Economic Populism Sells...Libertariansim? Not so much...

[Sammy Jankis]

Still waiting for you to articulate the discrimination against white people .. in a land dominated by white people .. that you're talking about and claim is so obvious.

What is wrong with your brain that you can't intellectually describe what you're talking about beyond the talk-radio-inspired-bumper-sticker-goofy man's logic you speak from?

Shouldn't this speak volumes to the false concept of "superiority"?

Affirmative Action WORKS by racially discriminating against white people. It doesn't get plainer than that. You can deny it all you want, but it just makes you look stupid.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affirmative_action

Affirmative action refers to policies intended to promote access to education or employment aimed at a historically socio-politically non-dominant group (typically, minorities or women). Motivation for affirmative action policies is to redress the effects of past and current discrimination and to encourage public institutions such as universities, hospitals and police forces to be more representative of the population.

This is commonly achieved through targeted recruitment programs, by preferential treatment given to applicants from socio-politically disadvantaged groups and in some cases through the use of quotas.

Opponents of affirmative action policies argue that it is based on collectivism and merely another form of discrimination because it can result in qualified applicants being denied entry to higher education or employment because they belong to a particular social group (usually the historically socio-politically dominant group; typically majority races and men, regardless of social standing or financial need.)

 

[blackascoal]

Affirmative Action WORKS by racially discriminating against white people. It doesn't get plainer than that. You can deny it all you want, but it just makes you look stupid.

As usual and expected, once again you're incapable of demonstrating evidence of wide spread racial discrimination against whites .. in the land dominated by white people.

You aren't comprehending what "evidence" is and you don't appear capable of figuring it out.

And what white people ar you talking about GIVEN that AA has helped WHITE women more than it has helped blacks .. AND AA also includes various programs for the disabled.

Do you have a brain instead of that speakerphone you use to parrot the bullshit you've been told on talk radio?

Go do some research dude, then come back and let's see if you can then hold an intelligent conversation.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

As usual and expected, once again you're incapable of demonstrating evidence of wide spread racial discrimination against whites .. in the land dominated by white people.

You aren't comprehending what "evidence" is and you don't appear capable of figuring it out.

And what white people ar you talking about GIVEN that AA has helped WHITE women more than it has helped blacks .. AND AA also includes various programs for the disabled.

Do you have a brain instead of that speakerphone you use to parrot the bullshit you've been told on talk radio?

Go do some research dude, then come back and let's see if you can then hold an intelligent conversation.

Are you saying no affirmative action programs exist? How stupid are you exactly? We need a zero tolerance policy toward racial discrimination of any kind.

 

[Epicurus]

The best way to end racial discrimination is to simply stop discriminating by race.

Affirmative Action, IMO, does little but reinforce the notion of racial identity and discourage integration. The existence of AA leaves lingering bitterness in many whites who misunderstand the program's procedures, which is why I feel we would be better off without it.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

The best way to end racial discrimination is to simply stop discriminating by race.

Affirmative Action, IMO, does little but reinforce the notion of racial identity and discourage integration. The existence of AA leaves lingering bitterness in many whites who misunderstand the program's procedures, which is why I feel we would be better off without it.

One correction, if I may...
It's not a 'misunderstanding of it's procedures'. It's blatantly racially discriminatory.

 

[Obfuscate]

the truth is that the formation of this nation was an act of collectivism, a collective effort to free Americans from the british

I don't think many especially conservatives disagree with a "collective" effect to protect ourselves and our property. Remember it was collective effort to gid RID of intrusive over government.

 

[Obfuscate]

As far as alberts socialism. History has proven the Labor Theory of Value was inncorrect and marginalism and utility dictate prices.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

As far as alberts socialism. History has proven the Labor Theory of Value was inncorrect and marginalism and utility dictate prices.

It's a moral value. It states a worker should be recompensed with value roughtly equal to the value he creates. It cannot be "disproven".

 

[Obfuscate]

Labour theory of value

The notion that the value of any good or service depends on how much LABOUR it uses up. First suggested by ADAM SMITH, it took a central place in the philosophy of KARL MARX. Some neo-classical economists disagreed with this theory, arguing that the PRICE of something was independent of how much labour went into producing it and was instead determined solely by SUPPLY and DEMAND.

http://www.economist.com/research/Economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=L

Different labor theories of value prevailed amongst classical economists through to the mid-19th century. It is especially associated with Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Since that time it is most often associated with Marxian economics; while among modern mainstream economists it is considered to be superseded by the marginal utility approach

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Labour theory of value

The notion that the value of any good or service depends on how much LABOUR it uses up. First suggested by ADAM SMITH, it took a central place in the philosophy of KARL MARX. Some neo-classical economists disagreed with this theory, arguing that the PRICE of something was independent of how much labour went into producing it and was instead determined solely by SUPPLY and DEMAND.

http://www.economist.com/research/Economics/alphabetic.cfm?letter=L

Different labor theories of value prevailed amongst classical economists through to the mid-19th century. It is especially associated with Adam Smith and David Ricardo. Since that time it is most often associated with Marxian economics; while among modern mainstream economists it is considered to be superseded by the marginal utility approach

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labor_theory_of_value

in "modern mainstream economics" they state it in this reverse fashion, to avoid framing it as a labor issue.

 

[Obfuscate]

If the amount of Labor should dictate wages that would mean companies that fail essentially workers would owe the employer.

I make two widgets

1 is highly demanded but cost very little to produce.

2 is very expensive to produce but no one wants it.

Labor theory would conclude that worker 2 should be compensated better than worker 1.
That's not reality.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

If the amount of Labor should dictate wages that would mean companies that fail essentially workers would owe the employer.

I make two widgets

1 is highly demanded but cost very little to produce.

2 is very expensive to produce but no one wants it.

Labor theory would conclude that worker 2 should be compensated better than worker 1.
That's not reality.

I would assert that workers would recompensed on realized value of the product, consistent with market forces, taking into consideration the kinds of supply/ demand concerns you mention. Thus, all workers are incented in planning which products to make. Distributed planning is a superior paradigm.

 

[Obfuscate]

I can't really explain it much easier than I already did.

 

[ironhead]

It's staggering that Cypress is interested in "what sells". Fear has been selling rather well in this country for the last seven years, much to our detriment.

 

[Diuretic]

Labour is always priced on its availability. But it's also linked to skills as well. I'm seeing that here in my own country.

Interesting discussion this one.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

I can't really explain it much easier than I already did.

your analysis is strictly from the viewpoint of "how to price an item". I'm speaking of it from the viewpoint of "compensation for workers". Until you realize this frame-based disconnect, you will never understand.

 

[Annie]

your analysis is strictly from the viewpoint of "how to price an item". I'm speaking of it from the viewpoint of "compensation for workers". Until you realize this frame-based disconnect, you will never understand.

So everything should be predicated on the worker, not the profit or loss to the owners? My you have veered off.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

So everything should be predicated on the worker, not the profit or loss to the owners? My you have veered off.

It should be more balanced than it is now, in our our current state of pitting slave laborer against slave laborer in a race to the bottom. Arbeit Macht Frei, right?

 

[Diuretic]

It should be more balanced than it is now, in our our current state of pitting slave laborer against slave laborer in a race to the bottom. Arbeit Macht Frei, right?

That's what happens when the union movement is gutted.

I'm trying to hang on here so no bashing me okay? This stuff is above my head but I'm learning as I go along.

 

[Obfuscate]

It isn't about being against the union. The right for workers to unite is critical. However Unions shouldn't get favors from government nor should they be a barrier to entry for employment as many are.