An Open letter to President Bush (End run vs. Outsourcing)

Me | Me

[Gekko The Great]

Lying? When all I'm doing is copying from your posts and agreeing with what you said? If that's lying then since I'm agreeing with you you must be the one starting the lies.

Hey, you said it yourself. Only profits matter. There is no loyalty to anything or anyone else other than profits and money. You and I are the same, don't you see that?

I'm only holding a mirror up for you to look into. What's the matter, don't like what you see...?

[Havoc]

Your problem is that you take things to far. Duty to the law is achieved through duty to profit,

No, it is not. Nor does saying it make it true. Nor is it either logical or historically sound.

breaking the law is usually unprofitable.

Ah the familiar look of squirming in place. *usually*. So we've gone from duty to the law being achieved through duty to profit and it is now that this is *usually* the case. Fidget, wiggle and handwring. One wonders what your next position will be.

Slavery was profitable. Slavery was made illegal. And rather than comport with the law, those advocating the disenfranchisment of the rights of Black and Caucasions in this country in slavery decided to go to war to have their way. All I had to do is grab blindly at history to pull it out of the ether as an example. There are countless more - it's not like it taxes anyone to grasp these things.

Corporations don't have a duty to any constitution,

Really, is that why treason committed by a company in time of war is actionable? Do tell. No duty to any constitution. Tell you what, go break the embargo to Cuba blatently and let's see how long you stay a free man. If you are bound by it, you have a duty to it. You'd rather we not dwell on such things; but, you're a liar and I've just demonstrated it with a known fact.

They also don't have a duty to "the people",

Ah, but it's the people who hold you to the constitutional penalties of treason in wartime if you see fit to violate them. Just who are you seriously intending to kid here?

Words do mean things, and when you repeatedly take things well beyond their logical conclusion

Well beyond - you mean like far enough to make you look like an ass for saying assanine things like you have no duty to any constitution. I mean, It isn't like Enron isn't sitting out there as an example of a company made to answer to the people and the constitution for it's wrongdoing. Yet you say these things as if we should just close our eyes and turn off our brains so we can be lulled quietly into subservience with the discostu free traitor lulliby. And I'm purposedly using the term free traitor because it fits - not because it is insulting, though given the demonstrable lies you present in your position - and readily demonstrable at every turn as being lies, the insult fits.

The sophist here is yourself, taking everything too far

Maybe you should shut up for five minutes - seriously - not intended as gruff - just shut up for five minutes and look at this from another mindset. Back away from the philosophy and put down the talking points, then start looking at it from a standpoint of logic. a + b = c. You can't on the one hand proffer that you have no duty to the Constitution of the United states while admitting you can be held for treason by violating Government restrictions in wartime or otherwise. I don't go too far, I just demonstrate the absurd by displaying it's absurdity for all to see. The truth is the truth. You state these things as though true but in examination at even a basic level their is no truth to the statements. If you can't live up to a basic standard of truth, that's your problem. It's also why we have to regulate business - because rather than be forthright, business will sometimes do and say things without regard to truth so long as there is profit in it. That includes having you on this thread to spew propaganda that is demonstrably false on it's face.

[discostu]

But you're not agreeing with me. You're being sarcastic and taking my posts to a rediculous level that makes no sense and bears only the most superficial resemblance to what I'm saying. No where have I said murder is OK, but you say that's what I said, that's LYING. Here's the mirror bub: you're a liar.

[discostu]

Clever editing. Try reading the sentences you deleted, they're the ones that prove my point. The fact that you edited them out, ala the liberal media, to twist my words, again, into something I didn't say shows once again that you are nothing but a liar.

I gave you an example of when breaking the law was profitable, and why that was a problem that society needed to fix and how it was fixed.

Actually slavery wasn't profitable, but the slave owners foolishly thought it was. In the end having willing workers results in higher output and quality of work.

"actionable" cute word. What's actually been done to corporations that supposedly commited treason? The US government paid GE for the factories they bombed.

Not kidding anyone. Just telling the truth "the people" is an amorphous construct that has no real meaning. Who are "the people", do they include people that voted for Al Gore, people that want to end Free Republic, people that want America to turn communist, Islamic terrorist infiltrators? What is a corporation's duty to them? Corporations have a duty to investors and share holder, and nobody else. Deal with it.

No by well beyond I mean to the point where you out yourself as a LIAR.

Hey you keep avoiding the WalMart question:
Were YOU being UNETHICAL when YOU worked for them and helped them UNDERCUT competition? stop dodgin and answer the question Havoc. You said corporations that undercut the competition are unethical, you used to work for one, is this a late conversion or are you just a pathetic lying hypocrite?!

[Gekko The Great]

You're the one lying if you said I accused you of sanctioning murder. I explained to you what "kill" means in the sense of the business world. You know, ruin, drive out of business forever, if you can't compete then the h*ll with you, that kind of "kill". Then you ignored that and went back to the lie of saying that I accused you of advocating murder.

