But...but...the person on your side of the argument just said

Workers can walk away from the job if they don't like it, and get a new one.

I'm so confused!

In that case, libertarians would never complain about jobs being shipped overseas, or high unemployment numbers as a result of this, right?

International trade isn't an "artificial" constraint, nor does international trade conflict in the slightest with libertarian ideology.

If he doesn't believe he can find a better job, he's a fool to even consider walking away.

Walking off the job when there are millions of people ready to replace you is stupid. This is just common sense, and not at all a "cruel" observation.

Its an artificial constraint when the companies that employ you used the "protectionist" policies, relatively free access to natural resources, the right to own private property and grow capital, access to domestic markets, corporate personhood status, and all of the other factors that allowed the American company to build itself to a point where it became profitable enough to lobby gov't to make offshoring the preferred mode of business, immediately throwing the entire middle class into the deep end with no life preserver.

Joe, you are being very shortsighted here. I think most people at Wal-Mart realize they may well be fired if they walk off the job. But if enough of them do it, and enough attention is brought to the fact that assistmant managers at Wal-Mart make $14K a year, hopefully enough zombies will wake up and realize that maybe they should boycott this corporate bully. Many people make sacrifices every day for the GOOD OF SOCIETY.

Not really. Market forces don't stop working at the lines drawn on maps. There's certainly a lot of crony capitalism in the U.S., but the entirety of international trade hasn't been some big conspiracy meant to screw the little guy.

I just want to scream when I see people fighting each other over the crumbs thrown to them by the big kahunas at the top.

Also, shame on you, Sam, for allowing Joe to skitter out from under his disavowing of FOX News with your planking or whatever.

good of society," only the size of their paychecks.

I've also not seen any shoppers threaten to boycott Walmart, but perhaps I missed it.

I didn't say it was, I'm all for international trade. I do like bananas and pineapple and cinnamon. Modern globalist trade policy isn't about bringing goods to a wider market, it is designed entirely to benefit corporate players at the direct expense of the masses. A middle class, if you want one at all, is dependent on regulation of corporations and eliminating offshoring. There will always be a country somewhere that is desperate enough to offer corporate concessions (e.g. lax environmental laws) and cheaper labour. Right now its China, and when the people there start getting uppity the mulitnationals will move somewhere else.

If it continues this way long enough, we'll have a small class of super rich, no middle class and billions of people so poor it would make the North American definition of poverty seem like something to strive for.

Well, the North American definition of poverty actually *is* something to strive for, at least for about two-thirds of the world's population.

Well, the North American definition of poverty actually *is* something to strive for, at least for about two-thirds of the world's population.

I've also not seen any shoppers threaten to boycott Walmart, but perhaps I missed it

We're getting close to the point where staying at home without a lower-income job brings as much money (welfare) in as actually having the job (wages/benefits) does.

I realize that, but since we have unlimted intellectual capacity as a planet, we should wake up and realize that there is no practical limit to the amount of people that can be elevated out of poverty.

I can elevate a large fraction of the people out of poverty right now, by re-defining the poverty line down to a point where all the people below it actually are living in true poverty. Right now the placement of the line is not rationally related to what true poverty is.

I can elevate a large fraction of the people out of poverty right now, by re-defining the poverty line down to a point where all the people below it actually are living in true poverty.

I was the one who made the point. The point was that you are currently apoplectic - or, to be fair, fervently arguing - a point so bizarrely biased that even FOX NEWS doesn't dare do the same. In my opinion, this should tell you something about said point. YMMV.

Way to qualify. I'd be curious who said that, because it's gotten no play.

2012 presidential campaign was a negative one with limited coattails in the House.

I guess Debbie Wasserman Schultz, et al., were just faking us out — and stealing money from dumb donors — when they spoke of retaking the House for the past two years.

It can't be that, unless you accomplish every goal that everyone associated with the party says you can/will do, a particular election cycle is a failure.

Number of non-liberals on the last five pages or so: 2 or 3.

For the purposes of discussion here (and the political culture of the United States) I guess I count as a liberal. But it's not something I'd think to self-apply

Perhaps Robinred has on his list a slew of non-liberals who made imaginary

I explained this a few pages ago, and I don't need a list, since I can actually remember exchanges on BTF and who says what to whom.

The irascible douche now acknowledges there is no evidence that Susan Rice was responsible for editing CIA talking points after the Benghazi attack, and that the DNI gave her what she subsequently went on TV with. End of scandal. No formal retraction or apology of course.

we need to stop letting people choose to not be schooled because the cost of their choice of staying ignorant is to great

I don't need a list, since I can actually remember exchanges on BTF and who says what to whom.

The irascible douche now acknowledges there is no evidence that Susan Rice was responsible for editing CIA talking points after the Benghazi attack, and that the DNI gave her what she subsequently went on TV with. End of scandal. No formal retraction or apology of course.

The irascible douche

now acknowledges there is no evidence that Susan Rice was responsible for editing CIA talking points after the Benghazi attack, and that the DNI gave her what she subsequently went on TV with. End of scandal. No formal retraction or apology of course.

we need to stop letting people choose to not be schooled because the cost of their choice of staying ignorant is to great

So you favor increased government subsidies for college tuition? It seems like everyone is already going who possibly can afford to go, and driving themselves into six-figure debt in order to do so. It's been considered essential for at least a generation. People who don't go are hardly "choosing" not to.

With the shape of the economy that we now have, finishing high school hardly matters if you're not continuing to college.

i think the 'modern' college/university is an overpriced stalling device where too little learning and too much leisure is experienced by the participants.

i would disagree. there are other options than college if the individual is willing to commit or have others commit on his/her behalf.

college is not for everyone nor is it intended for everyone. frankly, i think the 'modern' college/university is an overpriced stalling device where too little learning and too much leisure is experienced by the participants.

frankly, i think the 'modern' college/university is an overpriced stalling device where too little learning and too much leisure is experienced by the participants.

Whether subsidies have driven costs up or not, that horse is out of the barn. Tuition prices are not going to come back down, and students need to pay them somehow. It's the same as anything else--prices do not come down once they've gone up, no matter the reason.

nothing is static nor should we accept that condition

I'd consider myself pretty down the middle (but really, who doesn't?).

Rain Man territory.

Well, I am a Reds fan. Definitely not into Judge Wapner though.

Mostly it is being good at remembering names (or, in this case, the analog, handles) and paying attention to what people write.

would this be a bad time for me to say i'm thankful for this crazy country of ours

and the weirdos who argue about anything and everything on btf?

Started holiday drinking tonight, I see.

I'd consider myself pretty down the middle (but really, who doesn't?).

One thing I have noticed is that the things the government subsidizes all increase in price at greater than inflation. Namely, higher education, medical care, and housing.

Gasoline pricing is skewed by a cartel. Over the longer run, the price of food is lower.

Walmart Allows Its Workers To Unionize In Other Countries, Just Not In The United States

but part of the problem is the complete inability of many on the right to comprehend that a social welfare safety net/ workplace regulations/ environmental regulations system IS NOT SOCIALISM

come back to me when there is an actual serious effort at nationalization, collectivization and curbing of private property rights etc.

Honestly, the regard liberals have for the intelligence of the people they are trying to "educate" is stunningly low.

And soon will be even for Americans who are above that line. We're getting close to the point where staying at home without a lower-income job brings as much money (welfare) in as actually having the job (wages/benefits) does. In that case, there is utterly no real incentive to work.

Walmart was given little choice, in those cases. It's only in the US, where it's more able to buy the appropriate legislation, that it can pseudolegally circumvent unionization.

It seems like an awful lot of hassle. I'm pretty cheap, but the convenience of not trampling young children at midnight is worth a fair amount to me.