Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
September 27, 2013 at 6:46 PM in reply to: Matt Taibbi’s latest article- Wall Street Hedge Funds Are Looting the Pension Funds of Public Workers #765875
CDMA ENG
ParticipantRoid Rage.
CE
September 3, 2013 at 10:16 PM in reply to: Buying the home I’m renting-Section 1 clearance and repair questions #765105ParticipantVery interesting post. We need more like these!
CE
Participant[quote=SK in CV][quote=CDMA ENG][quote=SD Realtor]yep…yep… and yep…as horrid as Assad is, I cringe to think what happens if he falls. Utter and complete chaos. Unless you have a plan to 100% occupy that country and cleanse it of all the weaponry I would not touch it with a 10 foot pole.
[/quote]Hezbolla and Al Quada are foaming at the mouth and trying to figure out how to set quick and deep roots.
CE[/quote]
The only thing that Hezbollah wants in Syria is weapons. They’ve staked their claim with the Assad government. It’s unlikely they’ll be integrally involved in any new power structure in Syria. And the current opposition in Syria is made up of dozens, maybe scores, maybe even hundreds of disparate groups. AQ aligned groups make up only a tiny portion. There are no good guys there. There are bad guys, badder guys, and victims.[/quote]
Sounds like Lebanon to me… Circa 80’s. In fact AQ and Hezbollah will probably be fighting each other within 15 seconds of victory. Even if Hezbollah did make their bed with Assad you don’t think they won’t be courting however is in power?
CE
Participant[quote=spdrun]
The defining line is whether it works solely on the nervous system.
No it isn’t — I recall reading about WW I, where mustard gas was used. It wasn’t neurotoxic, just produced deep, slow-healing skin (and internal) burns. Definitely considered a chemical weapon.[/quote]
Actually you are correct and finding the definition at a glance appears to be difficult however, your arguement for napalm and AO doesnt really hold.
CE
ParticipantLastly I don’t know if anyone is watching the Syria fight on youtube but it is very interesting. Not for the shock value but for tactics that are employed on both sides and the culture of both sides fighting.
Some things that I have observed and I am sure the CIA and DOD are studying indepthly…
– Syria’s army are using tanks with no supporting infantry.
– The rebels are getting good hits in on tanks in urban enviroments. T-80s are getting eaten up by RPGs. Partly because there is no infantry support.
– The Rebels spend more time shouting “Allah Akbar” than aiming thier damn weapons. I kid you not… If it wasn’t so pathetic it would be funny.
– Despite thier inexperience and poor tactics they face thier enemy pretty valiantly so less fear than most.
– And the one thing that I saw that was very worrisome… I could have swore I saw a SMAW being fired. This is an American weapon. Where did they get that?!? And no Allan it wasn’t a Carl Gustuv…
These people are to be feared… By Assad… By us… By Israel…
CE
Participant[quote=Blogstar]Allan, Correct me if I am wrong but Hillary is a private citizen at this time? Taking a highly public role would be not so great for her and could be bad for the party.
Can’t see why to call her out? She might endorse Obama publicly, but doesn’t want to look too involved.[/quote]
Plenty of citzens have made loud public proclaimations that get plenty of press… The difference is that they are not contemplating a run at the presidency…
😛
CE
Participant[quote=spdrun]Not to mention chemical weapons. What do you think that Napalm and Agent Orange were in all but name?[/quote]
Poor line of logic…
So firing a gun isn’t chemical warfare?
The defining line is whether it works solely on the nervous system.
And Agent Orange wasn’t thought to be toxic at its usage. Time has said something different.
I would rather they drop AO on me then Willie Pete…
CE
Participant[quote=SD Realtor]yep…yep… and yep…as horrid as Assad is, I cringe to think what happens if he falls. Utter and complete chaos. Unless you have a plan to 100% occupy that country and cleanse it of all the weaponry I would not touch it with a 10 foot pole.
