I Already Knew This But . . .

[OrnotBitwise]

I want to reiterate how much I genuinely respect and appreciate Michael Moore. I'm spending my Saturday afternoon watching The Big One and working myself into a really righteous rage. So where are all the cons when you need 'em, huh?

No, no: I'm not saying that he's perfect or saintly. Wipe that spittle off your chin. Given my choice between Moore, though, and ANY national politician, I'll hang with Michael, thanks.

 

[Said1]

I want to reiterate how much I genuinely respect and appreciate Michael Moore. I'm spending my Saturday afternoon watching The Big One and working myself into a really righteous rage. So where are all the cons when you need 'em, huh?

No, no: I'm not saying that he's perfect or saintly. Wipe that spittle off your chin. Given my choice between Moore, though, and ANY national politician, I'll hang with Michael, thanks.

His depiction of Canadians in "Bowling for Columbine' was a bit off.

What DID happen to those people in the boat going to Cuba for medical care anyway?

 

[OrnotBitwise]

His depiction of Canadians in "Bowling for Columbine' was a bit off.

What DID happen to those people in the boat going to Cuba for medical care anyway?

Haven't seen Sicko yet -- a bit too close to home under the current circumstances. I expect we'll be buying a copy or two as soon as it's available. Also, it's on my Christmas list.

But enough of that.

You're picking nits -- which is a common reaction to Moore's theses. In general, his point in BFC was both valid and telling: Canadians own nearly as many guns per capita as we do yet have a far lower rate of gun-related violence. It's an interesting comment on American culture, at the very least.

Downsize This is much more Moore, though. The problem with an economy built entirely on the profit motive is that there's no incentive for the industrialist or CEO to treat labor as anything other than an expense. Henry Ford -- hardly a socialist by anyone's reckoning -- once said that there's only one rule for the industrialist: make the best product possible as cheaply as possible and paying the highest wages possible. Yes, Ford once really did have a better idea. Sadly, though, our economy doesn't reward anyone for paying the highest wages possible.

And therein lies the rub.

We need people like Michael Moore. We need them to help shame the wealthy into doing what they have no other incentive to do: behave like decent human beings.

 

[OrnotBitwise]

Talking with my wife just now, I realized that I need to articulate something more clearly. I think we need more labor unions. Now. Nothing else is likely to address the growing tendency of business entities to squeeze their employees dry. In addition, we need some (limited) protectionist legislation: we need to severely penalize U.S. corporations for outsourcing jobs to other nations. That's a short term measure and can easily get out of hand, but we do need it for the next few years.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Japan did that in about 1990, Ornot.

Funny, althrough out the 80's, people were scared of how big the Japanes were getting. At about 1990, stagnation hit big time, and they really lost jobs, except these jobs were stolen by protectionism. You don't really hear much about Japan anymore.

 

[Said1]

Haven't seen Sicko yet -- a bit too close to home under the current circumstances. I expect we'll be buying a copy or two as soon as it's available. Also, it's on my Christmas list.

But enough of that.

You're picking nits -- which is a common reaction to Moore's theses. In general, his point in BFC was both valid and telling: Canadians own nearly as many guns per capita as we do yet have a far lower rate of gun-related violence. It's an interesting comment on American culture, at the very least.

Downsize This is much more Moore, though. The problem with an economy built entirely on the profit motive is that there's no incentive for the industrialist or CEO to treat labor as anything other than an expense. Henry Ford -- hardly a socialist by anyone's reckoning -- once said that there's only one rule for the industrialist: make the best product possible as cheaply as possible and paying the highest wages possible. Yes, Ford once really did have a better idea. Sadly, though, our economy doesn't reward anyone for paying the highest wages possible.

And therein lies the rub.

We need people like Michael Moore. We need them to help shame the wealthy into doing what they have no other incentive to do: behave like decent human beings.

No, I'm not nitpicking. Acustory comments such as yours are common with Moore fans, but never mind that. In short, I have no problem with Moore's 'theses'. But, we do lock our doors. The majority of us are not half wits who pass out with our doors unlocked - ok, I know one or two have been robbed under the same circumstances - not shot though.

