Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

Insolent Cur, I'm curious about your thoughts about this...


  • Please log in to reply
146 replies to this topic

#101 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:33 AM

ooo, he used a bold font :lol: :grin:



#102 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:33 AM

:facepalm:

 

Oh, def. a good way of pinging the pong, DD.



#103 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:35 AM

and btw... TOP :grin: :lol:



#104 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,960 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:44 AM

ooo, he used a bold font :lol: :grin:

I considered underline.  Do you think I made a good choice?



#105 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,922 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:46 AM

i like pinging my pong...as it were... pinging it in it i will



#106 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,922 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:47 AM

n shit...



#107 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:47 AM

in answer to your question; no.  I prefer wingdings 1. :lol:



#108 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,922 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:49 AM

ding dongs are more satisfying 



#109 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:07 AM

Wing Ding Junior :grin:



#110 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:08 AM

Lamb ah dam ah ding dong.



#111 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 17,369 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:11 AM

Tim,

I think you've already acknowledged elsewhere that 2 of the 5 go that way.  


I think what I said previously was that a couple of them lean that way.
 
Regardless, what I said here was that no one who voted in the majority in this case can be called libertarian. I stand by that.
 
What I'm not sure you understand about libertarian thought is that it's about social and economic freedom. So of course from time to time, libertarians appear "progressive." Sometimes we appear "conservative." Which is probably why we sometimes get tired of discourse - we're constantly in conflict with the left and the right at the same time.

Probably even moreso in my particular case because I'm increasingly making a distinction between individual economic freedom and and corporate freedom.



#112 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,960 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:17 AM

I understand that is what many these days think libertarianism is about

 

But libertarianism in real life leads to economic and social slavery .  Folks who are for libertarianism aren't necessarily for that, it's just what it leads to.



#113 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:32 AM

they been trackin us for 8 years, so go ahead and change your name now :lol:



#114 Slarti

Slarti
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,023 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:34 AM

the return of subcom Feppo :devil: :lol:



#115 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 17,369 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:59 AM

I understand that is what many these days think libertarianism is about

 

But libertarianism in real life leads to economic and social slavery .  Folks who are for libertarianism aren't necessarily for that, it's just what it leads to.


I disagree...at least from my perspective. What I'm espousing isn't anarchy. While in my heart, I'd like to see people be responsible and moral enough to be able to live without government, we've seen time and time again that not everyone is. What I'd like to see is a societal/governmental system which lets people freely live their lives unless their actions impose upon the wellbeing and happiness of others. If they are imposing in such a way, then government should be there to protect those whose rights are being infringed upon.

That, by the way, includes corporations and individuals whose disregard for air, soil and water infringes upon the rights of others now, and others yet to come.



#116 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,960 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:07 AM

If I understand you, I don't think that's libertarianism Tim :thumbsup:

 

The devil is in the details, and in how much government you need and when you need to make things mandatory in order for it to work well.  That's a big long topic.  For example, you can't just let people decide whether to pay taxes or not.  You can't let them do whatever they want with their property.



#117 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 17,369 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:19 AM

It's a pretty broad spectrum of beliefs, and I believe what I'm describing falls within it.

May have more to say on it tomorrow. May not. :)



#118 capt_morgan

capt_morgan
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,922 posts
  • Locationatlantic ocean

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:26 AM

im gonna create a corporation that disregards everything...especially ur face



#119 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,960 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:29 AM

im gonna create a corporation that disregards everything...especially ur face

By disregarding it you are paying attention to it  :lol:

 

Or not



#120 Deadshow Dan

Deadshow Dan
  • VibeTribe
  • 11,960 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:30 AM

It's a pretty broad spectrum of beliefs, and I believe what I'm describing falls within it.

May have more to say on it tomorrow. May not. :)

probably better discussed over beer and fumes ;)

 

or a nice cocktail



#121 PieDoh

PieDoh
  • VibeTribe
  • 5,938 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:42 AM

this is about that which it is ....which is that, about, no?

#122 Java Time

Java Time
  • VibeTribe
  • 10,461 posts
  • Locationthe Island

Posted 19 June 2013 - 12:40 PM

People who work in libraries shouldn't have their own political theories anyways...the nerve :nulo: Stupid librarytarians... :rolleyes:

#123 Tim the Beek

Tim the Beek
  • VibeTribe
  • 17,369 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:28 PM

probably better discussed over beer and fumes ;)

 

or a nice cocktail


Seltzer for me, but I'd dig chatting with you some time.



