Nickel & Dimed by Barbara Ehrenreich (A Review) - Obnoxious Book Alert

[discostu]

Of course the 4th Ammendment has absolutely nothing to do with one's EMPLOYER testing them. The 4th applies to the government. Thanks to the freedom of association outlined in the 1st there's nothing wrong with an employer puting all kinds of wierd restrictions on their employees... it also allows the employees to give the employer the finger and go find a better job, or no job. There's no rule that says you have to work for employer X or for any employer at all. Could always learn to juggle and make money at street fairs.

[parsifal]

Thank you. Now I feel better. If I can just convince Alan Chapman,and Action in America that I ain't a Marxist. PS- What did you think of the Quantum Greed Theory? parsy the conservative liberal.

[discostu]

Never heard of the Quantum Greed Theory, but if it says greed runs the world I'd agree with it, unless it thought that was bad. Greed, like so many other things, is perfect A-OK in small doses, it's when it goes crazy and runs amok (Enron, WorldCom, Merkt, ArthursAnderson i'm talking to you) then it's bad.

[BADROTOFINGER]

Your reply somehow slipped by me, but a buddy of mine is writing an essay on Bab's trash, and while searching I noticed your reply. Mine is as follows.

You would have to be a complete freakin' idiot to compare the 1st amendment right to association between private individuals to the 4th amendment protections against unlawful search and seizure by the government. Thats 6th grads civics, pal.

Of course, since your 'reply' to my post quickly deteriorates into varied irrelevancies, no further intellectual value can be gleaned from your post. This sorry state of affairs is further punctuated by your invoking of Godwin's Law at the end of your ramblings by referring to me as 'Herr Himmler'.

You call me a Nazi, but totally support the power (not a right, but a power, the govt does not have 'rights') of the government to interfere in a particularly jack-booted manner in the affairs of two parties whose only crime is exercising their 1st amendment rights.

Your use of 'dignity' as some sort of right is curious as well. Exactly what is undignified about agreeing to a contract (of sorts) with an employer, and holding up your end of it? I have gained dignity by following my word, not lost it. Perhaps we own different dictionaries. All of your examples are all so spectacularly over the top (and irrelevant) that all of us know that they are purely fanatical fiction. And of course, only in the world of fanatical fiction can your arguement hold any weight. Take care...JFK

[Revolting cat!]

Aside from the review itself (a good one at that!), you have a curious method of selecting your reading matter, I must say. This book, I think this is the one where she works as a waitress, is what caused a rift between my non-working, well off and sentimental liberal sister-in-law and myself, who started out as a minimum wage dishwasher at a Holiday Inn before being promoted (after two weeks) to a busboy and then higher. The rift started over an argument at a Vietnamese Pho cafeteria-like restaurant, my regular hangout, where she was visiting from far away, and where I tried to dissuade her from grossly overtipping after the usual careless, hurried and impersonal service by the owner family members plus a Mexican dishwasher/busboy/food server.

But as far as selecting non-fiction reading matter, I strongly recommend reading reviews instead, even in the NYT Book Review Sunday supplement. That is usually sufficient, as non-fiction books these days, unless they are history books or memoirs, are typically stretched out essays, containing no more than a handful of ideas repeated endlessly throughout, if that (check out the single idea Theodore Roszak, for example.) I had read reviews of this very book and, believe me, everything in your report sounded familiar, as if I had read the book myself, but without all the aggravation that came with it.