Maybe you can remind me (I honestly forget) why Moore went into one of the nicest areas near downtown Toronto? Did he mention why he didn't venture into a poor, crime ridden area and start opening doors, at randome?

We prefer to stab people anyway. Guns are just so loud.

We don't need people like Moore either, we have David Suzuki and Margret Atwood.

 

[evince]

I did not know said was a canuck.

Moore has given much to the political forum in the US. This country has begun to realise the free market does not solve everything in life. It has to have limmits and boundries set up by the people to protect the very continued exsistance of our great country and our own elelctions.

 

[Cancel 2016.2]

Talking with my wife just now, I realized that I need to articulate something more clearly. I think we need more labor unions. Now. Nothing else is likely to address the growing tendency of business entities to squeeze their employees dry. In addition, we need some (limited) protectionist legislation: we need to severely penalize U.S. corporations for outsourcing jobs to other nations. That's a short term measure and can easily get out of hand, but we do need it for the next few years.

That is bad policy. Because those corporations can simply change there corporate headquarters to another nation. Then what do you do? Tell them they cannot employ anyone in the US if they don't employ everyone in the US.

Side note: Why won't those evil hollywood celebs take pay cuts to give more money to their workers unions... like the writers? They are all livin it up in their hollywood mansions while their writers are having to use foodstamps to get by. What a shame.

 

[Cypress]

That is bad policy. Because those corporations can simply change there corporate headquarters to another nation. Then what do you do? Tell them they cannot employ anyone in the US if they don't employ everyone in the US.

I see. You support alleged "free" trade agreements, that don't have enforceable labor standards, and that facillitate mulinational corporations ability to shop around for slave wages...and then you say we can't support unions, because companies will outsource and screw us because of the very trade policies YOU supported?

lol

Side note: Why won't those evil hollywood celebs take pay cuts to give more money to their workers unions... like the writers? They are all livin it up in their hollywood mansions while their writers are having to use foodstamps to get by. What a shame.

Hollywood celebs are in unions too. Did you know your Buddy Fred Thompson is a card carrying member of the Screen Actors Guild, and recives a nice, hefty, and generous UNION pension from them?

Why can't more americans have nice UNION benefits, like your buddy Fred Thompson ?

 

[uscitizen]

Then there are the federal employees aka congress and such which is an undeclared uniion....

Best benefits of any union in the country.
They even employ seniority rights in congress....

 

[OrnotBitwise]

That is bad policy. Because those corporations can simply change there corporate headquarters to another nation. Then what do you do? Tell them they cannot employ anyone in the US if they don't employ everyone in the US.

Side note: Why won't those evil hollywood celebs take pay cuts to give more money to their workers unions... like the writers? They are all livin it up in their hollywood mansions while their writers are having to use foodstamps to get by. What a shame.

That is the rub, of course. Then you find yourself looking at the other side of protectionism: tariffs on the now-foreign trade of these formerly U.S. companies.

Protectionism is not a good thing, in the long run, I'll grant. It's sometimes the lesser evil though. The proper purpose is not to prevent change in the economy but to slow the pace of change and allow U.S. workers more opportunity to adapt and for foreign economies to catch up with ours.

There is no doubt that we're looking at harder times for the majority of Americans. I'm not saying we can fix it, just that we can help cushion the landing . . . wherever that may be. The world simply cannot support six or seven billion people living as Americans today do: our lifestyle(s) will have to change whether we want it or not.

We've been riding an unprecedented wave of prosperity since the end of WWII due to unique circumstances. It was a nice ride but we're on the beach now, dudes. Time to get back to work.

And speaking of which . . .

 

[theMAJORITY]

Moore and Gore are the same to me. Both idealists who don't do their homework well enough to present a non biased opinion--and present it as fact. Neither of them seem to have a moral obligation to not skew facts, or not give full disclosure in their arguments. To me---that is what a lier/rich politician does--and I have red flags about any information I hear from either of those guys.

One example about Gore and his movie (which has been banned by at least one country for presenting poor factual material). I have had a few statistics classes back in my college days. And the siomple fact that CO2 levels are higher, and the possible fact (questioning the measuring methods) that the earth is warming up again (it has done this a few thousand times before), does not mean there is a strong coorolation between those two factors.--yet--it is presented to us by Gore as fact.--and he is a hyprocrite to boot---more red flags baby--more red flags.

Why should a fat pig like Moore get free health insurance anyway? He obviously does not care about his health.

 

[theMAJORITY]

That is the rub, of course. Then you find yourself looking at the other side of protectionism: tariffs on the now-foreign trade of these formerly U.S. companies.

Protectionism is not a good thing, in the long run, I'll grant. It's sometimes the lesser evil though. The proper purpose is not to prevent change in the economy but to slow the pace of change and allow U.S. workers more opportunity to adapt and for foreign economies to catch up with ours.

There is no doubt that we're looking at harder times for the majority of Americans. I'm not saying we can fix it, just that we can help cushion the landing . . . wherever that may be. The world simply cannot support six or seven billion people living as Americans today do: our lifestyle(s) will have to change whether we want it or not.

We've been riding an unprecedented wave of prosperity since the end of WWII due to unique circumstances. It was a nice ride but we're on the beach now, dudes. Time to get back to work.

And speaking of which . . .

Not a bad write from a guy in the middle of libville. We rode that wave of prosperity, and got to that level due to a free market system and low taxes. But then Gov got bigger, taqxes went up, and we struggled more. Now mom had to work also for a average family to survive. One man used to be able to easily support a family of 7--with out any assistance. Globalization, with countries that are not anywhere near our level of a society is what is hurting us today (and all previously prosperious countries--we are not alone). What wall street does not realize is manufacturing makes the world go around, and they fractured our manufacturing base (knowing it would hurt our people). That is big trouble boys, and we can't protect ourself with a soft landing, if we can not see the bottom yet. Tell me you see the bottom--where is it????? The only candidate I heard that directly addressed this is Duncan Hunter during the republican Michigan debate (also, not bad for a guy from libville). Don't think manufacturing is the only type of industry that will leave us (as if that were not bad enough), anything that can go over will go over--and it is. I would love to keep a total count of industries that are leaving over time. If you think your job is protected, think again. There are all kinds of indirect factors that very well may work into your life in a negative way. we all feel it now with crappy products, reduced wages, less benifits, more home forclosures, etc etc. You know the drill. I am not telling you anything new here. it is 10 years old--and still in it's infancy--no bottom in sight. But hey------we can rely on green industry---that does not exist to any capacity yet. good thinking.


Bottom line---all these issues are just symptoms of the real problem.

Being forced to elect rich see-suckers who don't care about theMAJORITY of the people first. Our problems will only get worse, like they have been since D Eisenhower, unless we can get some balance to be able to elect people from a large portion of the population--not just the tiny elite top group.

THATS RIGHT!!!

 

[theMAJORITY]

Lookie here--the fat pig Moore, who probably never lived from pay check to pay check like most Americans, wants everybody to pay for his health care. How about he pay attention a bit more to his health, and buy some insurance for himself (like I do) and buy some for some underpriviledged (a nice word for lazy) families.

Mark my words--in the USA, a socialistic health care system will put 30% of the population in poverity in 10 years. The only way you wuld know that is if your like most Americans, who live pay check to pay check (many with higher degrees), and can not even keep their home. Have you seen the home forclosure rate lately? Now those people, most of them, have health insurance either from their employeer (who is also suffering from globalization--and most will not give the employees a raise if the HI burden is lifted), and they are paying up to 30% of their income on taxes out of their check (I will be forced to pay about 42% this year--because I am not incorporated yet and self employeed--trying to take care of myself). Now Hitlery says tabbacco taxes will pay for our health care? Nope--if you believe that, your in a insane dream. Our income taxes will go over 50% of our check--just like every other socialized country with social health insurance. There govs are not as big and fat as ours, so I preditc over 60% will be coming out of our checks. Taxes going up, poverty and welfare expanding, wages going down we most are on the edge now. It is insanity. But, it really is not about the people--now is it?

 

[evince]

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


He not only worked he was a business man and created his own paper.

He was also a NRA member and a award winning shot.

You allow your hate to fill in the "Facts" for you. Why do you hate people who refuse to do the corporations bidding? Do you really think the corporations are out to improve your life?

 

[theMAJORITY]

Talking with my wife just now, I realized that I need to articulate something more clearly. I think we need more labor unions. Now. Nothing else is likely to address the growing tendency of business entities to squeeze their employees dry. In addition, we need some (limited) protectionist legislation: we need to severely penalize U.S. corporations for outsourcing jobs to other nations. That's a short term measure and can easily get out of hand, but we do need it for the next few years.

I like some of those thoughts. But I think there is a more simple fix to it. Japan and Europe, and probably some other historically productive nations are really pretty close to us a society that is expensive to do business in, (compared to todays globalized market), are countries that we can easily do business with without hurting our people. It is slave countries like China, that we sould not do business with--or trade with because we can not do it withoput hurting our people. I am actually saying---lets just do business with the countries that are close to the same level of society for their people, and let the slave countries do the sme amungst eachother. If they want to step it up and enter our market, tey will have to rise their level of society for their own people. Now some people may call that fachist---but they (the slave countries) have a choice to do what they want, and will make money either way--and build their nucular wheapons arsenol for the hostile leaders--just like we will with the countries we do business with (accept, we are not quite so hostile as the slave countries). If we don't compete against slave labor in countries that have no real business expense--our companies will not jump ship. We can raise our wages, make quality products that don't put our kids in comas, and every body can make money to support them selfs again.

Now if a company did leave, to join the cheap crowd, that is fine. But he would not be able to sell his product in the USA, and his old building and employees could be taken over by venture capitolists to continue makine that same product to sell to our people--who make enough money now to pay for them.

Globalization, and the oppertunity for shareholders to make huge profit using slave countries is the back bone of the downward spiral we are in right now--and it is going to get much worse--before it gets better unless we stop dealing with the lower level countries, or find a way to do it without hurting our own people. I have nothing against geting rich, but it should not be at other peoples expense in this country. I am ashamed as a American to have to vote for a eleite small population that does not care about us.

 

[Dilloduck]

Haven't seen Sicko yet -- a bit too close to home under the current circumstances. I expect we'll be buying a copy or two as soon as it's available. Also, it's on my Christmas list.

But enough of that.

You're picking nits -- which is a common reaction to Moore's theses. In general, his point in BFC was both valid and telling: Canadians own nearly as many guns per capita as we do yet have a far lower rate of gun-related violence. It's an interesting comment on American culture, at the very least.

Downsize This is much more Moore, though. The problem with an economy built entirely on the profit motive is that there's no incentive for the industrialist or CEO to treat labor as anything other than an expense. Henry Ford -- hardly a socialist by anyone's reckoning -- once said that there's only one rule for the industrialist: make the best product possible as cheaply as possible and paying the highest wages possible. Yes, Ford once really did have a better idea. Sadly, though, our economy doesn't reward anyone for paying the highest wages possible.

And therein lies the rub.

We need people like Michael Moore. We need them to help shame the wealthy into doing what they have no other incentive to do: behave like decent human beings.

Henry Ford also said

“Sapiro is a shrewd little Jew. The bible says Jews will return to
Palestine, but they want to get all the money out of America first.
Sapiro should be kicked out because he is trash..”

http://www.cyberessays.com/History/57.htm

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Labor is cost just like any other cost. Until you can make sure that screwing a nut onto a tire is something requires specialized knowledge, anyone on the planet can do it, and it's stupid to pay someone just as much for something that anyone could do.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Henry Ford also said something else: I believe in paying someone what they're worth. And if they're not worth the minimum wage, I do not believe in hiring them.

 

[theMAJORITY]

Labor is cost just like any other cost. Until you can make sure that screwing a nut onto a tire is something requires specialized knowledge, anyone on the planet can do it, and it's stupid to pay someone just as much for something that anyone could do.

Then, we will be able to do nothing because of irresponsible globalization without our peoples interest held first, and we may become as poor as a people as a slave country.

Ford also saw that his employees needed to make more money so they can drive a Ford to work from far away places. That is why he gave all of his employees a raise.

It was working fine--better than the rest of the world--our free market system it used to be. Then we got away from a free market too much and globalization with slave countries started happening. We became the most prosperous country in the world in short order--but we don't do it that way anymore. say good by. Your grand childrens life may become one of poverty if we stay on this track.