The Other War

Main discussion area is here. Reply to a message to continue a discussion thread, or create your own new Topics.
User avatar
Neck-aint-red
Posts: 326
Joined: 2008 Apr 08 14:08

Re: The Other War

Postby Neck-aint-red » 2012 Feb 07 09:44


User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 634
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Re: The Other War

Postby Juggler » 2012 Apr 26 12:13

alcohol-calculus.jpg
alcohol-calculus.jpg (15.18 KiB) Viewed 1189 times

User avatar
Juggler
Posts: 634
Joined: 2007 Jun 11 03:51

Re: The Other War

Postby Juggler » 2013 Dec 18 09:06

landoffree.jpg
landoffree.jpg (65.45 KiB) Viewed 816 times

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 365
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: The Other War

Postby Cannoneer » 2013 Dec 18 10:11

As a believer in personal freedom and a person who thinks the government is too much into the personal lives of it's citizens I'd like to weigh in on this subject.
If people want to use drugs in their own home, and they are not endangering anyone else or causing probplems for other people I don't think it's the governments business to molest them.
If on the other hand someone using drugs adversly effects another persons well being in any way that should be against the law.
I have a whole laundry list of restrictive laws that piss me off.

User avatar
Coondog
Posts: 1514
Joined: 2008 Jul 08 15:14

Re: The Other War

Postby Coondog » 2013 Dec 18 11:53

Cannoneer is spot on with this one.

Law enforcement, when it comes to controlled substances is nothing if not bizarre.

Marijuana is the most widely enforced and most innocuous on the demon drug list. Not only is it illegal to use it, one cannot legally buy it, transport it, grow it, possess it or be in possession of "paraphernalia" which might be used in conjunction with usage......or contain some "residue" indicating some past existence of the killer weed.

So.....in order to enjoy it in the comfort of one's own home, one must break any number of laws just to get it there......except in a few areas of the country where some measure of sanity prevails.

Now, Coondog does not advocate the use or abuse of any kind of drugs.....legal or otherwise. Ask your doctor if pot is right for you.
Side effects include...........short term apathy, lack of concern and situational avoidance.

But, yes, Coondog's recessive libertarian genes agree that the "war on drugs" is really designed to control, not the drugs, but the people......and to basically financially support the industrial prison system and all the judges, lawyers and minions of the law involved along the way.

This does not mean Coondog wants to share the highways and hydrants with homicidal sociopaths hopped up on meth.

There are reasonable limits to everything.

CD :craz:

And......those veterans handing out poppies.....poppies......poppies



....................!!!

User avatar
Cannoneer
Posts: 365
Joined: 2012 Dec 02 22:19

Re: The Other War

Postby Cannoneer » 2013 Dec 18 12:43

good job coondog, only the poppies are in remembarnce of the war dead.
That started after WWI. The red poppies were on many of the battlefields. The poem "In Flanders Field" sort of tells the story.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1817
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: The Other War

Postby Wise One » 2013 Dec 18 17:00

cannoneer wrote:If people want to use drugs in their own home, and they are not endangering anyone else or causing probplems for other people I don't think it's the governments business to molest them.
It is a pleasure to find something we can agree on. The "war on drugs" has cost us more in self-inflicted damage than our "adversary" has cost.

coondog wrote:Coondog's recessive libertarian genes agree that the "war on drugs" is really designed to control, not the drugs, but the people......and to basically financially support the industrial prison system and all the judges, lawyers and minions of the law involved along the way.
You hit the nail squarely. There is a huge vested interest in the arrest and incarcerate industry that has become a leech on all of us.

We see it even in our own County, where John Higgins sits on the Board of Supervisors and is employed to run the Jail simultaneously, a conflict of interest. Compounding the error, David W. Hinty, when he is not beating his wife, also sits simultaneously on the Bard of Supervisors and the Jail Commission, a conflict of interest. Proceeds of property seizures made by the police are usable by the police, another conflict of interest.

These are glaring examples of how people with a vested interest devote their energies to spending ever more taxpayer money on imprisoning ever more people in ever more space, to their personal benefit and contrary to the public interest.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 2920
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Harsh Hinty?

Postby Crux » 2013 Dec 18 17:17

You ever meet Hinty? HARSH MUCH?

I would not know if he DID beat his wife. He might have. He might not have.
Do you know him or her? I would wait til the facts come out in the courts...

Obviously MJ should be decriminalized at least. It's a NO BRAINER, but still, it should not be so controlled. I will say this. As one of the two BALMS to the Left, it is striking to me that in this country you can be so SEVERELY penalized for using the one, and so FREE to use the other. ABORTION.