[/quote]Hezbolla and Al Quada are foaming at the mouth and trying to figure out how to set quick and deep roots.
CE
ParticipantFormer SD…
There is a development in San Elijo Hills were the pannels come standard. All of the houses have a southern exposure and so in this development where the homes have front doors pointed to the south the solar panels are on the “front” of the house. Granted they are all two stories but they are noticible and I didnt really think they looked that bad. In fact I thought it had a little bit of cool factor to it. Not only do they produce power but they reduce the overall temp of the house as they act as a solar shield coupled with the fact they were spaced correctly enought to create a convection current over the roof…
For me, it wouldn’t be a gating issue unless it didnt look professional…
Hope this helped…
Oh… and I was out house shopping at the time…
CE
ParticipantThe last bastion of civility on this board has been breached…
We are now two seconds away from “croch shots”
CE
August 30, 2013 at 6:16 PM in reply to: OT: On the killing floor; immigrations impacts on wages #764974Participant[quote=no_such_reality]Yes, the human race is at crux point. We’ve seen forerunners of it before but not to the extent we’re seeing now.
The primary issue is as CDMA points out, we can have wealth without labor. And more importantly, provide the necessities without labor but not without capital.
The best example of it is that farm. In the 1800s, a single very large (think 13 kids type), would have 40 acres and bust their but farming it in cotton, wheat, corn, etc.
Today, a single smaller family can have 25000 acres, and with couple trucks and harvesters, do it all themselves and due to fertilizer, science and crop improvements, generate 2-10X/acre more.
The combine can cut and thresh an acre of wheat in under 6 minutes, by hand farmers could only cut 2 acres a day. And in the 1800s when the first rudimentary cutter/combines came out it was a dramatic improvement to 8 acres a day.
With a couple combines and trucks, 4 people can do 300 acres a day of wheat harvest.
That same change is happening across all industries and now moving into services. Computers read your medical scans, automated service systems process your payments, change your accounts and even change your services.
In the past, there was always work to do an hard physical labor was exceedingly valuable. It took the vast majority of physical labor to just feed ourselves. That’s changed.
Unlike the past in which the workers provide all the labor and were necessary, today, workers are quickly becoming unnecessary.[/quote]
BTW this is an excellent extension of my arguement and something that MISH states repeatedly…
CE
August 30, 2013 at 6:05 PM in reply to: OT: On the killing floor; immigrations impacts on wages #764971Participant[quote=bearishgurl][quote=CDMA ENG]…Our children will have it tougher as more labor than before will be available. If the labor force does not decrease to the point where the demand for it is high then supply side will always drive labor down. It’s just that simple…[/quote]
I don’t think its as simple as you make it out to be here, CDMA.
First of all, the availability (or unavailability) of any kind of labor depends entirely upon locale. In many locales in the US, there is never enough available would-be employees at any given time.
In addition, boomers retiring en masse will free up many “career-track” positions, but of course, some of these positions may very well then be eliminated. But the sheer NUMBERS of boomers leaving the workforce should create openings for new workers (millenials) and others who have been chronically unemployed in recent years through no fault of their own.
I don’t foresee all the doom and gloom that you do but realize that in places like San Diego, CA (15 mi from the int’l border) a large portion of its population who wants to work will be without work, due to a never-ending supply of low-wage workers and also the presence of thousands of “American” workers who have chosen to live on the other side of the border so they can work in SD County for less wages (be more “competitive”) and still have enough money to live comfortably on.
Due to geography, this phenomenon has been ever present and will never leave this area but there IS an alternative. It’s called “relocation.”[/quote]
Do you even stop to read things charitably before you start to rebuff?
WTF are you even talking about?!?
What did I say… Let’s revisit…
“…Our children will have it tougher as more labor than before will be available. If the labor force does not decrease to the point where the demand for it is high then supply side will always drive labor down. It’s just that simple…”
Then you go one to talk about locales and the lack of qualified personnel in areas and that those employers are offering better wages to attract talent…
Yes that is exactly the fucking point irrespective of locale!
So in the above situation the labor force did decrease and demand for labor is high and therefore wages increase… It only follows from the above. Everyone on this board understands that (well not everyone apparently) but you feel the need to go on and argue about a non-issue.
As for you locale argument that is an outlier and there are very few examples of that compared to the total amount of jobs worldwide.
Plus you keep going on about “Boomers” as a tangent… I agree about a lot of boomers out there are hard working individuals but a lot of them are just as lazy as the incoming work force.
I am tired of you talking about my generation as lazy and entitled. About 50% of the time you are right. And about 50% of your generations is the same. I can’t believe how many ppl I want to retire because they are consistently a gating personality.
Lastly you go on about techies and Boomers. Since you can’t keep off that tangent… let me address… Again some of them are capable of bringing their skills up to date and some are not but let me tell you something about tech you don’t understand.
I don’t care how smart you are… How old or young you are… Your salary requirements…
IF YOU CAN’T OPERATE IN MY ENVIROMENT FROM DAY ONE YOU ARE GONE. I released two kids/non-hackers from my group today. Production is key and you need to show that immediately.
I can’t afford for you to update your skills on my time or projects. You can do the job from day one or not (within 75% of the total scope of work no one know the complete job day one). Also I need you for 40+ plus hours… Not part time… Tech does not operate like that… So if you are a Boomer and your skills are not up to date you have little opportunity to come back. Same applies to junior engineers…
Work some years in tech as a tech then I may consider your argument even if it is as off-based as it is.
The Boomers retiring will not satisfy not open up that many positions that it’s even worth discussing…
Sorry this argument drifted from point to point but it was just following your comments which are more of rant than an argument.
CE
August 30, 2013 at 9:52 AM in reply to: OT: On the killing floor; immigrations impacts on wages #764920Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=CDMA ENG]
Or maybe…Absolutely. I’ve said this very thing many times before. The problem is that we have to figure out how to allocate resources in a world where there is falling demand for First World workers who (used to) make a good living. Some of that is due to technology, and some of that is due to the off-shoring of good jobs/importing cheap labor.
Do we relegate all of those former First-World workers to the welfare rolls? Do we expect them to take menial jobs in service of the wealthy few…eating crumbs and living in crowded mud huts, while the rich get richer? How do you see that ending?
What sort of solutions do you see as an answer to the problem?[/quote]
You missed it completely.
As for the solution… It’s easy and a political firestorm. The world needs less people… There is no value in human manual labor and even the technology services are suffering the same fate.
Take a look at China… Their economic and political policy centers around one thing and on thing only… How to keep people employed.
As SDR already stated the availability of labor is what drives wages not what the wage earner thinks they should earn.
And I don’t disagree with your sentimentality… Again your heart is in the right place but not your head… Bill Maher had a very good, but miss guided point… He said that the wealthy should be praying for wealth distribution because when the disparity is that great… That’s when the rich start getting kidnapped and held for ransom. He is correct about that… Its happening all over the Americas exclusive of the US and Canada… But the day may not be far off.
It’s a tough world out there… adapt or die.
Our children will have it tougher as more labor than before will be available. If the labor force does not decrease to the point where the demand for it is high then supply side will always drive labor down. It’s just that simple.
To answer your last question directly. Yes regulate those to welfare rolls or the living under a bridge. It is up to the individual to compete in this world. If you chose not to arm yourself with unique skills that set you apart then you suffer the consequences of your action. That is the way it is! Let me caveat the last statement as pertaining to this country and a few others. Everyone, with some exceptions, get a pretty good crack at being successful here. Many too many take the easy route. “Come work for GIANT Corp” out of high school… Do thirty years here and have a decent life… Those days have long… LONG… gone and for anyone to have an expectation that is will return again is seriously delusional. The conditions in which the middle class thrived are gone unless the US wants to bomb everyone else’s manufacturing infrastructure and keep the country repressed for forty years.
