Are you a domestic terrorist?

[Occhidiangela]

Durn, I thought it was a "how empty is your glass" argument. My mistake.

BTW my vessel contains equivalent volumes of air and liquid.

-V

Mine contains piss, at the moment.

Note to self: not for drinking.

[Jester]

That and a euro will get you a cup of coffee.;)

Nah, they just raised the price to a pound and ten pence, and being a student just gets me through the door.

-Jester

[eppie]

I seek the purest form of liberty,

You are talking about liberty from governments right? Not liberty from 'your boss'.
(otherwise wouldn't you be an anarchist).

I find the idea that a multinational will treat its employee's better (or purer as you say it) than a government perse, a bit confusing.

[kandrathe]

You are talking about liberty from governments right? Not liberty from 'your boss'.(otherwise wouldn't you be an anarchist).

You need to pay attention. My theory is that through lobbyists, PAC's and collusion with politicians the government and the reins of corporate power are in collusion. We the people are mere chattel used to run their money making enterprises. We are intentionally kept away from means to accumulate enough wealth to actually be owners of the machines, rather than operators of the machines.

I find the idea that a multinational will treat its employee's better (or purer as you say it) than a government perse, a bit confusing.

I would guess that almost all multinational companies are exploitative, but perhaps there are some corporations that are beneficent. Mostly, from where I sit, that soul sucking sound I witness in corporate America are jobs being moved to off shore sweat shops.

[kandrathe]

But the IT world isn't the whole world. And unemployment isn't the only alternative. There are nationwide shortages of teachers and nurses. There are other fields that need people.

Right. It's perhaps the jaded viewpoint I have. Perhaps teachers and nurses have a much less repressive work environment.

If you cannot afford to retrain, it is not the corporate world that put you in that position, it is the choices you made. If, to be free, you have to have no boss, no supervisor, no one that expects your effort for their money, then you can still move to undeveloped areas and live a pioneer lifestyle, grow and hunt your own food, etc.

I have been VERY tempted to do just that. I grew up on a farm, and I know how to be self sufficient doing it.

If by 'freedom' you mean a total lack of responsibilities, the ability to do whatever you want or even nothing at all, then that condition has never existed and will, probably, never exist. Our earliest ancestors (if our closest relatives are any indication) formed bands with leaders and followers. The leaders were not free, they were constrained by the good of the band, both real and perceived. The followers were not free, they had to cooperate in the band's activities and submit to the will of the leader. "Lead, follow, or get out of the way." Those are the three possible states, the third being 'outcast' and possibly the least free of them all, for the outcast is a slave to nature and has no one to relive him of any part of that slavery.

No. Not a lack of responsibility, or even a lack of social conscience. Here is an example that happened to a friend of mine; He lost his job, and the only way to save his home from foreclosure was to tap his IRA's and 401K's. The government has set up that system so that not only do you pay taxes on that saved income, you also pay an additional 10% penalty to the government. Then, to make matters worse, that money he deducted to pay for his house counted as income so he no longer qualifies for any program to help struggling people in his predicament. I don't call that justice. I'm looking for "us", the little people, to define the system such that we all benefit. I don't care whether the topic is health care, or banking, or savings, or retirement, or inheritance. Unlike Jester, I don't want to drain away wealth from the "us" who are finding a way out of the employment trap. If we agree the government needs tending, then each of us should shoulder an equal burden. If that burden is too big, then we should make it smaller.

As a person of principle, and as one that seems even to put principle above personal well being, your argument that working for someone is the equivalent of slavery seems incongruous. The fundamental difference *is* one of principle. Slavery reduces a human being to an object that can be owned. This was recognized as far back as Cicero ("instrumentum vocale"). The most benevolent treatment of a slave (short of manumission) does not negate this fundamental fact, that a slave is an object, not a person.

Agreed. Although, if you have no choice but to be an employee, then servitude is not your choice. Your choice is in which master you choose to serve. You need to have the means to have excess income (after expenses and taxes) to save up and buy property. I believe that a shrinking number of people own the means of production, and property -- and the next generation will find more servants than owners.

We have options, we have choices. We don't have unlimited license, but we do have a large chunk of freedom. Maybe we should have more, but that is something to work for. But if your idea of freedom is freedom from responsibility to the world, to the nation, to society, then I cannot agree with you. And if you think that those responsibilities will be shouldered by individuals without coercion, then I think you are mistaken. And, with the fragmentation and decline of religion, I cannot think of an organization other than the state who can supply that coercion.

