Visit the Ironworks Gaming Website Email the Webmaster Graphics Library Rules and Regulations Help Support Ironworks Forum with a Donation to Keep us Online - We rely totally on Donations from members Donation goal Meter

Ironworks Gaming Radio

Ironworks Gaming Forum

Go Back   Ironworks Gaming Forum > Ironworks Gaming Forums > General Discussion > General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005)

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-27-2003, 12:53 PM   #51
Rokenn
Galvatron
 

Join Date: January 22, 2002
Location: california wine country
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
My second guess was you were an 'employer'. Giving one party excessive authority over another is bad in any situation, as it leads to abuse. Fair labor laws are their because employers have abused employees in the past. Since the the power equation of employers and employees the employers have the overwelming balance of power I see no problem with current US labor laws. There is nothing in the law saying you can not fire someone, you just have to have a reasonable reason. Do you think employer actions like those taken against Cerek's wife or the security guard at the mall are reasonable?
__________________
“This is an impressive crowd, the haves and the have mores. <br />Some people call you the elite. <br />I call you my base.”<br />~ George W. Bush (2000)
Rokenn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 01:32 PM   #52
Thorfinn
Zhentarim Guard
 

Join Date: February 24, 2003
Location: Indiana
Age: 56
Posts: 358
I'm not sure what is accomplished by the ad hominem. Are you trying to discredit the argument by pointing out a potential conflict of interest?

Additionally, whatever abuses employers have committed pales beside the way the government abuses the employees. Seriously, through payroll taxes, you lose about 15% of your money straight off the top. Between payroll taxes, workman's comp, and unemployment, you are somewhere around 25%. This is not counting any possible income tax. In other words, if not for the gov't payroll taxes and mandates, in only six hours, you could have the same "pre-tax" income you now have in 8. If your employer tried to force you to work an extra two hours for free, you would hear nothing but cries of oppression, yet when the government does it, you simply hear nothing.

Compounding the problem is that taxes on corporations and investment capital increases the cost of consumer goods by somewhere between 400% and 800%. In other words, because of government, you pay 32 cents for a 4 cent can of tomato sauce. Just imagine how much better off you would be if your paycheck went 8x further.

Taking it to the lowest level, imagine a $6.00 per hour ditch digger. Without the payroll taxes, he would be making $8.00 per hour. If not for the 800% increase in the prices of goods, cet. par., this ditchdigger would have the means to live the lifestyle of a current day CEO making a cool $125k per year. Alternatively, he could live the same lifestyle he has now working less than an hour a day. Not too shabby, eh?

The upshot of all this is that whatever abuses employers have perpetrated upon employees are nothing compared to the abuses the government has perpetrated. They are not even in the same league. Most people see no problem with government forcing them, presumably since they got to vote on which taskmaster weilds the whip, yet have no problem screaming foul when an "evil" employer decides to replace someone with another, more qualified person, or even to phase out the position entirely.

It is usually incredibly poor form to use anecdotes as the main thrust of the argument, but I'll bite. No Cerek's wife was not treated fairly, and neither was the security guard. What difference does that make? I will await your argument that because one person treated another unfairly, it is justified to empower a third person to treat a fourth person unfairly.

A 42 year old guy at my wife's company just died of cancer. A local 35 year old tv personality with no symptoms dropped dead on a basketball court of a massive heart attack. Several of my friends and colleagues have already been planted at an early age due to heart disease, heart attacks, auto accidents and cancer. Some people are smarter, or faster, better looking than others. What do all these have in common? None of them are fair. In the grand scheme of things, the unfairness done to Cerek's wife wouldn't even show up in the background clutter of the unfairness of life.

Life is not fair, and the sooner you learn that, the better.

[ 03-27-2003, 12:53 PM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]
Thorfinn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 01:50 PM   #53
harleyquinn
Symbol of Cyric
 

Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 43
Posts: 1,190
Thorfin, just my [img]graemlins/twocents.gif[/img] but it seems to me like you are not being considerate of the fact that others might not agree with you. Others are just as right to their opinions as you are to you, but statements like
Quote:

Life is not fair, and the sooner you learn that, the better.
in my opinion is almost insulting. While I don't agree with all of your opinions (some of the points I do agree with) I don't think saying stuff like that makes others feel comfortable to voice their opinions. I hope I did not make you feel attacked, as that was not my intention. It was mearly to point out how your post was coming across in a way that you may not have intended.

Thanks
__________________
[img]\"http://www.bethspage.us/sig.jpg\" alt=\" - \" />
harleyquinn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 01:55 PM   #54
Rokenn
Galvatron
 

Join Date: January 22, 2002
Location: california wine country
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
Life is not fair, and the sooner you learn that, the better.
Life is a fair as we make it. If you hate the government so much why not relocate your business to a country that will allow you to freely exploit your workers to your hearts content. There are many countries that allow employers to chain workers to their work areas, allow cheap child labor, and, best of all, none of those pesky OSHA types coming around to insist you have a 'safe' working environment for your chattel employees.
__________________
“This is an impressive crowd, the haves and the have mores. <br />Some people call you the elite. <br />I call you my base.”<br />~ George W. Bush (2000)
Rokenn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:05 PM   #55
Thorfinn
Zhentarim Guard
 

Join Date: February 24, 2003
Location: Indiana
Age: 56
Posts: 358
Hmmm. I had not meant to be insulting, but merely making the point that calling attention to unfairness in some employer-employee relationships is not only a poor reason to grant some people the privilege of being unfair to others, but that the unfairness is utterly trivial. I'm making a guess here, but I would bet Cerek would think the unfairness of losing the $500 would be preferable to the unfairness of her getting hit by a bus. In most places, she could file in small claims court and get back the money anyway -- most states require the employer to pay out the two weeks regardless of whether or not they walk you out the door immediately.

"Unfair" is just not a very strong argument, particularly when your solution to unfairness is more unfairness.

[ 03-27-2003, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Thorfinn ]
Thorfinn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:07 PM   #56
Thorfinn
Zhentarim Guard
 

Join Date: February 24, 2003
Location: Indiana
Age: 56
Posts: 358
Quote:
Originally posted by Rokenn:
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
Life is not fair, and the sooner you learn that, the better.
Life is a fair as we make it. If you hate the government so much why not relocate your business to a country that will allow you to freely exploit your workers to your hearts content. There are many countries that allow employers to chain workers to their work areas, allow cheap child labor, and, best of all, none of those pesky OSHA types coming around to insist you have a 'safe' working environment for your chattel employees.[/QUOTE]More ad hominem?
Thorfinn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:21 PM   #57
Rokenn
Galvatron
 

Join Date: January 22, 2002
Location: california wine country
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
Quote:
Originally posted by Rokenn:
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
Life is not fair, and the sooner you learn that, the better.
Life is a fair as we make it. If you hate the government so much why not relocate your business to a country that will allow you to freely exploit your workers to your hearts content. There are many countries that allow employers to chain workers to their work areas, allow cheap child labor, and, best of all, none of those pesky OSHA types coming around to insist you have a 'safe' working environment for your chattel employees.[/QUOTE]More ad hominem?[/QUOTE]Not really. The main thrust of your argument is the government is the cause of the workers problems. Merely pointing out some of the things those pesky taxes we pay protect us from.

You do know your labor history don't you? How employers used to require 12 hour workdays. And that when early labor organizers worked to change this practice (amoung others) the companies would hire thugs to do everything from intimadation to outright murder of these organizers?
__________________
“This is an impressive crowd, the haves and the have mores. <br />Some people call you the elite. <br />I call you my base.”<br />~ George W. Bush (2000)
Rokenn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:24 PM   #58
Rokenn
Galvatron
 

Join Date: January 22, 2002
Location: california wine country
Age: 54
Posts: 2,193
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
"Unfair" is just not a very strong argument, particularly when your solution to unfairness is more unfairness.
For nearly every labor law on the books a root cause can be found. In the vast mojority of these cases the root cause is the company exploiting their power over the worker, not the other way around.
__________________
“This is an impressive crowd, the haves and the have mores. <br />Some people call you the elite. <br />I call you my base.”<br />~ George W. Bush (2000)
Rokenn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:34 PM   #59
harleyquinn
Symbol of Cyric
 

Join Date: November 25, 2002
Location: NY
Age: 43
Posts: 1,190
Just in case anyone is interested, you can find information about the history of labor in the US here: http://www.aflcio.org/trivia/links.htm

And,in my opinion, arguing that one injustice should be ignored because of others is just not a solid arguement. Why bother doing anything then? Why bother trying to stop torture by one government when there are other governments doing it? Why try to stop rape when there are people being murdered? One does not cancel out the other.

Anyway, the site is a link of other sites with Labor hitory information. Very interesting. Anyone curious, go check it out.
__________________
[img]\"http://www.bethspage.us/sig.jpg\" alt=\" - \" />
harleyquinn is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:38 PM   #60
Timber Loftis
40th Level Warrior
 

Join Date: July 11, 2002
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 11,916
Quote:
Originally posted by Thorfinn:
Compounding the problem is that taxes on corporations and investment capital increases the cost of consumer goods by somewhere between 400% and 800%. In other words, because of government, you pay 32 cents for a 4 cent can of tomato sauce. Just imagine how much better off you would be if your paycheck went 8x further.
I think this is naive. You pay 32 cents (actually more like 99, but anyway) for a can of tomato sauce because that's what the market will bear. It will cost (more or less) that much regardless of whether the corporation pays taxes or not. On the tax issue, it's likely you do not understand the corporate tax structure, which is IMO lower than it should be, but at the very least inarguably should exist. If you're thinking "double taxation" you have heard a soundbyte and have not developed an understanding of the tax system.
Quote:

Taking it to the lowest level, imagine a $6.00 per hour ditch digger. Without the payroll taxes, he would be making $8.00 per hour. If not for the 800% increase in the prices of goods, cet. par., this ditchdigger would have the means to live the lifestyle of a current day CEO making a cool $125k per year. Alternatively, he could live the same lifestyle he has now working less than an hour a day. Not too shabby, eh?
Those $2.00 you mention serve 2 major purposes: (1) social security and (2) unemployment. THe fact the ditchdigger pays this money "into the system" justifies his drawing of unemployment for up to a year if he gets laid off and has to find another job. It also justifies his drawing of social security. Especially important for a ditchdigger, who likely has no 401k plan.
Quote:

The upshot of all this is that whatever abuses employers have perpetrated upon employees are nothing compared to the abuses the government has perpetrated. They are not even in the same league. Most people see no problem with government forcing them, presumably since they got to vote on which taskmaster weilds the whip, yet have no problem screaming foul when an "evil" employer decides to replace someone with another, more qualified person, or even to phase out the position entirely.
This is just silly. Quit taking the National Review Online to heart so much, because it has been proven to kill brain cells at the same rate as hippy crack. The employers, not the government, chose to expose employees to toxins and other death-causing incidences so much the workers were forced to form unions and the government was forced to implement OSHA.

I am no fan of bloated government, so I don't want anyone to get that mistaken. But, your notion of the benevolent nature of employers ignores reality. I won't bother to dig up the hundreds of articles of massive worker accidents in mines or construction sites or chemical factories or packing industries that existed in history - and still largely do exist. Suffice to say you could find some time well-spent with Sinclair's The Jungle.

On a more reflective note, I will point out that the corporate form of business promotes abuse of the worker. Why? Because a Board of Directors has one prevailing duty: value of the stock. This duty is dictated by law based on the Board's position as a FIDUCIARY of the stockholders. Because of this duty, and because all of the board members can deflect liability (both moral and legal) by simply saying "the board voted," the Board will choose to take actions (or *not* take actions) as a group that no one of them would dare decide on his/her own. Quite simply, 20 men/women sitting around a table will decide to undertake evil actions no one of them would undertake alone.

As for your comment that life isn't fair, I agree. But we can try.
__________________
Timber Loftis is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
"Chocolate health" news somehow mutated into "Who has the best" debate Larry_OHF General Discussion 34 03-25-2007 04:55 AM
Searching for "Star Blazers" aka "Uchuu Senchen Yamato," or "Space Battleship Yamato" Skydracgrrl Entertainment (Movies, TV Shows and Books/Comics) 3 12-17-2004 02:38 PM
Searching for "Star Blazers" aka "Uchuu Senchen Yamato," or "Space Battleship Yamato" Skydracgrrl General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 0 12-02-2004 10:27 PM
status on "pool of twilight" & "EOB4, xanathar's revenge"? manikus Dungeon Craft - RPG Game Maker 0 05-03-2003 08:28 PM
How's This For A "First" Speech Topic? Moni General Conversation Archives (11/2000 - 01/2005) 33 09-20-2002 04:42 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:31 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2017 Ironworks Gaming TM & The Great Escape Studios - All Rights Reserved