Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [LeftLibertarian2] definitions

Expand Messages
  • Rad Geek
    ... Look, if I drive a few blocks from my house I can find tens or hundreds of women on the street working all night as streetwalkers, many of them miserable,
    Message 1 of 174 , Aug 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      MikeHolmesTX@... wrote:

      > As to the mistreatment argument, you cite no evidence and what can be
      > observed by all is that Walmart seems to have no problem in hiring
      > workers (in some places when a new store opens, thousands apply for a
      > few hundred jobs). Their turnover doesn't appear to be excessive.

      Look, if I drive a few blocks from my house I can find tens or hundreds
      of women on the street working all night as streetwalkers, many of them
      miserable, strung out, and working long hours mostly for the profit of a
      pimp who skims the majority of their night's take. If I drive a few
      hours from my house into central California, I can find hundreds of men
      and women lining up at the break of dawn to go pick fruit and vegetables
      for twelve hours a day in 100+ degree heat while some jackhole of a
      driver screams at them over wanting to stop for a few minutes (at the
      sacrifice of their own piece rate) in order to get a sip of water. All
      kinds of shitty, miserable jobs have no problem in hiring and retaining
      workers, when (for whatever reason) people are desperate and would have
      trouble finding other work. The fact that a given boss, pimp, firm, or
      whatever has no trouble finding people to work on the terms that they
      set is no guarantee -- it's not even prima facie evidence -- that those
      terms don't amount to "treating people like shit." It may be decent
      evidence that it's one of the less shitty options available under the
      circumstances, or one of the options with a better pay-off for all the
      shit it puts you through, but that's a different issue from the one
      Roderick was discussing, and if anything, it seems like a good reason to
      (nonviolently, through mutual aid and nonviolent agitation) change the
      options that are available to people.

      > As to the "inculcation" argument, Walmart is no different from any other
      > business (other than it hires more workers than most). Nothing that
      > Walmart does is much different from any of its peers or practically any
      > business anywhere.

      Well, so? Roderick was giving a quick summary of his reasons for
      opposing how Wal-Mart acts, not an argument for why Wal-Mart should be
      singled out among all companies for special blame. Unless he's made that
      latter claim -- and I don't think he has -- I don't see why he should be
      expected to come to its defense. But if the claim is just that Wal-Mart
      sucks, rather than that it sucks somehow more than most, then I don't
      see how it matters whether or not other companies are just as bad.

      > If Walmart were "inculcating" habits of thinking along the lines of the
      > U.S. military (e.g., killing Hajis is okay) or spying on others is okay
      > when your leaders order it, then that would be possibly a matter of
      > instrumental thickness.

      Well. Concerning the latter:
      <http://www.pacifica.org/program-guide/op,segment-page/segment_id,439/>

      -C
    • Harry Pollard
      I did. Harry ... From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shawn wilbur Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
      Message 174 of 174 , Sep 8, 2008
      • 0 Attachment
        I did.

        Harry

        -----Original Message-----
        From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of shawn wilbur
        Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 4:44 PM
        To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        Subject: RE: [LeftLibertarian2] definitions

        Harry, it would be nice if you would say something related to the question,
        before you wander off and give your little cheer...

        -shawn

        --- On Fri, 9/5/08, Harry Pollard <henrygeorgeschool@...
        <mailto:henrygeorgeschool%40ca.rr.com> > wrote:

        > From: Harry Pollard <henrygeorgeschool@...
        <mailto:henrygeorgeschool%40ca.rr.com> >
        > Subject: RE: [LeftLibertarian2] definitions
        > To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:LeftLibertarian2%40yahoogroups.com>
        > Date: Friday, September 5, 2008, 4:38 PM
        > You said:
        >
        > 'If you think that these government invasions are
        > restrictions imposed
        > "by politically inspired law," then how are they
        > not exactly analogous
        > to the older restrictions we were discussing against women,
        > black
        > people, American Indians, Mexicans, etc.?'
        >
        > By George! I think he's got it!
        >
        > Harry
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:LeftLibertarian2%40yahoogroups.com>
        > [mailto:LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:LeftLibertarian2%40yahoogroups.com> ] On Behalf Of Rad
        > Geek
        > Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 2:14 PM
        > To: LeftLibertarian2@yahoogroups.com
        <mailto:LeftLibertarian2%40yahoogroups.com>
        > Subject: Re: [LeftLibertarian2] definitions
        >
        > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
        > Hash: SHA1
        >
        > Dan Ust:
        >
        > > One way it was less free was that the people
        > > who could own property and so trade was a much more
        > limited class than
        > > today.
        >
        > Harry Pollard wrote:
        >
        > > This was by politically inspired law, not by economic
        > pressure.
        > >
        > > Feel better now?
        >
        > This attempted distinction makes literally no sense at all.
        >
        > Are you claiming that the restrictions of economic freedom
        > imposed
        > *today* (by, for example, the IRS, FDA, USDA, FAA, TSA,
        > FTC, FCC, OSHA,
        > NLRB, BATFE, BLM, SEC, FDIC, federal reserve, etc., as well
        > as the
        > myriad state and local control boards, building codes,
        > zoning codes,
        > lending restrictions, hygiene laws, licensure laws, eminent
        > domain,
        > "urban renewal," "development
        > programs," etc. etc. etc.) are
        > restrictions imposed "by economic pressure" or
        > "by politically inspired
        > law"?
        >
        > If you think these government invasions are restrictions
        > imposed "by
        > economic pressure," then what in the world do you mean
        > by that?
        >
        > If you think that these government invasions are
        > restrictions imposed
        > "by politically inspired law," then how are they
        > not exactly analogous
        > to the older restrictions we were discussing against women,
        > black
        > people, American Indians, Mexicans, etc.?
        >
        > - -C
        > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
        > Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
        > Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
        > http://enigmail.mozdev.org <http://enigmail.mozdev.org>
        > <http://enigmail.mozdev.org <http://enigmail.mozdev.org> >
        >
        > iD8DBQFIwaEO1dpUSIv3yzMRAlXnAKCeN3ceO5J7DhVk2DOl9Y2VJ/+m5gCfd/hp
        > QIPOaqpSRRvsfJpidMKkJFk=
        > =g0LG
        > -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
        > Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.16/1654 - Release
        > Date: 9/5/2008
        > 1:24 PM
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >




        No virus found in this incoming message.
        Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com
        Version: 8.0.169 / Virus Database: 270.6.17/1655 - Release Date: 9/5/2008
        7:05 PM
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.