No not freedom from responsibility. Simply put, I want our system to supply and emphasize the freedom to move from poverty class to working class, and from the working class to the owning class. I believe our government should endeavor to make this easier, rather than more difficult. Why do they make it more difficult? My suspicion is that they collude to meet the needs of Corporations for highly skilled cheap labor.

[--Pete]

Hi,

We are intentionally kept away from means to accumulate enough wealth to actually be owners of the machines, . . .

I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or puke when I read or hear this. My parents and I came to this country in 1951 with two suitcases and $31 (the maximum that could be taken out of England at that time). Within two years, they were running their own millinery factory on Lexington avenue. They *owned* the machines then, and continued to own them until their retirement around 1985. My stepfather died last year at 88, my mother is still alive at 93 and still living on the money they made (and saved) by their initiative and hard work. Neither of my parents ever spoke English well (although, between the two, they spoke seven languages). My step father did not finish high school, seems that the Germany invaded Poland in what would have been his last year. My mother was educated in a convent, where religion and 'women's work' were the primary curriculum. What they did, they did without friends, without family, without inheritance, without privilege.

So, anyone born, raised, educated in this country that hasn't made it needs to face the reason for their failure. It isn't the government. It isn't corporations or business. It isn't inheritance or privilege. It's the inadequacy of that person in the mirror.

Those that can, do. Those that can't whine.

--Pete

[kandrathe]

I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or puke when I read or hear this. My parents and I came to this country in 1951 with two suitcases and $31 (the maximum that could be taken out of England at that time). Within two years, they were running their own millinery factory on Lexington avenue. They *owned* the machines then, and continued to own them until their retirement around 1985. My stepfather died last year at 88, my mother is still alive at 93 and still living on the money they made (and saved) by their initiative and hard work. Neither of my parents ever spoke English well (although, between the two, they spoke seven languages). My step father did not finish high school, seems that the Germany invaded Poland in what would have been his last year. My mother was educated in a convent, where religion and 'women's work' were the primary curriculum. What they did, they did without friends, without family, without inheritance, without privilege.

So, anyone born, raised, educated in this country that hasn't made it needs to face the reason for their failure. It isn't the government. It isn't corporations or business. It isn't inheritance or privilege. It's the inadequacy of that person in the mirror. Those that can, do. Those that can't whine.

I used to think that as well. Those were the days, and many of my relatives did the same thing. I believe that times have changed. I don't have time right now to list the ways that they have changed, but most of it has to do with laws, and morality.

[Swiss Mercenary]

I used to think that as well. Those were the days, and many of my relatives did the same thing. I believe that times have changed. I don't have time right now to list the ways that they have changed, but most of it has to do with laws, and morality.

Times have indeed changed. I'm afraid, though, that you've got off-shore sweatshops and market oversaturation to blame.

[eppie]

Hi,
I don't know whether to laugh, cry, or puke when I read or hear this. My parents and I came to this country in 1951 with two suitcases and $31 (the maximum that could be taken out of England at that time). Within two years, they were running their own millinery factory on Lexington avenue. They *owned* the machines then, and continued to own them until their retirement around 1985. My stepfather died last year at 88, my mother is still alive at 93 and still living on the money they made (and saved) by their initiative and hard work. Neither of my parents ever spoke English well (although, between the two, they spoke seven languages). My step father did not finish high school, seems that the Germany invaded Poland in what would have been his last year. My mother was educated in a convent, where religion and 'women's work' were the primary curriculum. What they did, they did without friends, without family, without inheritance, without privilege.

So, anyone born, raised, educated in this country that hasn't made it needs to face the reason for their failure. It isn't the government. It isn't corporations or business. It isn't inheritance or privilege. It's the inadequacy of that person in the mirror.

Those that can, do. Those that can't whine.

--Pete

I have to agree with Kandrathe here. You are just mentioning an example in which everything turned out fine and state that because of that it should go the same for everybody that puts in effort. And that is highly doubtful of course. And not only because times have changed.

[Swiss Mercenary]

I have to agree with Kandrathe here. You are just mentioning an example in which everything turned out fine and state that because of that it should go the same for everybody that puts in effort. And that is highly doubtful of course. And not only because times have changed.

I don't mean to say that there's no opportunities for enterpreneurship to be had. Just that there may be less of them.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I have to agree with Kandrathe here.

