. This is NOT the standard government line. There is no standard government line.

Ever hear of the historic Pony Express? Mail cars on the railroads? They helped to win the West. In the old days, there were many a sacrificing mail carrier who road a buckboard on muddy roads through rural areas to deliver the mail. "Through rain, sleet, or hail, the mail must go through!" Makes ya proud to be an American!

Again I say, the PO needs to be whiteyfied, not privatized.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #65
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
No, you're just too stupid to perceive the connection. I'll spell it out for you in stupid-people terms, that you might understand.

YOU think being a "Nazi" is all about dressing in cool blowsy pants and waving around your riding crop and fingering your holster.

But when the real thing takes power, you turn out to be a loser-everyman-schlub who doesn't figure in the big picture beyond being impressed into a labor gang to do this or that public works project.

What I have described is the REALITY of nazism for a schlub on your level. I know it conflicts with your imagination, but that's the way it is.
So, now you are Miss Cleo, the psychic. You are going to have to stop smoking those funny little cigarettes.

Your strong aversion to national socialism and your insistance that Hitler was a dictator, coupled with the extreme distortion of your perspective of both, would seem to indicate this issue is personal for you or you have some other agenda.

Outside of hating Jews, blacks, mexicans, and the white working class, what do you offer besides bourgeois politics?
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #66
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,436
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richyrichard View Post
So, now you are Miss Cleo, the psychic. You are going to have to stop smoking those funny little cigarettes.

Your strong aversion to national socialism and your insistance that Hitler was a dictator, coupled with the extreme distortion of your perspective of both, would seem to indicate this issue is personal for you or you have some other agenda.

Outside of hating Jews, blacks, mexicans, and the white working class, what do you offer besides bourgeois politics?
No, really. You're not seriously contending that Hitler was not a dictator?
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #67
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,436
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
the white working class, what do you offer besides bourgeois politics?
Advocating conditions that allow them to earn and save money and live free from physical fear shows something other than hate.

Yeah, you really are johnny jackass, the typical union sad-sack who thinks everybody richer than him is a criminal. You use bourgeois like a commie. There are lots of things wrong with bourgeois as a class, but the idea that they don't work harder and smarter than your type is laughable.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #68
Steve B
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
"In the United States, labor unions already have the power to abrogate employees' freedom of choice. One of the most basic freedoms for workers is their freedom to work and to make their own deal with a willing employer. But President Franklin Roosevelt and the U.S. Congress ended that freedom in 1935 with the Wagner Act. Under the Wagner Act, if a majority of the voting employees vote, in a secret ballot, to have a union represent them, then the union represents all the employees in the negotiation with the employer even if many of the employees don't want to be represented. If only 800 of 1,000 employees voted and if, of those 800, 401 voted for union representation, all 1,000 employees would be represented by the union.

Thus ends the freedom of choice of the other 599 employees. No longer are they free to bargain with the employer. The Wagner Act, thus, cartelizes labor. Even the late Arthur Goldberg, at one time a lawyer for the United Steelworkers Union, secretary of labor under President Kennedy, and former justice of the Supreme Court, admitted as much. In 1956 he wrote, "Technically speaking, any labor union is a monopoly in the limited sense that it eliminates competition between workingmen for the available jobs in a particular plant or industry."

And Harvard economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff, who tend to be pro-union, admit that unions have monopoly power. In 1984, Freeman and Medoff wrote, "Most, if not all, unions have monopoly power, which they can use to raise wages above competitive levels."

http://www.forbes.com/2008/11/02/oba...henderson.html
Ok, lets consider the source of this article because one can't arrive at truth unless you know who is writing it and what are their motivations.

It's a Forbes article. Big business corporate Forbes...ring a bell? The author is David R. Henderson a "researcher" with the Hoover Institution. What is the Hoover Institution and who funds it. According to Wiki:

Quote:
The Hoover Institution receives much of its funding from large corporations. Its recent donors include

* Archer Daniels Midland Foundation
* ARCO Foundation
* Boeing-McDonnell Foundation
* Chrysler Corporation Fund
* Dean Witter Foundation [14]
* Exxon Educational Foundation [15]
* Ford Motor Company Fund
* General Motors Foundation
* J.P. Morgan Charitable Trust
* Merrill Lynch & Company Foundation
* Procter & Gamble Fund
* Rockwell International Corporation Trust
* Transamerica Foundation
Hmm, big corporate business....what a shock. An anti union article printed in a big business magazine and penned by a big corporate business shill who works for an institute funded by more big corporate business. Think they might be anti union? Anti labor? Maybe it's just me but I think there might be a conflict of interest here.

