|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What is a Liberal, and What is a Conservative? | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
My point is that currency isn't fixed (it is regulated by the government.) Also, you statement of zero sums seems to imply that the economy really doesnt expand, just that stuff gets pushed around (which is part of it, just not the only part.)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
probably right there, have wandered a bit off topic.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3976 Joined: |
Correction (and explanation) made by edit at message 108. As RAZD guessed, I had accidently ommited an "at".
Adminnemooseus ps: I wish you would take such questions to the "Change in Moderation?" topic. It would cut down on the off-topic clutter in this topic. Adminnemooseus This message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 09-01-2004 12:40 AM Comments on moderation procedures? - Go to Change in Moderation? or Thread Reopen Requests
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6503 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: I agree. I was not trying to indicate that I am opposed to this newer ownership structure. I think it has some advantages i.e. rather than running a lousy company using tax money to make a national champion like the French due gets superceded by multinationals that are trying to make a profit without using public financing. The toughest part is how to regulate multinationals when they break local (or international) laws. The second part is a mixed bag. Outsourcing can be beneficial. The outsourcing of high tech jobs to India is not hurting the Indians who get the jobs. But the outsourcing of labor by Nike and textile companies to places like Indonesia or China where the workers are basically slaves should not be tolerated. Even if it makes things more expensive, I think (personal opinion here) that I would rather pay more for shoes etc. than benefit from forced or coerced labor. Again, how this is regulated and how some minimum standard of living can be enforced is one of the main sticking points in the globalization debate.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: ...or to the workers.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2197 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Cable TV is another example.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1432 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
internet access?
{added by edit} free internet acces could have been provided for every american for less money than the tax give-away. this would have boosted both education and commerce. to get back on topic: the tax give-away is reactionary conservativethe free internet is radical liberalism This message has been edited by RAZD, 09-01-2004 09:34 AM we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
I agree with you. There are of issues that remain unaddressed. One of them is how do we wish to deal with countries that obviously don't provide freedom and protection to its people. Of course, alot of the abuses stems from the government structure and regulation of buisnesss in those countries. ITs a sticky proposition, because how to change those governement peacefully to reduce or eliminate such abuses.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
That is another option. However, all employment is volentary on both sides. If the workers at tyco were unhappy with their pay, they have several avenues. One would be to get another job, another would be to unionize.
However, companies are not government enterprizes, thus the control and distrubtion of profits is in the perview of the shareholders and the board of directors. Of course, the same holds true for any buisness enterprise. Single propetierships give that same power to the single owner. I do think that workers who lost their jobs due to mismanegment may have a case against the manegment for econommic losses in civil court. They need to prove negligence and fraud, but considering the case, that shouldn't be difficult.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
Cable TV has these issues because of a lack of competition. One of the roles of government is to prevent monopolies and to look out for the interests of the consumers. In this regard, I feel that the government has failed. Just look at the difference between Satellite TV and cable prices. I could get twice or more channels for about 1/2 to 1/3 the price, and include a DVR. Of course, with Sattelite TV, there is plenty of competition in each market, which keeps costs down.
This message has been edited by Darwin Storm, 09-01-2004 11:07 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
free internet acces could have been provided for every american for less money than the tax give-away. this would have boosted both education and commerce. Couple of problems with this. One, internet access means nothing if people don't have computers. Alot of people don't have access because a computer is either out of their means, or just unwanted.Secondly, you are assuming most people would use the internet for education or commerce.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
crashfrog Member (Idle past 1494 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: |
However, all employment is volentary on both sides. But clearly, it's voluntary to a lesser degree for the workers. It's a well-understood principle that the worker and the employer are not on equal ground in regards to economic leverage. This forms the basis of our labor laws.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Darwin Storm Inactive Member |
Its also why workers often form unions to gain negotiationary leverage. Of course, Unions have their own baggage, but they can be very effective in protecting the workers. Also, politically, workers can vote, and labor laws are a direct consequence of such power.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
Yes, that is true: but also not the hostility that conservatism demonstrates toward unionisation, and even seeks to restrict unionisation. Fundamemtally, a workers rights agenda is diametrically opposed to the Heroic agenda of the "entrepreneur" advocated by conservatives.
Neverthless, this power does not functionally challenge the ayuthority weilded by employers. Thus for example, some German workers have recently accepted lower pay and conditions in exchange for the firm not leaving for the third world. Our society is still constructed on the many working for the few, and the interests of those few being opposed to the interests of the many. The rich are necessarily the enemies of the people.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
contracycle Inactive Member |
quote: Without a very specific clarification on what you MEAN by Globalisation, the term is pointless. So, what do you mean? Anti-globalisation protestors, for example, do not call for a return to local economies. They criticise the neo-"liberal" privatising, slash-and-burn business model that is referred to by the term Globalisation.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024