Just sayin...

There are SCADS of young and old two issue "liberal" voters out there that
are DRIVEN by these two issues. Well, throw in a little hate for CAPITALISM.

crux

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1817
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: Harsh Hinty?

Postby Wise One » 2013 Dec 18 17:23

crux wrote:Well, throw in a little hate for CAPITALISM.

As usual, you are wrong. I have no hatred for capitalism, indeed am probably more committed to it than you are because of a greater knowledge of how it works and how it must be tempered to keep criminals from taking over under its guise.

My hatred is only for destructive greed, waste, and harm to innocent people.

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 2920
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Maybe Mrs. Hinty just isn't a cat person...

Postby Crux » 2013 Dec 18 17:40

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o-oVhu2fu20

This video could explain her injuries.

__________________________________

AO. On capitalism. What do you think the minimum wage should be?

NoAbsoluteRules

Re: Maybe Mrs. Hinty just isn't a cat person...

Postby NoAbsoluteRules » 2013 Dec 19 09:10

crux wrote:.... AO. On capitalism. What do you think the minimum wage should be?

Whatever it takes to get the individual to the poverty line.

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1817
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: The Other War

Postby Wise One » 2013 Dec 19 13:57

Amen.
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 2920
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Call yourself what you will...

Postby Crux » 2013 Dec 19 17:54

http://www.bls.gov/cps/minwage2012.htm

Minimum wage earners are often teens or young folks under 25, often IN school. Minimum wage jobs could largely be described as ENTRY level LOW skill and experience jobs. They are often PART TIME jobs. They are often leisure and hospitality jobs that experience high turnover and low margins of profit, like restaurants that typically have profit margins of 2-3%!!!

Raising the minimum wage will result in LESS jobs both through attrition, and slowing hiring. It is not the role of government to DICTATE that minimum wage provide some arbitrary level of pay, say, "at the poverty level".

That isn't capitalism.
Besides, wages even in entry level jobs fluctuate wildly by region. Urban vs rural for example. Take north Dakota. We know that Wal-Marts there in the oil boom areas are hiring ENTRY LEVEL workers starting at, $14.50 per hour, and truck drivers with CDLs there make 75-100K per year. That is a heck of a lot more than I make driving here in Rockbridge County.

Now I will admit that some folks, like government wonks and politicians favor raising the minimum wage because it raises REVENUES to entitlement programs that are UNSUSTAINABLE. It is a subsidization by PRIVATE INDUSTRY of public sector pipe dreams (as in 90 TRILLION in unfunded Federal Mandates and OVER PROMISING).

crux

NoAbsoluteRules wrote:
crux wrote:.... AO. On capitalism. What do you think the minimum wage should be?

Whatever it takes to get the individual to the poverty line.


NAR, please consider your absolute rule on this my friend.


Have you considered any of this and are you aware of the truths I am laying out here? I will tell you that when I was a younger man, I gravitated towards the very notion that in a vacuum, minimum wages should be raised, or set at some "level", but then I learned, thought more deeply, and gained more experience in various industries. I have seen the realities of employees, business owners, etc. Thought about the difference between a JOB, and a PROFESSION. Thought about how to move from EMPLOYEE to SELF EMPLOYED by gaining skills and expertise. Anyway...

Good luck NAR as you ponder these things my friend.

crux

"Free Market Economy if you please..."

User avatar
Wise One
Posts: 1817
Joined: 2007 Nov 02 09:33

Re: The Other War

Postby Wise One » 2013 Dec 19 18:14

I don't accept this argument, conventional wisdom among conservatives and incredibly myopic.

Businesses do what they must do to compete. The model that too many follow is to game the system by paying dirt low, and transferring the obligation to provide a living wage to the government. Wal-mart sets hours just below the threshold that obliges medical insurance, and below a living wage. The difference is made up by government, which picks up welfare and medicaid costs for their impoverished employees. Wal-mart should carry its own weight, not unscrupulously transfer the true cost of its employees to the government, just to undercut local business and sell Chinese merchandise.

The entry level argument is a canard, deflecting from the much larger problem of most of the work force.