They must be selling lift tickets in hell. :lol:

You are just mentioning an example in which everything turned out fine and state that because of that it should go the same for everybody that puts in effort.

There's a poem I ran across a few years ago on the comic page of a newspaper, of all places. It runs:

"The race goes to the swift, I s'pose,
or else the slow and steady,
or else the passionate, or those
who bothered to get ready,
or ones who coached themselves, or those
meticulously mentored.
But every single time it goes
to somebody who entered."
-- Jeff Mallet 2003

So, no. Not everyone who tries makes it. But it is a good bet that those that do make it come from the ranks of those who tried, not those who cried.

As I walk the streets of downtown Seattle, I see bars and restaurants, bookstores and boutiques, cleaners, bodegas, Asian food stores, mini breweries, delis, hobby and toy stores, costume shops, and dozens, possibly hundreds of enterprises of all types. Most of them are not franchised, they are the property, the livelihood, the dream of an individual or of a family. These are workers who have taken control of their lives, who have become their own bosses. So it isn't just one case, it is many. It is the woman from Hong Kong who didn't know how to hold a needle twenty years ago and that now has possibly the most successful alterations shop in Atlanta. It is the guy from Macon who couldn't find a steak prepared the way he liked it that now owns one of the top rated restaurants, also in Atlanta. It is the lady who owns the tea store where I buy my tea -- who goes to the Dragon Well, and other tea producing places, to get the best quality at the best price.

But maybe you are right. Maye the American dream is dead. As I go to these stores, to these restaurants, to these businesses, I see many Latino faces, many oriental faces from the middle East to Japan. I don't see many Anglo faces there anymore. So perhaps the American dream has become the property of the immigrants. Or, maybe, that's what it always was, and those born to the prosperity of the second generation lost, or never developed, that drive, that desire, that fire, that allows one to take control of one's own destiny.

It's easier to blame 'The Man' than to admit the man is us.

--Pete

[Jester]

So, anyone born, raised, educated in this country that hasn't made it needs to face the reason for their failure. It isn't the government. It isn't corporations or business. It isn't inheritance or privilege. It's the inadequacy of that person in the mirror.

There are all sorts of factors that change the *likelihood* of success. Someone from a rich family of smart people from a favoured ethnic group that's well connected in the community is going to produce, on average, a lot more very successful people than a family with none of those things.

But America is still a place where people can start from the bottom and make it to the top; there are no shotgun-wielding crazies (or chainsaws) stopping you from becoming successful with the usual combination of pluck, luck, talent, and a hell of a lot of hard work.

That doesn't invalidate the thesis that social and economic mobility is affected by quite a few innate factors, many of which hold people back substantially - and therefore require quite a lot more to overcome. I would point out that the last few Democrats to sit in the Oval Office demonstrate that the odds can be beaten - the last couple Republicans demonstrate why there are still odds to beat.

-Jester

[Jester]

But maybe you are right. Maye the American dream is dead. As I go to these stores, to these restaurants, to these businesses, I see many Latino faces, many oriental faces from the middle East to Japan. I don't see many Anglo faces there anymore. So perhaps the American dream has become the property of the immigrants. Or, maybe, that's what it always was, and those born to the prosperity of the second generation lost, or never developed, that drive, that desire, that fire, that allows one to take control of one's own destiny.

Funny, I had a paragraph to that effect that I deleted out of my last post.

Wage differentials create incentives. If you're used to earning practically nothing, and working like a dog for it, then you don't have a problem working like a dog to earn a hell of a lot more. Usually, the idea is to earn your money and head back home (contrary to anti-immigrant logic, this is actually a massive net gain for the US). But many stay, and those that do are often among the most enterprising people, who have worked hard and found an opportunity.

As an example, who makes the restaurant business in the US function? An army of Latinos, who were once just dish washers and potato peelers, but are now working their way through the upper ranks of kitchens, to the point where they are now opening their own places.

Now, as to whether Anglos are not taking advantage of opportunities, I don't know. It may be that the opportunities where they have comparative advantage are ones you don't see when ordering tea or steak frites. :)

-Jester

[--Pete]

Hi,

Now, as to whether Anglos are not taking advantage of opportunities, I don't know. It may be that the opportunities where they have comparative advantage are ones you don't see when ordering tea or steak frites. :)

Well, they all go into the corporate structure -- you now, twenty-first century slavery. :whistling:

--Pete

[Jester]

Well, they all go into the corporate structure -- you now, twenty-first century slavery. :whistling:

I suspect, given the risks and rewards, their comparative advantages, and especially the sheer effort involved in self-employment, they are not irrational to do so.

-Jester

[kandrathe]

They must be selling lift tickets in hell. :lol:

I'm pretty pragmatic. So, while I loathe certain ideologies, and personalities, they do sometimes spout bits of truth, which cannot just be dismissed at face value. Such as when Stalin said, "Mankind is divided into rich and poor, into property owners and exploited; and to abstract oneself from this fundamental division; and from the antagonism between poor and rich means abstracting oneself from fundamental facts." Perhaps it is a false dichotomy, and I realize there is much gray area, but it strikes to some of the truths that Marx was philosophically wrestling. Now, don't paint me as a Marxist. :) Perhaps, this is why eppie and I are on the same page. :lol:

I'm questioning whether our society and social systems are structured to help take our youth from "exploited" to "property owner".

There's a poem I ran across a few years ago on the comic page of a newspaper, of all places.

I like the poem, and 30 years ago I would have been there. I've been jaded by my life experience. I've seen many dreams crushed lately, and the axiom of "good guys finish last" rings more true than ever for me. Those who follow the rules get burnt, while those that cheat the system win.

So, no. Not everyone who tries makes it. But it is a good bet that those that do make it come from the ranks of those who tried, not those who cried.
...

But maybe you are right. Maye the American dream is dead. As I go to these stores, to these restaurants, to these businesses, I see many Latino faces, many oriental faces from the middle East to Japan. I don't see many Anglo faces there anymore. So perhaps the American dream has become the property of the immigrants. Or, maybe, that's what it always was, and those born to the prosperity of the second generation lost, or never developed, that drive, that desire, that fire, that allows one to take control of one's own destiny.

Perhaps, they come here with better knowledge of how to be capitalists? When I travel to the more touristy areas of some countries, everyone from age 5 and up is selling something. Perhaps, we don't teach our children how to be entrepreneurial anymore.

It's easier to blame 'The Man' than to admit the man is us.

I don't need to blame the man, I know it's the man and that the man IS us. :) Generally, the trend I've seen worldwide in response to global competition (mostly from markets where labor is cheaper) is that we are trying to provide the same product with fewer people. This means that as an employee you are expected to do the work of two people (60 - 80 hour weeks) at the same or slightly higher salary. As a manager, rather than lead a group of 15 to 20 direct reports, you have 30 to 40 direct reports (which has happened to me -- I almost went insane trying to coordinate 40 performance appraisals in one month). Maybe, when you come from a place where life is a 24x7 struggle to survive, working a 60 to 80 hour week would be like a vacation. So, as you say, they might have a different set of expectations.

And, if I were the Dictator in Chief of the USA, I wouldn't do anything to curb employment, or corporations from exploiting workers (maybe... I'd have to think harder about this though... there are some things we should do socially to encourage a better quality of life). I would do some things to promote entrepreneurship, like remove corporate / business taxes and streamline or remove as many regulations on business as is possible. Rather than give a trillion dollars of TARP money to corporate failures, I would lead through the Small Business Association (in coordination with private lenders and investors) a program to foster more entrepreneurial growth, and stimulate the economy by growing the economy in the directions we believe it needs to go (e.g. renewable energy, care for the elderly, emerging technologies, etc.) and rather than burden the tax payers with debt, offer low interest loans and potential good investments in our future. I would review the laws regarding inheritance of the ownership of private business. I would also provide leadership and encourage more education around new venture creation and management in secondary education.

[--Pete]

Hi,

Perhaps it is a false dichotomy, and I realize there is much gray area, but it strikes to some of the truths that Marx was philosophically wrestling.

The problem is that in Marx's time, organized labor was being suppressed by the governments of the industrial nations. Because of the extreme conditions, Marx was only able to see extreme solutions. Surrounded by the excesses of unbounded capitalism, the only solution he saw was to abolish it completely. He never did work out the potential of labor and management, each needing the other, to work together in a dynamic equilibrium. Instead, he came up with a simple, easy to understand, *wrong*, answer. Like so many, he failed to understand that the right question is not, "What is the solution?", but rather, "What are the solutions?"

Those who follow the rules get burnt, while those that cheat the system win.

And from this, you conclude that the system is wrong? That is not a logical conclusion -- the failure of a system that is not being followed tells you nothing of the system, only of the people in it.

. . . we are trying to provide the same product with fewer people. This means that as an employee you are expected to do the work of two people (60 - 80 hour weeks) at the same or slightly higher salary.

Maybe so, maybe not. A worker with a front loader can move a lot more dirt than one with a wheelbarrow, and doesn't have to work as hard to do it. Ditto for the factory workers equipped with modern machinery as opposed to hand tools. Productivity is a function of much more than hours worked. "Work smarter, not harder.", is a trite cliché, but true nonetheless.

. . . like remove corporate / business taxes . . .

I'm of two minds about this. On the one hand, corporations don't pay taxes, they pass them on to their customers. So if our industry is taxed and the competition isn't, then the competition has an unfair advantage. On the other hand, corporations are taxed on profits. Since the corporation would rather keep the money, they are better off expanding and improving, which is to the nation's benefit. On odd numbered days I'm pro corporate taxes, on even I'm con, and on leap day I don't give a damn. ;)

. . . streamline or remove as many regulations on business as is possible.

Funny, but while I totally agree with this statement, I suspect if we started to discuss specific cases, you and I would soon part company on the details. Except for extremists on either side, I suspect everyone wants regulated business, but only with the minimum regulations needed. What that minimum is, however, has sparked riots and revolutions in the past. And may do so again in the future. (I live in Seattle -- think WTO.)

As for the rest, " . . . well, you know, we all want to save the world . . ." Trouble is, everyone has his own plan, and too few are willing to compromise. So the pendulum swings, pausing at the extremes and spending little time at the balanced medium. And the talking heads, the pundits, the social and political demagogues, blow every little item out of proportion to the point that no consensus can be reached, no compromise can be agreed on, and no progress can be made.

Bah. /rant off

--Pete

[eppie]

As I walk the streets of downtown Seattle, I see bars and restaurants, bookstores and boutiques, cleaners, bodegas, Asian food stores, mini breweries, delis, hobby and toy stores, costume shops, and dozens, possibly hundreds of enterprises of all types. Most of them are not franchised, they are the property, the livelihood, the dream of an individual or of a family. These are workers who have taken control of their lives, who have become their own bosses. So it isn't just one case, it is many. It is the woman from Hong Kong who didn't know how to hold a needle twenty years ago and that now has possibly the most successful alterations shop in Atlanta. It is the guy from Macon who couldn't find a steak prepared the way he liked it that now owns one of the top rated restaurants, also in Atlanta. It is the lady who owns the tea store where I buy my tea -- who goes to the Dragon Well, and other tea producing places, to get the best quality at the best price.

But maybe you are right. Maye the American dream is dead. As I go to these stores, to these restaurants, to these businesses, I see many Latino faces, many oriental faces from the middle East to Japan. I don't see many Anglo faces there anymore. So perhaps the American dream has become the property of the immigrants. Or, maybe, that's what it always was, and those born to the prosperity of the second generation lost, or never developed, that drive, that desire, that fire, that allows one to take control of one's own destiny.

It's easier to blame 'The Man' than to admit the man is us.

--Pete

Hej Pete!

I can agree much more with this explanation. I want to remark however that many of those shop owners you talked about are fare from rich, and many fail (and you don't see them directly).

[eppie]

But America is still a place where people can start from the bottom and make it to the top;
-Jester

I think there are still many countries were that is possible. And a country with a better social security system might actually help (but I am not sure about this....) because somebody that fails once doesn't have to drop into poverty....so you can take some risks.


Also (and this has been discussed here lately) nowadays many people that are not able to do much, and rather use large quantities of drugs can 'make it' because of the entertainment business.....a kind of reversed american dream you might say.

[--Pete]

Hi,

I want to remark however that many of those shop owners you talked about are fare from rich, and many fail . . .

True, but the question isn't one of being rich, it is of being independent, of not being a 'slave' to a corporation. And, yes, many will fail. And many that fail will try again, and again. We may have a right to pursue happiness, but there's nothing saying we'll get to catch it. We have the freedom to try for riches, for Independence, for knowledge, for power, for any goal we desire. Beyond that, no one owes us anything -- the talent, the luck, the abilities, the drive, the work must come from us. But I believe the opportunity is still there, that there is no government or corporate conspiracy to 'keep us down'.

--Pete