Twenty years ago I would have been an upper middle class citizen. Now I am just a middle class citizen because the value of what I do has decreased.
A little bit of a rant mixed with a lot of truth. I do not offer a solution nor do I want one to your stated problem. I don’t want to be in a union or normalized society where the playing field is “leveled” just to make people feel good about themselves.
I want to get bloody… I want to compete… I don’t want some structure that I am confined to so that others feelings aren’t hurt. I don’t have any problem with people knowing that I am their better in certain measures (career). Indeed I am not as good as they are in others but I excel at my job for one reason and one reason only. It keeps me off welfare, from out of under the bridge, and being outmoded. This job has made me fatter and sometimes unhappy but I go home at night and sleep well knowing that I got me to where I am, with some relative security, and not some damned notion of fair play.
I also know that my productive is such an outlier among my peers that my bosses wouldn’t dream of firing me unless the department is completely closed down. Most people don’t want to make that sacrifice for job security but that is the new reality.
This is just my opinion and this is where I draw a shit storm of criticism but I think people who belong to unions are, in a certain sense, cowards. They are afraid to admit to themselves their worth and that perhaps there are people out there willing to do their jobs better for less.
The world you offer is pretty attractive CAR but it is not going too happened again in the foreseeable future unless something very drastic and regrettable happens to it.
No malice intended though the second to the last line was pretty provocative,
CE
August 29, 2013 at 10:46 PM in reply to: OT: On the killing floor; immigrations impacts on wages #764901Participant[quote=CA renter][quote=SD Realtor]No way I am falling into that trap CAR.
Your Utopian society does not and never will exist. See you in the fiction section of the bookstore.[/quote]
First off, it’s no trap. Secondly, while my exact “Utiopian” society might not exist, there are plenty of societies/economies that are much closer to it than ours, and there have been quite a few throughout history as well.
You can study the history of civilizations throughout history yourself to see what happens when wage and income gaps become too great. You can also discover the ways and circumstances in which these gaps grow, and how they collapse. Trust me, you do not want to see this gap become too great; it has NEVER ended well. And these huge gaps have NEVER been the result of the rich “working harder.” It has always been because the rich use their power to obtain more power and control over resources. That is THE key to becoming part of the 1%; it is rarely about productivity or “job creation.”
[quote=SD Realtor]BTW CAR I do agree with your points about the country being at the mercy of capital and all that, corruption, etc etc…. No argument there. Nothing fictional about that.
However there are literally billions of bodies on this planet available for labor and fewer and fewer that have capital. Thus the value of labor is what drives wages down. Not the needs of those willing to do the labor. If you guys want to place a higher value on labor then what it should be then so be it, I simply disagree.[/quote]
Yes, there are billions of bodies willing to do the work, and there are also billions of bodies/millions of entities who would gladly compete with the existing corporate power (lowering prices for consumers and reducing profit margins)…but they are unable to because of IP laws, military threats, and legal restrictions on who can enter particular trades. Large corporate entities can tie up a small business in court with in IP or other types of cases (whether they have merit or not).
They also would have to contend with the sheer imbalance of power/money when competing with these entities. Large corporations can buy them out in friendly or unfriendly mergers or acquisitions; or a big box competitor can set up shop across the street from a successful business, using their ability to kill mom & pops’ margins because of the box stores’ economies of scale and marketing power.
Again, this is not a free market, and if capital deserves protection against competition (whether they do or not is another question altogether which I will not attempt to address here), then labor also deserves protection against competition. As it stands, the benefit of this huge imbalance of financial/political power clearly lies on the side of capital. If that’s how the game is played, then labor deserves the same protection.[/quote]
Or maybe…
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2013/08/income-inequality-explained-why-wages.html
-
AuthorPosts