Do you honestly believe that Henderson is really concerned with fairness in union certification, or with the virtues of majority petition or the existing secret ballot process? Does anyone really believe that Henderson is really concerned with the poor workers not getting a fair shake? Aww, those poor workers, they don't have the chance at negotiating individual deals with employers. Meanwhile CEO's reap millions in pay and bonus packages at the expense of people who do the real work and whose pay has remained stagnant for decades.

But lets ask ourselves.....how many times have big business employers been charged with intimidating workers not to join a union compared to union's charged with intimidating workers to sign a union card?

Ya dummy.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #69
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

And Harvard economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff, who tend to be pro-union, admit that unions have monopoly power. In 1984, Freeman and Medoff wrote, "Most, if not all, unions have monopoly power, which they can use to raise wages above competitive levels."

They are professors not businesspersons.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #70
Dan Allan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,787
Dan Allan
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by richyrichard View Post
No. You are too far over on the right side of your brain.

Some failures belong to the free market and some can be corrected by government regulation. This is NOT the standard government line. There is no standard government line.

Ever hear of the historic Pony Express? Mail cars on the railroads? They helped to win the West. In the old days, there were many a sacrificing mail carrier who road a buckboard on muddy roads through rural areas to deliver the mail. "Through rain, sleet, or hail, the mail must go through!" Makes ya proud to be an American!

Again I say, the PO needs to be whiteyfied, not privatized.
The Pony Express was a private company.
Quote:
Founders:
William Russell, Alexander Majors, and William Waddell. The company was the Central Overland California and Pikes Peak Express Company. The Pony Express was a subsidiary of the famous freight and stage company.
http://www.americanwest.com/trails/pages/ponyexp1.htm

So we can't give the government credit for that innovation. But that doesn't stop them from trying to take it anyway:

Quote:
The United States Postal Service (USPS) uses "Pony Express" as a trademark for postal services in the US.
Pony_Express Pony_Express
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #71
Steve B
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
And Harvard economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff, who tend to be pro-union, admit that unions have monopoly power. In 1984, Freeman and Medoff wrote, "Most, if not all, unions have monopoly power, which they can use to raise wages above competitive levels."

They are professors not businesspersons.
Bottom line....money. People who are in unions make more money, have better benefits and retirement pensions than non union workers. That's a fact. You want to be a wage slave making 10 shekels a day like the chinks then find yourself a non union job. Big jew and big business will thank you.

Mo-ron.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #72
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

You wrote-

". . .So you're saying that the Teamsters(the labor union that represents UPS drivers) is "governmentally enforced" upon UPS management? Got any facts to back up that statement?. . ."
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #73
Steve B
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Cali
Posts: 6,907
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
You wrote-

". . .So you're saying that the Teamsters(the labor union that represents UPS drivers) is "governmentally enforced" upon UPS management? Got any facts to back up that statement?. . ."
*Sigh* Why do I debate with people who argue in circles.

You wrote-

"Those high wages (drivers) at UPS are due to governmentally enforced union monopolies."

This statement makes it sound as if government forces unions on business to make them pay higher wages. No they don't. The workers vote on whether to accept unions as representing them at the bargaining table with employers. They can vote for or against. The government has no say in the matter.

Does the government have some rules and regulations that unions and businesses must abide by? Of course, it wouldn't be the government if they didn't stick their nose into everything. But the government is not involved in the negotiating process between employees and employers.

Have unions been corrupt and mob infiltrated in the past? Well sure they have. Anytime there is big money involved the sharks and the wise guys start circling. But the theory and process of workers banding together for higher wages is sound. Kind of like WNism. We band together or we die. Individuals and lone wolves die. Strong cohesive groups live and thrive.

But srsly, what is wrong with bargaining for higher wages? Who in their right mind would be against higher wages? Big business and jews that's who.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #74
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve B View Post
Bottom line....money. People who are in unions make more money, have better benefits and retirement pensions than non union workers. That's a fact. You want to be a wage slave making 10 shekels a day like the chinks then find yourself a non union job. Big jew and big business will thank you.
Ah! We agree.

Last edited by richyrichard; September 17th, 2009 at 09:35 PM.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #75
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
And Harvard economists Richard Freeman and James Medoff, who tend to be pro-union, admit that unions have monopoly power. In 1984, Freeman and Medoff wrote, "Most, if not all, unions have monopoly power, which they can use to raise wages above competitive levels."
And just the other day, the evil unions decreed that all union workers will now make $100 per hour and....bam!...it is so!

I realize there are problems with union labor. But you gotta understand something here: we lost the Civil War to big banks, factories, and to big business partnered with the government such as the northern railroads and the steel industry. We can't fight the war again. They impoverished the South and made us all slaves to capital. They freed the blacks and made them slaves to capital too. Labor Unions is one of the few available means to fight back and secure a fair portion of the profits. Leaving us poor dumb white agrarian Southernors to the mercy of a so-called free market that is run by Jews and bourgeois Republican parasites sucking our blood through banker-craft, lawyer-craft, and doctor-craft, just ain't gonna cut it. So...like it or not, call it situation politics if you must, we ain't gonna take their shit.

Freedom only works in a righteous society because freedom also means the freedom to cheat, lie, and steal, unless you have law against it. Free market also means pornography, stimulating drugs, gambling, whore houses, and other vice. We have to balance our dream of freedom to do whatever we please whenever we want, with the reality that this is a world in which evil also thrives. You anti-Christians are contributing to this problem.

I'm going to digress here just a bit to say to those who denounce Christianity so vehemently, that noone ever claimed to prove Christianity. Its a faith, that is all. So is CI. CI cannot be proven to be true. Its just a faith, a belief. That is why I won't debate it. However, since moral conscience is the main restraint against dishonest dealings, how can we have a free market if you eliminate both religious faith and government regulation? How then will you prevent the abuse of freedom? The law of the wild west? The law of the gun and the vigilantee? How can there be civilization if there is neither restraint by moral conscience nor government regulation to keep people honest and have fairness?

Alex says we need religious crusaders. I agree. But how does denouncing Christianity give us religious crusaders?

Last edited by richyrichard; September 17th, 2009 at 09:33 PM.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #76
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Advocating conditions that allow them to earn and save money and live free from physical fear shows something other than hate.

Yeah, you really are johnny jackass, the typical union sad-sack who thinks everybody richer than him is a criminal. You use bourgeois like a commie. There are lots of things wrong with bourgeois as a class, but the idea that they don't work harder and smarter than your type is laughable.
- I use bourgeois like Hitler did in Mein Kampf.

- I agree that they work harder and smarter. But that doesn't mean they work rightly. Take the professionals, for instance. Lawyers??

- By bourgeois, I refer to those who don't produce a product, those not directly involved in the production of real wealth. Along with professionals, liberal college professors, celebrities, and...dare I say it...journalists would also come under this classification. How much do Katie Curric or Bryan Williams get paid as news anchors? $15 million to $20 million per year?? Yes, they are definitely bourgeois. And so are those "others" (Buchanan, O'Reilly, Coulter, Hannity, Limbaugh, Inc.)
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #77
richyrichard
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Southeast Texas
Posts: 933
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Advocating conditions that allow them to earn and save money and live free from physical fear shows something other than hate.

Yeah, you really are johnny jackass, the typical union sad-sack who thinks everybody richer than him is a criminal. You use bourgeois like a commie. There are lots of things wrong with bourgeois as a class, but the idea that they don't work harder and smarter than your type is laughable.
Jerry Lewis was the Sad-sack.
 
Old September 17th, 2009 #78
Rick Ronsavelle
Senior Member
 
Rick Ronsavelle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,006
Rick Ronsavelle
Default

". . .Labor Unions is one of the few available means to fight back and secure a fair portion of the profits. . ."

Wrong. The purpose of unions is to steal from non-union workers.
 
Old September 18th, 2009 #79
Duke Mitchell
Banned
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 236
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Ronsavelle View Post
". . .Labor Unions is one of the few available means to fight back and secure a fair portion of the profits. . ."

Wrong. The purpose of unions is to steal from non-union workers.

And how exactly do unions steal from workers? I want details.
 
Old September 18th, 2009 #80
Mike Parker
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,311
Mike Parker
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
Yeah, the same government that shoves niggers into stable white neighborhoods is going to bring order to the airwaves too.
Government kwaps used to keep niggers out of white neighborhoods.
 
Reply

Tags
libertarianism is jewish

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:47 PM.
Page generated in 0.16071 seconds.