Capitalism Cures Poverty

[Speaker to Animals]

Wow. China is authoritarian. Never saw that coming.

[Hanarchy Montanarchy]

What are “labor conditions”?
A say in the business? No.
Higher wages? How is your kid Ma & Pa Grocer’s responsibility?

Advocate for safety. Advocate for subsidies. Advocate for “a job if you want one.” But Ma & Pa don’t bear any obligation to you.

The term isn't all that complicated.

People negotiate for higher wages all the time. It has nothing to do with responsibility or obligation.

However, if when I try to negotiate for a higher wage from Ma & Pa, the military police come and kick my teeth in, and then when I try to tell someone about my teeth getting kicked in, I get thrown in jail, I think it may be reasonable to think that I might not be getting the fair market price for my labor... hypothetically speaking.

Safety standards are another fantastic benefit of #walkingstagecapitalism.

Did you just take your support of Collective Bargaining into the realm of science fiction? My arguments are always grounded in the fundamental principle of most-liberty-to-most-people: jackboots don't fit into that formulation.

Jackboots are rather anti-liberty, aren't they, but not science fiction. The jackboots were laced up against American labor agitators. Chinese laborers get thrown into prison for trying to organize outside of the state monopolized union. You don't need to look very far to find a jackboot.

And, by the way, I don't know how Ma & Pa get out of footing the bill eventually, either way. They pay the wages. They pay taxes for the subsidies, or they pay by having their currency devalue as the state prints money for the subsidies. No matter what, they wind up paying. But if they are just paying the damn living wage, at least they aren't also paying for the massive, wasteful behemoth needed to pay by other means.

Not receiving a living wage, and laboring under unsafe conditions isn't maximum liberty for the worker. Avoiding the appearance paying a living wage in the short term is barely liberty for Ma & Pa. Having this shite relationship enforced by a single-party state certainly isn't most liberty to most.

[Fife]

MAKE LOCHNER GREAT AGAIN

[Martin Hash]

And, by the way, I don't know how Ma & Pa get out of footing the bill eventually, either way. They pay the wages. They pay taxes for the subsidies, or they pay by having their currency devalue as the state prints money for the subsidies. No matter what, they wind up paying. But if they are just paying the damn living wage, at least they aren't also paying for the massive, wasteful behemoth needed to pay by other means.

Not receiving a living wage, and laboring under unsafe conditions isn't maximum liberty for the worker. Avoiding the appearance paying a living wage in the short term is barely liberty for Ma & Pa. Having this shite relationship enforced by a single-party state certainly isn't most liberty to most.

You keep confusing Ma & Pa for society. If SOCIETY wants something for its members then SOCIETY is responsible. Society uses taxation & regulation to redistribute wealth. If you think Ma & Pa are the best source of this largess rather than the aristocracy then you simply make enemies of Ma & Pa. They sure as shit don't want to be responsible for you.

[Smitty-48]

And, by the way, I don't know how Ma & Pa get out of footing the bill eventually, either way. They pay the wages. They pay taxes for the subsidies, or they pay by having their currency devalue as the state prints money for the subsidies. No matter what, they wind up paying. But if they are just paying the damn living wage, at least they aren't also paying for the massive, wasteful behemoth needed to pay by other means.

Not receiving a living wage, and laboring under unsafe conditions isn't maximum liberty for the worker. Avoiding the appearance paying a living wage in the short term is barely liberty for Ma & Pa. Having this shite relationship enforced by a single-party state certainly isn't most liberty to most.

You keep confusing Ma & Pa for society. If SOCIETY wants something for its members then SOCIETY is responsible. Society uses taxation & regulation to redistribute wealth. If you think Ma & Pa are the best source of this largess rather than the aristocracy then you simply make enemies of Ma & Pa. They sure as shit don't want to be responsible for you.

There's no such thing as "society", Martin, and it's very un-Hash of you to invoke that term, the artificial construct of "society" being an anathema to Liberty Nation. There's no greater mandate for the collectivists to attack your liberties, than the bogus invocation of an ostensible "society".

Sad.

[Martin Hash]

???

Liberty derives from society. Without society, there is no liberty. If you live on a desert island, you have all the freedom you want but you have no liberty. Liberty requires opportunity. Society fosters opportunity.

[Smitty-48]

???

Liberty derives from society. Without society, there is no liberty. If you live on a desert island, you have all the freedom you want but you have no liberty. Liberty requires opportunity. Society fosters opportunity.

It's not the Society of the United States of America, Martin, for a reason, a "society" has no borders, a "society" has no laws, a "society" has no limitations whatsoever, a "society" is whatever the collectivists say it is at any given moment, those aren't illegal immigrants over there, they're just members of "society", those people over there are not criminals, they're just victims of "society", and on it on it goes, "society" is the ultimate rubric against your autonomy from a collective, the greatest threat to liberty there ever was.

[Martin Hash]

???

Liberty derives from society. Without society, there is no liberty. If you live on a desert island, you have all the freedom you want but you have no liberty. Liberty requires opportunity. Society fosters opportunity.

It's not the Society of the United States of America, Martin, for a reason, a "society" has no borders, a "society" has no laws, a "society" has no limitations whatsoever, a "society" is whatever the collectivists say it is at any given moment, those aren't illegal immigrants over there, they're just members of "society", those people over there are not criminals, they're just victims of "society", and on it on it goes, "society" is the ultimate rubric against your autonomy from a collective, the greatest threat to liberty there ever was.

You're making the argument that the Oral Illusionists will torture language to mean whatever serves their purposes. I will use the word 'society' until a word for 'a treaty we all abide by' comes along that can't be similarly distorted to mean communism.

[Smitty-48]

???

Liberty derives from society. Without society, there is no liberty. If you live on a desert island, you have all the freedom you want but you have no liberty. Liberty requires opportunity. Society fosters opportunity.

It's not the Society of the United States of America, Martin, for a reason, a "society" has no borders, a "society" has no laws, a "society" has no limitations whatsoever, a "society" is whatever the collectivists say it is at any given moment, those aren't illegal immigrants over there, they're just members of "society", those people over there are not criminals, they're just victims of "society", and on it on it goes, "society" is the ultimate rubric against your autonomy from a collective, the greatest threat to liberty there ever was.

You're making the argument that the Oral Illusionists will torture language to mean whatever serves their purposes. I will use the word 'society' until a word for 'a treaty we all abide by' comes along that can't be similarly distorted to mean communism.

No, there's "treaty" involved, a treaty is a formal contract, treaty has nothing to do with a "society", you had many treaties with the Soviet Union too, that didn't make them into Americans, "society" supersedes everything, a "society" can break a treaty, because it's the "right thing to do" for "society", you go down that rabbit hole, you're just handing the keys to the kingdom to the collectivists.

[Martin Hash]

Got a better word?