• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Walmart customers “unruly” after store closes, police called

Understanding the language is not a problem at all, for some however, speaking it can be difficult. It seems then, there is a clear difference... delineating the two might be helpful, in cases like this. I can't promise anything, but I'm sure you get the point.

de·lin·e·ate dəˈlinēˌāt/

verb

- describe or portray (something) precisely.

"the law should delineate and prohibit behavior that is socially abhorrent"

synonyms: describe, set forth/out, present, outline, sketch, depict, represent; More
indicate the exact position of (a border or boundary).
synonyms: outline, trace, block in, mark (out/off), delimit
"a section delineated in red pen"

How clever. However, since you made your view quite clear in your first response to me, any elucidation I may provide you would fall on deaf ears and thus be a waste of my time.

Have a good day.
 
What entitlements? I keep hearing this "entitlement" thing coming from the right.

And don't tell me entitled to park in the middle of the street 'er something like that.

If you save for a retirement through social security, aren't you entitled to receive it? Aren't your children entitled to a free education as a benefit of citizenship? What's all this BS about entitlements?

Why do you think you're entitled to someone else's earnings? Because the government took your property to pay other people while you were working? Is that it?
 
More empty rhetoric. You guys need a new set of buzzwords or something.

If it was empty rhetoric you would think what people think they are owed wouldn't be so apparent in politics.
 
Why do you think you're entitled to someone else's earnings? Because the government took your property to pay other people while you were working? Is that it?

How do you know everyone is getting paid their value?
 
How do you know everyone is getting paid their value?

Because they are agreeing to work for that amount. If someone was willing to pay them more, they could go work for someone else. You are only worth as much as someone is willing to pay you and not a penny more.
 
Because they are agreeing to work for that amount. If someone was willing to pay them more, they could go work for someone else. You are only worth as much as someone is willing to pay you and not a penny more.

Oh, so if I can get a slave then I'm all set then. That guy is ****ing worthless.
 
Oh, so if I can get a slave then I'm all set then. That guy is ****ing worthless.

So long as they agree to it and nobody is willing to pay them more, sure. How else do you determine someone's value to an employer?
 
How do you know everyone is getting paid their value?

Your labor is worth whatever the other party in the transcation is willing to buy it for. That does not mean however you couldn't find a better deal if you were to sell your labor to someone else.
 
So long as they agree to it and nobody is willing to pay them more, sure. How else do you determine someone's value to an employer?

I think liberals base it on fairness. Though I haven't figured out how that works as any sort of tool that can be used to determine value.
 
I think liberals base it on fairness. Though I haven't figured out how that works as any sort of tool that can be used to determine value.

There's no such thing as fairness without equality. Since people have different skills and different levels of ability, they are not all equal, hence it is absurd to pretend that it is fair to anyone to just expect them all to make the same amount of money, regardless of their skills.
 
Your labor is worth whatever the other party in the transcation is willing to buy it for. That does not mean however you couldn't find a better deal if you were to sell your labor to someone else.

So historically, labor rates were always correct?
 
This is a fine post and you are a very good thinker (a luxury around here). I was asking a loaded question of someone who was purposefully misleading his opponent... You and I both know that to the right-wing entitlements; and said thinking, are not about behavior, but this alleged "redistribution of wealth" nonsense that is all about the welfare state.

Well, I don't know that at all...It is behavior that drives redistribution. And further, I don't think it is nonsense at all. While I am all for helping those that are down, our current social welfare system is not only bloated, but inefficient at rooting out fraud. How long do you think a society can afford to take care of nearly half of its citizenry while they produce nothing?

Now SS: here's how a pension system works: what you contribute; dependent upon agreement / law, is what you take out when you meet the age requirements etc... The Central States Conference of Teamsters Pension Fund is way underfunded - because - population wise, the number of contributors is / was relatively small compared to my group: The Western Conference of Teamsters. I will be long gone, as will my family when that fund comes close to running out. The Central States has suffered massive layoffs and closures do to predatory competition. Therefore, there are a much smaller number contributing members; paying on those who are drawing....

SS is NOT a pension, and wasn't supposed to be ever. It was, as far as I understand, supposed to be a supplement to retirement savings. It has however, become many peoples sole retirement income, while the COLA goes up, the contributor pool decreases. Primarily because the investment involved only returns 1% or less over the course of years...We'd be much better off had we just put the money in the stock market and taken our chances...Oh, and don't give me that crap of the recent crash BS. The market has traditionally paid out over 8% even with the downturns.

Now, does it occur to you that there are much fewer people paying into the SS system, also due to predatory practices and Wall Streets need to control those funds so that -they - can skim a nickle off of every dime that passes through the system. I know you now what capital means, so I won't go into that. But have you noticed the heavy marketing of private retirement savings against a backdrop of huge unemployment in this country.

No, the two are separate. Unless the government is investing in the stock market with our money, and only giving us the scraps...Which I know you know better...Try as you might Jet, you are projecting an anti capitalist screed that would in real world realization fail miserably....We may not have a perfect system in this country, but it is among the best in the world.

Smelling a rat? I am.

Maybe you need a shower?
 
I like the idea, but I don't think I could stomach it.

That's because you only react emotionally and not rationally. If people want to better their lot in life, they need to earn it, not just have their hand out and expect to be handed it.
 
That's because you only react emotionally and not rationally. If people want to better their lot in life, they need to earn it, not just have their hand out and expect to be handed it.

That's true. Slave labor is a choice. Pass the word on.
 
So historically, labor rates were always correct?

If they aren't then competition ensures that either that business that is paying low wages either comes up, or can't get workers...No workers, no business.
 
There's no such thing as fairness without equality. Since people have different skills and different levels of ability, they are not all equal, hence it is absurd to pretend that it is fair to anyone to just expect them all to make the same amount of money, regardless of their skills.

As the old saying goes

"Life's not fair, kid. Get used to it."
 
If they aren't then competition ensures that either that business that is paying low wages either comes up, or can't get workers...No workers, no business.

So historically labor rates have always been correct?
 
That's true. Slave labor is a choice. Pass the word on.

That's why I specified agreement. We don't do slavery, you're just trying to cast things in emotional terms. If someone agrees to work for nothing, which is how internships work, I might note, that's entirely up to them, but they can't come back later and complain because it was their own personal choice.
 
Sure, but all reports today are that those collecting their SS benefits will exceed what they paid in a few times over. That comes from future contributors, at some point it will go broke, then what?

Social security can be "fixed" relatively easy for the indefinite future. Most of the current problem is the stagnation/decline in wages for the bottom half or so, but even with that, we don't have a big SS problem other than the political will to make a couple of unpleasant choices - slightly higher taxes and/or slightly lower benefits.

Who the heck ever told you that education was free? It is paid for through property, and other taxes. Now I understand with nearly half the country not paying any net taxes, and if you are in that part of the country then people like me are paying your share.

Where did you get the idea half the country pays no net taxes? Even those who don't pay federal INCOME taxes spend almost all their money on sales taxable items, and so pay sales taxes (in my area of 9.25%), which fund schools, and they pay real estate taxes either directly or as part of their rent which directly fund schools, and pay a portion of the income taxes of the businesses they purchase from, etc. And of course most pay about 15% in payroll taxes, gas taxes, other excise taxes (phone etc.) and more.
 
That's why I specified agreement. We don't do slavery, you're just trying to cast things in emotional terms. If someone agrees to work for nothing, which is how internships work, I might note, that's entirely up to them, but they can't come back later and complain because it was their own personal choice.

Slave labor does not have to be forced labor. Sweat shops are a form of slave labor.
 
So historically labor rates have always been correct?

Hard to say since we haven't had a free market in such since minimum wage laws went into effect. Over all though, I'd say No, but like I say, that is because largely the government sets a false floor.
 
So historically, labor rates were always correct?

I'm not sure how else you determine the value of what you're selling. If I claim my product is worth a grand but people are only willing to buy it for ten bucks my claim doesn't seem to have any sort of relation to the real world. What things are worth are determined by consumers, not by producers. The same is true for anything you sell. If you sell your labor and employers are only willing to give you eight bucks an hour then that is what your labor is worth. It doesn't matter if you think your labor is worth fifteen bucks an hour because no one agrees with you.
 
I'm not sure how else you determine the value of what you're selling. If I claim my product is worth a grand but people are only willing to buy it for ten bucks my claim doesn't seem to have any sort of relation to the real world. What things are worth are determined by consumers, not by producers. The same is true for anything you sell. If you sell your labor and employers are only willing to give you eight bucks an hour then that is what your labor is worth. It doesn't matter if you think your labor is worth fifteen bucks an hour because no one agrees with you.

I guess where I disagree is that just because the market puts a value on something, that doesn't necessarily make that value correct.
 
Back
Top Bottom