Posted on 01/13/2004 5:54:13 AM PST by JustPiper
You need to make your final descent into hell with that sentiment branded on your forehead. That's a real keeper. So's hell.
Let's see, you post an artificial opposition of two unrelated ideas and demand everyone sign off on it. To-wit:
a. Businesses need profits to survive. Not a controversy.
b. I'm not sure what to make of the second reference you've spun in there with gongoristic incomprehensibility -- are you arguing that businesses need to avoid caring about their workers at all? Are you in favor of sending them home hurt, for example, without medical attention, and never mind workers' comp or OSHA rules or any of that weenie stuff that cuts into your profits? Is that where you're coming from? Or are you simply arguing that Fezziwig couldn't cut it because he treated his workers decently and kindly, and that however regrettably, Scrooge and Marley had the better, actually the correct, business model for HR? What's your model?
How hard would you push your employees if there were no employment laws on the books and you could do whatever you wanted? What would your ideal relationship be? Ownership outright? Would you want clear title to each of your workers? Or would you settle for a rental contract with whoever owned them?
Just wondering.
And if you don't like the insinuation, well, I did that deliberately -- to show you what your constant prating about "racism" sounds like. You constantly tell us that anyone who opposes borders wide open to Malthusian masses of would-be workers is a racist. Well, pal, if all those people are from foreign countries and more than likely of other races as you assume they are, and you're the guy who wants to use them to screw wages down to zero, then who's the racist? The people who want them to stay at home and build their own countries, or you, who want them to come over here so you can use the "iron law of wages" to take advantage of them?
Just like I can say that you are a liberal troll if you think Bush should be impeached. See how that works? There is nothing "logical" about this "debate". This is a fist fight. This is the predictable influx of the same damn unnapeasables that hit this site EVERY election cycle. There is no debate or changing of minds, there is just the same damned clack of contrarians and JBS disciples that wake up every election cycle and accuse the GOP and George Bush of everything under the sun right up to and including treason. I play with them and yes I jab them in the eye because they leave NO room for compromise and they came here for a fight and then act surprised when the find one. I have violated the Lead Moderator's desire for civility on the immigration threads and I should be a bigger man but when I get my blood up I am going to say what I think.
Only to the point of keeping the productive enough to maximize profit. The worker is the ULTIMATE beneficiary of “trickle down economics”. If a business is losing profit due to labor costs it makes NO difference how happy or unhappy the workers are., a different approach has to be taken towards labor costs. BTW, Dickens was a socialist.
That weak-assed excuse does not even begin to cover your atrocious conduct on this and all the other threads I've seen you post to. Being a foul-mouthed, mean-spirited, bully-boy is not a posting technique anyone will ever respect.
But...
Savage is an idiot. It might be accurate to label him a populist, but he is definitely not anykind of a conservative. I've never heard a talk show host with such an out-of-control ego as he's got. He is his own worst enemy. When that blithering idiot says that we should impeach Bush over this, I say Hell, No!
But that being said, even a broken watch is right twice a day and when Savage says "This is the worst betrayal of our country in my lifetime", I agree with him on that. How I choose to handle that betrayal is something else, but it won't include joining forces to impeach him.
Stop treating everyone that disagrees with you as your mortal enemy. You're sounding more like Savage than Savage himself.
--Boot Hill
I wouldn't push them at all. I would hire the one that would accept the wage I had determined a function was worth. If no one accepted that wage I would have to either raise the offer or find another labor source, even outside of the country to accomplish the task at a price I could pay that maximizes the profit I am in business to make. I, as a business, do not care who does it only that it is done at an acceptable profit. It is NOT up to unions, government or anyone else to determine what an acceptable profit is for me.
Hey bootie did I hurt your widdle feelings? Put some ice on it.
As it is, the only people that are going to be impressed with your style of argumentation are the weak-willed, who can never be counted on in a pinch, and your fellow bullies. But those with even half an ounce of sense are going to see through your bluster and just ignore you. In other words, you lose and the irony is that you are doing it to yourself.
Just like Savage who you detest so much, you are in self-destruct mode. Your out of control ego and your black flag posting tactics do as much damage to conservatism as DU or MoveOn.org could ever do. You are your own worst enemy. The critical issues facing our country are more important than you and your ego.
Are you so far over the edge that I'm wasting my time trying to point out the obvious to you?
--Boot Hill
Yeah cogent arguments like "Impeach Bush" because of a proposal. Or your really intellectual treatise on how to set up the new Berlin wall. Yeah that is what Freerepublic is all about. If I offend your tender sensibilities I feel I have done my bit for the cause. I don't ask for quarter and I don't give it when I have to suffer fools.
Even when those fools look you in the mirror every morning? Hence my expressed concern that you "don't be an ass", appear to be for naught.
Goodnight,
--Boot Hill
Let me know when you and ranch are ready for the hunt.
I see. So if their rags are trailing in the mud and slowing them down, would you raise them enough that they could afford a new wife-beater, or would your compensation manager throw a fit?
The worker is the ULTIMATE beneficiary of “trickle down economics”.
And then corporations pay out millions in accounting and consulting fees in order to keep from "trickling". Bring in Kinsey Associates and fire a few dozen people, to throw a fear of God into the others so they won't ask for raises. You're a real sweetheart -- you need to be unionized. By the Teamsters.
If a business is losing profit due to labor costs it makes NO difference how happy or unhappy the workers are., a different approach has to be taken towards labor costs.
Any raise or concession at all is "losing profit"! I'll bet you have professional corregidors come in and flog your drones twice a day to boost morale.
Dawg, are you Mexican, curious?
No. White. Family has been in the U.S. South since the late 1700s.
Thought so. You're the problem. Get ready for some enforcement, pal. If I'm on the other side of the table from you, I'm going to try to send you to prison, okay? Nothing personal -- I just don't like sweatshop operators and people who deliberately hire illegals, so they can break their people on the wheel.
Foist a civil war off on us just so you can have a few good quarters? I don't think so! No, the laws were written for guys like you. Go ahead and strut your ego -- we'll let you have Michael Milken's old cell.
Have a nice day.
"The problem with capitalism is capitalists." -- Bill Buckley, quoting someone else.
Percipience bump, all except the part about "illogical". Oh, they're logical, all right. Logical and perverse. The policy is to break wages in the U.S., using masses of immigrants who'll bid wages down to starvation levels. I wouldn't have believed, 20 years ago, that I would see McKinleyite policies reintroduced in this country, but that is exactly what George W. Bush is, in his domestic policy -- a clone of William McKinley. All that's missing is the gold standard, and sending National Guardsmen to break a hatmakers' strike. Unbelieveable.
May I disagree? Clinton and his deal with Jiang Zemin was the worst. That's the deal that traded Loral's technology to the PLA and "the three no's" for reptile money that Slick needed to do his below-the-radar polling work in 1995 that he used to beat Bob Dole before the primaries began, by "bracketing" Dole with Gingrich in the key markets and demographics (family women) by lambasting Dole as the Congressional running mate of the "mean" Gingrich. Remember that? John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung and Pauline Kanchanalak? The Riady family? That was the worst.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.