Here's the mirror on you. A heartless, cruel, amoral capitalist who lies and has a problem with being intellectually honest even with himself.

I'll take that back about being on your side. I'm honest enough with myself to admit to what I am. You're not. You're putting on masks, pretending to be something you're not. But it's clear to anyone with the eyes to see. You're all about greed, don't give a damn about anyone or anything but money and profits, in and out of it for the buck, and you don't take prisoners. And when the mirror is held up to you, you flinch and lash out. Read your own words. They are what condemn you, not me or anyone else here.

[discostu]

Saying you were speaking metaphorically after the fact is just piling lies on lies. There's no Judeo-Christian ethic against driving the competition out of business, and since you included that in your little sarcastic rant it's obvious that the type of killing you were talking about was the real, illegal, and immoral kind.

I'm perfectly intellectually honest. I go to work to make money, I make money by helping my company stay the number solution in our field, if that means the competition goes out of business that's not my problem. My problem is making sure our products are the best of breed and don't give the customer any reason to use anything else. If that makes me a heartless, cruel amoral capitalist then I'm OK with that. I shave every morning, mirrors don't bother me in the least.

[Havoc]

Kinda like a clansman, ain't it - pull the mask off and watch out lol

[discostu]

All you've done is put masks on.

What about your time at WalMart, answer the question Havoc: were you unethical?!

[Havoc]

Oh, come now, let's not over-react. He's just doing what I did earlier - highlighting the absurd with sarcastic witt. You're trying to make a personal attack out of it in order - you think - to recover your composure and assume a high ground by claiming martyrdome and shouting that you've been wronged.. Standard run hide argument in debate - in fact, debate 101 tactics for the unethical. Next absurdity?

[discostu]

you're finally right for once. yes he is doing the exact same thing you did. What you still fail to understand is that what you did was to LIE about what I said, take to a rediculous level, and then claim that meant my position was wrong. Again it's like saying you shouldn't drink water because if you drank a HUGE quantity all at once you'll die. that's what you did, that's what he's doing, it is unethical, dishonest, and frankly pathetic.

I haven't run and hidden at all. But you on the other hand continue to. You said undercutting competition was unethical, you used to work at WalMart: were you unethical when working at WalMart and helping them undercut the competition?!

[Toddsterpatriot]

I guess if an evil drug company made a cure for XBOB's diabetes or a cure for Havoc's disability they would only buy it if it was made in America.

Maybe not even then because the drug company didn't do it to be nice but did it for filthy profit.

Oh, the humanity!!

[Gekko The Great]

LOL. Your weak assertion does not even stand the test of elementary logic and reading comprehension. Look at what I said in post #490, keeping as much context as we can:

Ah, good. A man after my own heart. It's all about bucks, kid. The rest is...conversation. Just kill everybody else and devil take the hindmost. Ethics, morality, doing the right thing, all of those are for sissies, sentimental Judeo-Christian ethics that are outmoded in the globalist capitalist world. To hell with anything and anyone who gets in the way of the pursuit of the Almighty Dollar. Right on!

Now, I know it’s hard, but try to follow this. See where I use the word “kill” in the fifth sentence. Then notice the concluding phrase. If I meant “kill” as you are lyingly trying to accuse me of, how could there be anyone left for the devil to take the hindmost? They’d be dead, so the devil either wouldn't get them or he’d have them anyway, no need to take them. But, if you view it for it’s true meaning, that is, run everyone else out of business or otherwise destroy them to enrich yourself, the meaning is clear. Profits are the only things that matter, so destroy whomever you have to so you can get more money for yourself.

If that makes me a heartless, cruel amoral capitalist then I'm OK with that.

Of that I’m sure. Don’t worry, history provides you with plenty of company. Nero fiddled while Rome burned and was okay with that. The masses in the Coliseum enjoyed their bread and circuses while the lions devoured the early Christians and were okay with that. It is said that Eichmann was a reliable churchgoer and kind to animals, but he presided over the slaughter of millions. You may not be in the same league as this rogue’s gallery, but the principle is the same. People who do wrong things always seem to find ways to rationalize and live with them. It doesn't make them right, just deluded.

[discostu]

Only an evil capitalist would expect to be paid for his labors, ethical people would sink millions into research and development and millions more into FDA testing and expect nothing in return beyond a warm feeling in the cockles of their heart, or maybe in the subcockle area.

[Havoc]

Since when have I put masks on?

What about my time at Walmart? Please tell me you're going to intimate that telling people the truth about a product is unethical - PPPPPPPLEASE!

Or, no, wait, let me guess - you're going to intimate that if you can make me look to have been unethical at anypoint in my life it gives you free reign and excuse to be unethical yourself.. right ROFL. Come now, I thought it was easy destroying your points; but, you aren't going to out and tell us you're still thinking like a third grader.
You really don't get it do you - do you have any moral or ethical standard beyond praying to a dollar bill?

I'm an adult. I did a lot of things in my youth and learned from it and changed my ways. I don't make any bones about it and rather am happy to say it. If it had been yesterday it would give you no excuse. You are responsible for your actions. You can't blame them on me or anyone else nor can you excuse them by pointing the finger. Grow up.

[discostu]

When people die if they don't go to heaven they go to hell. That would be, theoretically, when the devil would take the hindmost. Kind of like "kill 'em all, let God sort them out".

Profits ARE the sole duty of a corporation. If that means competition goes out of business then that's the competition's fault for not being up to the fight. Or are you saying that Harley Davidson is evil because Indian Motor Company has gone out of business while competing with them not once but twice? Why is it Harley's fault that Indian didn't have the ability to be profitable even when there were only two motorcycle companies in America? Harley is just selling the best bike they can for a price that is market friendly, if that drives the competition under what is Harley supposed to do about it? Make less popular bikes?!

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA the fact that you would equate being a good quality engineer and trying to make sure my company ships a high quality product with Eichman shows that you're downright certifiable. We just make communications software man, no Jews on the trains here, got a few in the boardroom though.

[discostu]

I've asked the question quite clearly multiple times, and no I'm not saying telling the truth about a product is unethical. YOU are the one saying undercutting the competition is unethical. That's how WalMart built it's empire. You worked at WalMart... follow the very simple logic here.

I'm not intimating anything. I'm just showing you how desperately wrong you are. Undercutting competion is NOT unethical, IMHO working for WalMart and helping them undercut competition is not unethical. But YOU SAID undercutting competition is unethical. So you've got two choices: either you're a bad person, or you're wrong. Take your pick.

I don't pray to anything. I have a very 1960's Catholic relationship with God, I don't hassle Him, He doesn't hassle me, at appropriate time I thank Him, whenever He feels like it He shows me a nice sunset. I work for money, because money does things I need it to do like put a roof over my head and food in my belly. I suspect you work for the same reason. The difference is your undies get knotted up when other people point out that money is and always will be an important part of life on this rock.

That last paragraph doesn't even make sense. Lets try to stay on topic. Businesses exist to make profit, undercutting the competition is not unethical, laws that hurt business in their attempt to be profitable usually damage the economy and need to be rethought. That's life in grownup land.

[ThinkDifferent]

Businesses exist to make profit, undercutting the competition is not unethical, laws that hurt business in their attempt to be profitable usually damage the economy and need to be rethought. That's life in grownup land.

It's disappointing that this needs to be said at all on a supposedly conservative forum.

[Toddsterpatriot]

It's disappointing that this needs to be said at all on a supposedly conservative forum.

Yeah, and the solution is all government.

Here's Havoc's entire argument: It's too blatently obvious that it's unfair

I must have missed school the day they taught that life was fair.

Could I borrow your notes.

[Havoc]

I cited what you said and anyone here can go back and read through the arguments and get to the same point I did rather easily. It's when you start making mutually exclusive statements as though they were fact that you're getting yourself in trouble. IE - that companies have no duty to anyone or anything but to profit. It's the same argumentation line your compadres got tripped up in the other night - exactly the same - and you walked right down the rosey path just like a sport. Problem is your unethical arguments and positions are, at this point, predictable.

See the whole point of saying that companies owe to nothing but profits is to hope someone will buy it and leave them alone to do what they will. Just like you're friends argue it from the more direct approach. Your position is to try and convince people that outsourcing is just another way of getting profit and that ethics should not be a hindrance to those profits. That is the free trade mantra. It isn't right to regulate; so, don't cause it isn't right.. Don't do anything to stop the great god, profit.

[Havoc]

YOU are the one saying undercutting the competition is unethical.

Oh, no. Quite to the contrary - I've been absolutely crystal clear and I think it's fair to say you're flatly mistating the record. Competition is one thing - unfair competition is quite another. You are the one with the ethical problem that can't tell the difference between the two. I've spelled out my position in the letter that opened this thread and have been quite clear as to precisely what it is that is being protested. So, you're not gonna get by with mistating what I've said. I've been consistent here and on multiple other threads on this subject and in no way unclear about what I'm protesting. Try again junior.

But YOU SAID undercutting competition is unethical.

Quote it. I can cite what I rebut from you. Cite it. Show me where I made that general statement. I've been specific as I noted before. So cite it and point to where it was said.

The difference is your undies get knotted up when other people point out that money is and always will be an important part of life on this rock.

Nope, never have thrown a fit over that - you're making things up now.

As for the rest of what you said, it made zero sense.. I think that's discostu speak for I can't deal with it so I won't. I think I'll take the same approach.