#124 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:45 PM

Wait, freedom leads to slavery? :lmao:



#125 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 01:54 PM

If I understand you, I don't think that's libertarianism Tim :thumbsup:

 

The devil is in the details, and in how much government you need and when you need to make things mandatory in order for it to work well.  That's a big long topic.  For example, you can't just let people decide whether to pay taxes or not.  You can't let them do whatever they want with their property.

 

Of course! We must have government to take away our freedoms and then call it freedom! It all makes perfect sense now. 



#126 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:02 PM

Of course! We must have government to take away our freedoms and then call it freedom! It all makes perfect sense now. 

 

should there be no anti-trust laws, no environmental laws, no wage laws, no worker's rights laws? I don't see these as limiting individual rights but rather limiting corporate "rights" so as to safe-guard individuals.

 

I would love to be a fly on the wall while you, Tim, and Dan discuss these issues. I know little and would love to learn from all of you.



#127 concert andy

concert andy
  • VibeTribe
  • 12,508 posts
  • LocationPhilly

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:24 PM

Finally got moved...



#128 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 02:27 PM

should there be no anti-trust laws, no environmental laws, no wage laws, no worker's rights laws? I don't see these as limiting individual rights but rather limiting corporate "rights" so as to safe-guard individuals.

 

I would love to be a fly on the wall while you, Tim, and Dan discuss these issues. I know little and would love to learn from all of you.

 

Antitrust laws do the exact opposite of their intentions. They foster monopolies and squash competition. But how?

Read: http://mises.org/daily/4397

 

Wage laws actually is a funny one, because wage laws are directly against both workers and companies. Lets look at it from an economic perspective alone. If the government mandates that there be a minimum wage, the first thing this is going to do is price certain people out of work. The second thing it does is raise prices on all goods and services. Lets take an example that has come up here before - tomato pickers. 

 

Tomato pickers work long hard hours and make little money for their effort (at least from the perspective of a minimum wage). Most of these workers are illegals, and from their service consumers enjoy low prices on tomatoes. These workers are likely highly unskilled in contemporary technology and modern day business practice, so working the fields gives them a way to be productive in labor markets. Now, lets say that the government stepped in and began drastically regulating tomato pickers. Making sure each worker is documented and is making the minimum wage. What happens to the price and tomatoes and the labor pool for pickers? The answer should be very obvious. 

In short, wage laws price labor out of the pool, and also raise price levels on goods. A two fold fuck you to workers.

 

Worker rights laws just more controls put in place by govt. See above. Now, lets say that the tomato farmer must also giver the labors pensions, 40 hour work weeks and 1 hour daily lunch breaks to go along with their minimum wage. What do you think would happen in the tomato industry?

 

The environmental law question is a good question and we can save it for now, because it's viewed as complicated (though really it is not).



#129 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 19 June 2013 - 04:08 PM

TASB, I will definitely read that anti-trust link

 

I hesitate to embrace pure libertarian philosophy, as philosophy and reality often look quite different. But I'm open... just learning, absorbing, questioning....



#130 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 01:15 PM

I read the article

 

"As is true of many other measures, evaluation of the antitrust laws has not proceeded from an analysis of their nature or of their necessary consequences, but from an impressionistic reaction to their announced aims."

 

*This immediately caught my attention. like.

 

" The only viable definition of monopoly is a grant of privilege from the government.[1] It therefore becomes quite clear that it is impossible for the government to decrease monopoly by passing punitive laws. The only way for the government to decrease monopoly, if that is the desideratum, is to remove its own monopoly grants"

 

*something about that first sentence confuses me - can you reword?  Is it saying there really is no definition of monopoly aside from the govt. arbitrarily making the decision a particular business has an unfair privilege? And all takes to get rid of monopolies is to stop calling them monopolies (because "monopolies" only exist as a definition, not reality?)  Excuse my ignorance here.

 

"The law in the United States is couched in vague, indefinable terms, permitting the Administration and the courts to omit defining in advance what is a "monopolistic" crime and what is not. Whereas Anglo-Saxon law has rested on a structure of clear definitions of crime, known in advance and discoverable by a jury after due legal process, the antitrust laws thrive on deliberate vagueness and ex post facto rulings. No businessman knows when he has committed a crime and when he has not, and he will never know until the government, perhaps after another shift in its own criteria of crime, swoops down upon him and prosecutes."

 

*I see the author's point here and it seems valid (I'd only add as a side note, that there is inherent vagueness is many laws, especially when they rely on clear definitions because there really is no such thing as clear definitions, since definitions are socially constructed and not always agreed upon (ex: "obscene" speech, etc.)

 

"It is vain, however, to call simply for clearer statutory definitions of monopolistic practice. For the vagueness of the law results from the impossibility of laying down a cogent definition of monopoly on the market. Hence the chaotic shift of the government from one unjustifiable criterion of monopoly to another: size of firm, "closeness" of substitutes, charging a price "too high" or "too low" or the same as a competitor, merging that "substantially lessens competition," etc."

 

*Other areas of law run into this as well (free speech issues,"fighting" words, pornography, "terrorist" etc). Should we not attempt to define (hence put some parameters around) certain business practices because those definitions are arbitrarily constructed--because they may be flawed and open to human interpretation? All definitions are, should we throw them all out? 

 

"The original Sherman Act stressed "collusion" in "restraint of trade." Here again, there is nothing anticompetitive per se about a cartel, for there is conceptually no difference between a cartel, a merger, and the formation of a corporation: all consist of the voluntary pooling of assets in one firm to serve the consumers efficiently. If "collusion" must be stopped, and cartels must be broken up by the government, i.e., if to maintain competition it is necessary that cooperation be destroyed, then the "antimonopolists" must advocate the complete prohibition of all corporations and partnerships. Only individually owned firms would then be tolerated"

 

*interesting. conceptually no difference but pragmatically a difference?

 

"Standard Oil did not restrain trade; it went out to the ends of the earth to make a market. Can the corporations be said to have "restrained trade" when the trade they cater to had no existence until they produced and sold the goods? Were the motor car manufacturers restraining trade during the period in which they made and sold fifty million cars, where there had been no cars before… Surely… nothing more preposterous could have been imagined than to fix upon the American corporations, which have created and carried on, in ever-increasing magnitude, a volume and variety of trade so vast that it makes all previous production and exchange look like a rural roadside stand, and call this performance "restraint of trade," further stigmatizing it as a crime!"

 

*when a car becomes necessity and oil becomes necessity and the entire economy is reliant on it and a cartel can control the supply and cost of it (thus, dictate and dramatically impact lives), govt should never step in?

 

I've never read anything in opposition to anti-trust laws. Thanks for posting, TASB.  I hope we can all have another get together at Tim's or elsewhere, 'cause I'd love to hear ya'll discuss these issues.  



#131 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 20 June 2013 - 01:55 PM

something about that first sentence confuses me - can you reword?  Is it saying there really is no definition of monopoly aside from the govt. arbitrarily making the decision a particular business has an unfair privilege?

 

Exactly. We know monopoly as a definitive term is language, but in legal statute, there is no clear definition to lay down over the market. hence the shift around abotu what types of "monopolistic" crimes occur and where leg. and courts make decisions. We have no clear case of a monopoly except for government itself.



#132 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 28 June 2013 - 07:35 PM

Antitrust laws do the exact opposite of their intentions. They foster monopolies and squash competition. But how?

Read: http://mises.org/daily/4397

 

Wage laws actually is a funny one, because wage laws are directly against both workers and companies. Lets look at it from an economic perspective alone. If the government mandates that there be a minimum wage, the first thing this is going to do is price certain people out of work. The second thing it does is raise prices on all goods and services. Lets take an example that has come up here before - tomato pickers. 

 

Tomato pickers work long hard hours and make little money for their effort (at least from the perspective of a minimum wage). Most of these workers are illegals, and from their service consumers enjoy low prices on tomatoes. These workers are likely highly unskilled in contemporary technology and modern day business practice, so working the fields gives them a way to be productive in labor markets. Now, lets say that the government stepped in and began drastically regulating tomato pickers. Making sure each worker is documented and is making the minimum wage. What happens to the price and tomatoes and the labor pool for pickers? The answer should be very obvious. 

In short, wage laws price labor out of the pool, and also raise price levels on goods. A two fold fuck you to workers.

 

Worker rights laws just more controls put in place by govt. See above. Now, lets say that the tomato farmer must also giver the labors pensions, 40 hour work weeks and 1 hour daily lunch breaks to go along with their minimum wage. What do you think would happen in the tomato industry?

 

The environmental law question is a good question and we can save it for now, because it's viewed as complicated (though really it is not).

 

 

Children are caught up in clashes with police as at least 15,000 protesting garment factory workers block key roads in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka, the latest in a string of protests over low wages and poor conditions. Police fired tear gas and used water cannons to disperse the workers, who sew clothes for some of the top names in western retail, after they blocked a major intersection in the north of the city

1003653_518699004864296_1480767924_n.jpg

 

 

I dunno, TASB. hard to believe corps will do the right thing by those they employ. exploitation seems to be the name of the game with no safe guards in place to secure basic needs of workers who have little to no alternatives.



#133 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 28 June 2013 - 07:54 PM

TASB, I'd be interested in your perspective on the criticism of Friedman here - if so inclined

 

http://www.filmsfora...ity_state_2012/



#134 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 28 June 2013 - 08:08 PM

Children are caught up in clashes with police as at least 15,000 protesting garment factory workers block key roads in the Bangladeshi capital Dhaka, the latest in a string of protests over low wages and poor conditions. Police fired tear gas and used water cannons to disperse the workers, who sew clothes for some of the top names in western retail, after they blocked a major intersection in the north of the city

1003653_518699004864296_1480767924_n.jpg

 

 

I dunno, TASB. hard to believe corps will do the right thing by those they employ. exploitation seems to be the name of the game with no safe guards in place to secure basic needs of workers who have little to no alternatives.

 

 

Nothing happens in India without govt. involvement. They also have a caste system there. There is absolutely nothing free market about india. Nothing.



#135 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 28 June 2013 - 08:09 PM

TASB, I'd be interested in your perspective on the criticism of Friedman here - if so inclined

 

http://www.filmsfora...ity_state_2012/

 

I'll watch and comment on that when time permits. Thanks for the link.



#136 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 06:56 PM

CC, a little somethign from the M. Daily that may give more insight into the Austrian view on monopoly.

 

http://mises.org/dai...Austrian-Lenses



#137 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:00 PM

BTW, I'm an Oakley man myself. :D



#138 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:12 PM

speaking of tomatoes http://thecnnfreedom...ies-to-slavery/

 

http://www.takepart....n-hunger-strike



#139 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:17 PM

The Price of Shrimp

Shrimp is a major force in Thailand’s economy. With hundreds of factories and low prices, Thailand makes more than $1 billion every year by supplying shrimp to the U.S. alone.

Despite the economic profit, this booming business is filled with corruption and violence.

About 400,000 Burmese migrants spend their days peeling shells and conducting other menial tasks for as little as $10 a day, as one worker told PBS. Not only are workers underpaid, but there are also reports upon reports of beatings, physical confinement, forced labor and underage workers. Laborers allege that this shrimp is farmed under shockingly dismal conditions too.

The worst part is that undocumented workers have minimal rights in the government’s eyes. But there is some hope for improvement, as a daily minimum wage standard was recently introduced.

 

Chocolate’s Bitter Side

African cocoa plantations have received widespread scrutiny for their unethical working conditions. Stories of children abducted by local farmers, denied access to an education and exposed to dangerous pesticides unveil the harsh reality behind the main ingredient in chocolate.

About 75 percent of the world’s cocoa originates in two West African countries, Ghana and the Ivory Coast. Local farmers sell their cacao at very low prices to maintain an edge against other competitors. To balance the low price, farmers exploit children between the ages of six and 17 as laborers. Many children who end up on the plantations have been sent to work for low wages by their families, sold by relatives, or abducted by farmers.

The hours are long and the work is dangerous. Equipped with large sacks and sharp knives, these children suffer the harsh conditions that have been frequently, fairly equated with slavery.

While many multinational candy companies have adopted ethical cocoa-sourcing standards, UNICEF estimates that nearly a half-million children work on cocoa farms across Ivory Coast.

 

Palm Oil Injustice in Malaysia

According to the World Wildlife Fund, about half the packaged food in supermarkets contain palm oil. This everyday ingredient is found in margarine, cereals, sweets and baked goods, along with cosmetic, cleaning and bathroom products.  

Since nearly 85 percent of palm oil comes from Malaysia and Indonesia, the industries there have high demands for laborers. Most workers are immigrants who are sent to live in isolated locations without access to clean water, lighting and adequate shelter. Others are children trying to help support families stuck in a poverty cycle.   

The typical workday is spent gathering the palm fruit bunches, which weigh between 15 and 25 kilograms, hour after hour. Often workers climb the trees, which are covered with thorns, or handle heavy poles to cut the fruit. Without proper equipment, many workers suffer from cuts, scratches and heat exhaustion.

Another glaring issue is the exposure to toxic chemicals. A study found that blood samples from palm-oil laborers indicated acute Paraquat poisoning, a condition that causes nosebleeds, eye irritation, skin irritation, hair loss and abdominal ulceration.

 

 

Help me understand why these violations would not expand in U.S. if laws weren't in place to stop them. I'm seriously asking, not arguing - help me understand.



#140 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:21 PM

speaking of tomatoes http://thecnnfreedom...ies-to-slavery/

 

http://www.takepart....n-hunger-strike

 

That's disgusting. And i'd like to point out was NOT what I advocated regarding this example earlier. What this shows, is absolutely appalling. Prisoners, human trafficking, violence, rape, murder and more. Hard to compare to a voluntary exchange for low wage for employment. But I digress....



#141 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:26 PM

CC, a little somethign from the M. Daily that may give more insight into the Austrian view on monopoly.

 

http://mises.org/dai...Austrian-Lenses

 

I will read it

 

I think the sunglasses example in the article is just silly.  But what about oil monopolies and what about media monopolies - we need oil and we need to be informed. Both industries have a profound impact on society. You don't support laws limiting the amount of media outlets one corporation can own? no restrictions -  5 corps can control 90% of mainstream media (thus control mainstream conversations and opinions)



#142 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:28 PM

Help me understand why these violations would not expand in U.S. if laws weren't in place to stop them. I'm seriously asking, not arguing - help me understand.

 

Well, these types of things are going on here, as your article on tomatoes shows. I've never said we should not have laws against such practices. Especially when you bring in involuntary measures. I'm certainly not trying to paint some utopian portrait, CC. I'm a little too far jaded from absorbing two lifetimes worth of information like you provide here. I am, however, a full scale advocate of individual liberty and the decentralization of power/authority.

 

I'd have to go digging, but i'd be willing to bet I can find direct ties with governance in most, if not all of these human right violations.
 



#143 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:32 PM

I will read it

 

I think the sunglasses example in the article is just silly.  But what about oil monopolies and what about media monopolies - we need oil and we need to be informed. Both industries have a profound impact on society. You don't support laws limited the amount of media outlets one corporation can own? no restrictions -  5 corps can control 90% of mainstream media (thus control mainstream conversations and opinions)

 

No, I do not support laws that limit the amount of media outlets one corporation can own. Especially as long as there are no restrictions to who can participate in  providing information. The state of MSM is atrocious. You'll get no argument from me there. But look at the tron! There are litterally hundreds of thousands of places cycling news. People are more and more completely disenchanted with the establishment. Most of those corp. MSM outlets get their news directives from.....wait for it! Wait for it!.....Government.



#144 china cat

china cat
  • VibeTribe
  • 15,577 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:34 PM

Well, these types of things are going on here, as your article on tomatoes shows. I've never said we should not have laws against such practices. Especially when you bring in involuntary measures. I'm certainly not trying to paint some utopian portrait, CC. I'm a little too far jaded from absorbing two lifetimes worth of information like you provide here. I am, however, a full scale advocate of individual liberty and the decentralization of power/authority.

 

I'd have to go digging, but i'd be willing to bet I can find direct ties with governance in most, if not all of these human right violations.
 

 

So, the solution would be what? 1. workers speaking out - uniting for change and 2. working with industries who purchase these good to put pressure on the employers to improve conditions?



#145 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:50 PM

So, the solution would be what? 1. workers speaking out - uniting for change and 2. working with industries who purchase these good to put pressure on the employers to improve conditions?

 

Sure, Private sector unions is one option in economic arenas with poor conditions. As long as they aren't colluding with government for concessions at taxpayer expense (or competition). Consumer reputation is another angle there as well. In the world of information today, it is pretty easy to spread the word on products and the way in which they are procured (from the ground on up). Then there is competition. Probably the most stifled process in economic affairs in most sectors.

 

Another word on media. In some ways, consumers are absolutely to blame (especially today) in the state of affairs of information they consume.



#146 TakeAStepBack

TakeAStepBack
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,014 posts

Posted 01 July 2013 - 07:52 PM

That could be said for food sources like tomatoes too. People have to take responsibility for what they consume, and the impacts of it. I think that responsibility is largely dodged by individuals who believe the nanny will step in and keep them safe. Which is a lot of the problem and the reason why we seem to dumb down more and more instead of the reverse.



#147 hoagie

hoagie
  • VibeTribe
  • 19,454 posts

Posted 02 July 2013 - 12:20 PM

page 3, no reply from Insolent Cur.  :lol: