Re: Police Pepper-Spray Seated Protesters At UC Davis
hmm... and Who is Jahn Galt?
Regarding hard work and sacrifice and jobs, I was explaining the notion of the American Dream.
Regarding the disintegration/disappearance of the middle class, I disagree that it is because of gov't policy that jobs are disappearing. In fact, I think that it is pretty clear that the US manufacturing base, responsible for many middle class jobs, has been outsourced to lower cost areas. NAFTA is the only gov't act that I can think of that encouraged this behavior. Outsourcing of many other jobs is also occurring in the pursuit of corporate profit. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I think US gov't policy could be implemented to reward corporations for keeping jobs in the US... but this is untested and may not work.
Regarding Marx, right or wrong, my point is to illustrate the possibility of unrest when the have nots give up on the American Dream and decide to do something resulting in violence.
Regarding fair/equitable, I agree that fair is a loaded term (and subjective). Used more to make a point.
And with the current US situation, I don't believe that the problem right now is the have-nots asking for too much (but entitlement programs are always an issue). My fear is that the gap between rich and poor is becoming dangerously large; the implications of which are frightening.
And this leads back to the framework set up by the gov't. I do not believe that life is fair or that it is the responsibility of the gov't to make it so. And I said that the deck should be stacked evenly by building a framework that does not rig the system in favor of the rich. I do not suggest lowering standards or trying to legislate inequities.
And athletes vs. CEOs... not sure that either should command salaries 1000x more than that of a school teacher, but I do not really want to argue with the market here. Signs that our societies priorities might be out of whack but I will not suggest punitive action to redistribute the wealth that they have earned. I do listen to Ayn Rand quite often!
Hard work and sacrifice alone are not enough. I could work hard digging ditches for all my life and never get ahead. Working smart, and making good decisions, and further, having the freedom to make decisions in one's best interests is what truly creates equality of opportunity.
Employers provide jobs to individuals who are capable of proving they are 'worth' the employer's money. There's no guarantee of jobs being available at any level to anyone.
There is no 'disintegration' of the middle class. Many middle class individuals are being suffocated by the very regulations designed to help them (and the poor) because they are at just the income level where they are penalized (taxed) by the government, but do not have the income structure nor means to avoid it, in the manner that the upper class do. The answer is less government intervention, not more.
I have read Marx, and he was wrong. The 'have-nots' can claim that something was 'stolen' from them until they are blue in the face- the 'haves' are not 'taking' anything from them. Usually it is the 'have-nots' that use their majority voting power to elect politicians that use the police power of the state to punitively tax the 'haves' and redistribute income to the 'have-nots' who then squander this largesse and crave more.
I agree with most of what you are saying here: Government should build the 'framework,' but it is up to the individual to make it a house. What we have now is 'have-nots' demanding the house, at whatever cost, and then demanding it be repaired after they've soiled and broken it.
Maximum tax rates have been lowered, but taxes themselves have continued to rise. When the tax rates were high as they formerly were, there were many more tax breaks and loopholes than currently exist, and very few, if any individuals were paying these higher taxes. Now, there are less loopholes and breaks, but more people are paying the top rates.
'Fair' is a very subjective term; I would imagine no two people on EF would agree on the exact same definition of what fair is. Trying to create a system around such a vague term would be nearly impossible.
There is no way to stack the deck evenly for everyone. That would be akin to making it possible for a quadriplegic to play professional football; the only way that is possible is to lower standards all around until the least capable person qualifies. The best a system can do is to not deny opportunity to an individual based on circumstances like gender, age, religion, ethnicity, nationality, etc.
I agree, but from a different perspective. I would say that the 'majority' needs to become better informed in regards to how economies function, and how their decisions impact their economic opportunities and outcomes. Much of the economic disparity in countries like the US is more perceptual than real, and many of the economic problems of the 'have nots' are self-inflicted.
I've asked this before- Why do we glorify the kid who goes to school, works hard, gets a scholarship to a great college, and goes on to be a millionaire professional athlete, but villify the kid who does much the same thing, but goes on to be a millionaire corporate CEO? Who creates more jobs, in and of themselves- the athlete or the CEO?
Regarding the disintegration/disappearance of the middle class, I disagree that it is because of gov't policy that jobs are disappearing. In fact, I think that it is pretty clear that the US manufacturing base, responsible for many middle class jobs, has been outsourced to lower cost areas. NAFTA is the only gov't act that I can think of that encouraged this behavior. Outsourcing of many other jobs is also occurring in the pursuit of corporate profit. This is not necessarily a bad thing, but I think US gov't policy could be implemented to reward corporations for keeping jobs in the US... but this is untested and may not work.
It is a combination of government legislation (things like minimum wage legislation, Corporate tax structure, ObamaCare, and regulations regarding products produced by American labor) and American Unions that have contributed much to America's former manufacturing base moving overseas. Unless changes are made to the legislative environment and tax structure, and unions are willing to negotiate at an internationally competitive level (tough choices will have to be made) nothing will ever change on this front.
Regarding Marx, right or wrong, my point is to illustrate the possibility of unrest when the have nots give up on the American Dream and decide to do something resulting in violence.
Yeah, but there are individuals who don't grasp that (I did), and, again, the misunderstanding of his ideas is another cause of heartache in the US (and in the world, IMO), so I feel compelled to dispute it. Also, IMO, too many of the 'have nots' in the US are too mesmerized by People, Survivor, and American Idol to do much of anything violent, or even anything that might improve their lot.
Regarding fair/equitable, I agree that fair is a loaded term (and subjective). Used more to make a point.
Yes, but loaded words tend to skew an argument in an emotional direction, and I really try to discuss thing objectively. That's not to say I don't let my emotions get the better of me from time to time
And with the current US situation, I don't believe that the problem right now is the have-nots asking for too much (but entitlement programs are always an issue). My fear is that the gap between rich and poor is becoming dangerously large; the implications of which are frightening.
I believe that when a group stops 'asking' and starts using their voting block to enable the police power of the State to forcibly take (find out what happens in the US if you don't pay your taxes) income from another group and distribute it to the first group, oftentimes against the will of the members of the second group, it becomes 'too much.' The simple fact is that the money is not theirs, and they're stealing it, legally or otherwise. And there always have been, and probably always will be more people in the first group, so under a largely 'popular' election system in the US, they will always have more votes.
And this leads back to the framework set up by the gov't. I do not believe that life is fair or that it is the responsibility of the gov't to make it so. And I said that the deck should be stacked evenly by building a framework that does not rig the system in favor of the rich. I do not suggest lowering standards or trying to legislate inequities.
Good. Because, life isn't fair, and trying to make it so only hurts the people we're trying to help. In life there will always be winners and losers, unfortunately. And I don't know how to 'evenly stack the deck,' because, as in poker, or any other card game, you get the cards you're dealt, and its your ability to play them that determines whether you win or lose. We try to teach children 'how to play the game' (i.e. school) but many choose not to listen, and their parents choose not to force them to. So you could 'stack the deck' and people will still have bad outcomes because they chose not to listen, or chose to play outside the rules.
The system is not in favor of the rich anymore than it is against the poor. Most millionaires in the US are self-made first-generation millionaires, and most of the richest individuals in the US made their own fortunes, and many of those came from middle class or worse backgrounds; if they can do it, why can't others try, and maybe come close?
And athletes vs. CEOs... not sure that either should command salaries 1000x more than that of a school teacher, but I do not really want to argue with the market here. Signs that our societies priorities might be out of whack but I will not suggest punitive action to redistribute the wealth that they have earned. I do listen to Ayn Rand quite often!
Cheers,
fduvall
I don't think our society's priorities are 'out-of-whack' Michael Jordan (for example) makes 1000x more than teachers, is because there's only one person that could do what he has done, otherwise someone would be doing it now (All Kobe/Lebron arguments aside ); however, there are 7.2 million teachers in the US, a ratio of 7,200,000:1 versus the roughly only 870:1 income ratio; if anything, due to the rarity of someone with Jordan's ability, he should be earning more! I could extrapolate examples of CEOs versus teachers, but the point is that there is a greater supply of teachers, the job qualifications are much different, and each individual teacher has less of a measurable impact on the economy and job creation, as a whole, than does Michael Jordan.
Thank you, though, you do raise very interesting points, and it was a pleasure discussing this with you.
The following 2 users would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
I agree with what was done to them. clearly warned and blocking the way. ...
Are you serious?
That's possibly the most cowardly police action I've ever seen using pepper spray like that. And believe me, I've seen a few cowardly police forces - an occupational hazard if you watch Manchester United play in Europe.
The following 3 users groan at oldmanc for this post:
That's possibly the most cowardly police action I've ever seen using pepper spray like that. And believe me, I've seen a few cowardly police forces - an occupational hazard if you watch Manchester United play in Europe.
read the rest of the damned thread and then make a comment will you.
I have done. It was the action of cowards who were too unfit and overweight to lift a few students out of the way. End of.
ah wow another brilliantly thought of argument. common man at least put in an effort of some intelligent conversation /discussion. Look at how well it was going before you joined the discussion
Hehe your profile pic is very correct in this case
I have done. It was the action of cowards who were too unfit and overweight to lift a few students out of the way. End of.
Your opinion is appreciated. The name calling is not. I seriously doubt these police officers were cowards.
The students were asked to move. They refused. The students were warned. They persisted. The police tried to move them. They interlocked arms and prevented the police from doing this. Only then did the police result to pepper spray. Ultimately, it was the protesters who precipitated this action, not the police. These protesters were all big boys and girls and they knew the consequences of their actions, and the police further warned them, and they ended up getting pepper sprayed.
This user would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
That's possibly the most cowardly police action I've ever seen using pepper spray like that. And believe me, I've seen a few cowardly police forces - an occupational hazard if you watch Manchester United play in Europe.
Maybe?
This user would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
"
In the wake of so much controversy, the Occupy movement — which began as a populist uprising to represent all but the wealthiest 1 percent — has begun to lose some of its mainstream support. A Washington Post poll early this month showed that only 18 percent of responders "strongly supported" the Occupy Wall Street movement. On Monday, a few hundred New York residents and business owners organized a protest of the protests, wearing white masks and chanting: "Leave here now."
City officials have said that the demonstrations have cost them millions of dollars — even as the protesters call for fiscal responsibility. Denver estimates its bill at $200,000 per week. Oakland has spent more than $1 million just to pay overtime for police officers. Businesses near Zuccotti Park say protesters have cost them a combined $500,000 in profits.
The protest movement has "hurt the quality of life in every part of the city," said Oakland Mayor Jean Quan."
This user would like to thank Anthony1406 for this useful post:
Re: Police Pepper-Spray Seated Protesters At UC Davis
I think what really happened is the campus police received reports of a revolting stench from an area of campus, reached for the potpourri spray from the "P" shelf, and then mistakenly grabbed the wrong can
Re: Police Pepper-Spray Seated Protesters At UC Davis
...And the truth comes out. The police acted correctly, according to the law, gave multiple warnings and only sought to arrest those committing the most egregious violations, i.e. the campers and the actual obstructionists. IMHO, the police could have arrested several more students for various forms of aiding and abetting and/or attempting to incite a riot. Specific students were individually warned, and individually stated they understood the consequences of their actions.
The students incorrectly, and in several instances, illegally exercised their right to public assembly. This is why the police reacted as they did.
This user would like to thank Jobsrobertsharpii for this useful post:
); however, there are 7.2 million teachers in the US, a ratio of 7,200,000:1 versus the roughly only 870:1 income ratio; if anything, due to the rarity of someone with Jordan's ability, he should be earning more! I could extrapolate examples of CEOs versus teachers, but the point is that there is a greater supply of teachers, the job qualifications are much different, and each individual teacher has less of a measurable impact on the economy and job creation, as a whole, than does Michael Jordan.
I seriously doubt these police officers were cowards.
Linear Mode