Government minimum wage requirements serve an essential role by leveling the economic playing field, so that unscrupulous businesses gain no advantage by exploiting their employees. Costco pays decent wages, which Wal-mart undercuts for competitive advantage, screwing its lowest level employees. We're talking only about leveling the playing field at the low end, basically filling in the potholes of economic exploitation. Yes, in order to fund those potholes, there will be pressures to overpay senior executives just a little bit less, and send slightly lower dividend billions to Sam Walton's rich bitch children-stockholders, but I say such incentives are long overdue. Why should the taxpayer cover the Wal-mart wage shortfall when its real effect is to send money off to those who are already billionaires?

:coffee:
"If your only tool is a hammer, every problem looks like Donald Trump."

NoAbsoluteRules

Re: The Other War

Postby NoAbsoluteRules » 2013 Dec 20 06:32

The BLS profile does not match the new economy and, more cynically, may reflect a political agenda. As I mentioned elsewhere, our political parties don't necessarily represent the majority of people.

As the BLS link notes,
By major occupational group, the highest proportion of hourly paid workers earning at or below the federal minimum wage was in service occupations, at about 12 percent. About three-fifths of workers earning the minimum wage or less in 2012 were employed in service occupations, mostly in food preparation and serving related jobs.

Among this group, for example, a hike in wages would impact all employers equally so there would be no competitive disadvantage. One just might have to pay more for one's burger and fries if the job creators needed to maintain their profit margins.

There are no absolute rules: Minimum wages vary geographically and, in case you're not familiar with the Fair Labor Standards Act and federal contract Wage determinations, can also vary by labor category. As far as capitalism is concerned, as Keynes said,
Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 2920
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

Re: The Other War

Postby Crux » 2013 Dec 20 08:15

NoAbsoluteRules wrote:Among this group, for example, a hike in wages would impact all employers equally so there would be no competitive disadvantage. One just might have to pay more for one's burger and fries if the job creators needed to maintain their profit margins.


Wicked men, which will seek to act in any system of course, and political agendas aside for now, wage hikes across the board will cause a RESET. We will just chase the tail of minimum wage hikes continually.

GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT GOVERNMENT :turn:

This kind of marketplace manipulation will not just fill in pot holes, it raised the wage bar across the board and disrupts! Let's raise it to whatever number... EVERYONE will have to pay more for EVERYTHING, because folks in business will have to maintain profit margins.

An observation. By your quote of "wicked men" in regards to capitalism and your ready lack of CONFIDENCE that the burger will cost more, I have to tell you that I don't find you to be quickly empathetic to the "job creators", which is of course private industry.

Government certainly can just, MAKE UP jobs, and work.

Business HAS TO make that profit margin my man, HAS TO, week in and week out. Businesses have to pay the taxes, pay the wages, handle the materials in, and get them out, and satisfy the customer, and make a profit to keep the plate spinning on the of the stick or the business can't survive.

Businesses can't pull a healthcare.gov my friend...

NoAbsoluteRules

Re: The Other War

Postby NoAbsoluteRules » 2013 Dec 20 12:38

crux, I worked in and for government for almost 40 years; believe me when I affirm government creates jobs. I trade stocks and bonds regularly; trust me when I claim unregulated markets are not pretty. I spent my entire professional life in intelligence collection and weapon systems development; allow me credence when I tell you we could spend a lot less on both.

And wrt "Businesses can't pull a healthcare.gov my friend ...." You surely remember the Edsel, the New Coke, the Beta format, the Newton, the Zune, etc. :hum:

User avatar
Crux
Posts: 2920
Joined: 2010 Dec 16 19:44

You make my point.

Postby Crux » 2013 Dec 20 13:10

NoAbsoluteRules wrote:
And wrt "Businesses can't pull a healthcare.gov my friend ...." You surely remember the Edsel, the New Coke, the Beta format, the Newton, the Zune, etc. :hum:


If it ain't profitable it fails. Based on your experience you should be able to verify that government can WASTE VAST SUMS of money, and just keep coming back for more. Or printing more. Or borrowing more. Government is not constrained in quite the same ways as private industry. Federal government is not constrained like State government either...

On UNREGULATED markets or economy, that is a straw man. We got regs...
There is no such thing in any industry or segment of our economy my friend.

User avatar
Amy Probenski
Posts: 433
Joined: 2007 Aug 28 17:06

Re: The Other War

Postby Amy Probenski » 2014 Jun 23 13:09


User avatar
Buck Turgidson
Posts: 105
Joined: 2011 Mar 10 22:48

Re: The Other War

Postby Buck Turgidson » 2015 Jan 24 15:47

This is a good article on the evils of civil asset forfeiture. It's unfair, unAmerican, corrupt, and we should stop it not only at the federal but also at the state and local levels.


Return to “MAIN FORUM”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest