What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1

[Valox]

Supervised video games are allowing for better corporate training, leading to a better prepared and more productive workforce.

Technologies developed for pc.-consol-. games, have been adapted in the fields of
education and advertising to provide innovative solutions that would have
otherwise been unaffordable.


!!The entertainment software industry employs large numbers of highly
educated engineers and computer scientists, and these workers are well compensated for the
human capital they possess.!!

Clearly, the entertainment software industry is not just about “fun and games.” It is a
serious business that improves training, efficiency, and productivity in a variety of industries and has led to innovation in other high-technology industries. Videogames play an important role in maintaining U.S. leadership in information technology, which is critical to the future success of the U.S. economy.

You are a good little corporatist. However, most sane people know that break throughs in video gaming did not happen through supervision, but through innovation that was not guided by the state.

This is another corporate BS post.

 

[bripat9643]

Wow, citing the law and its interpetations of facsist?.

When you claim the government is free to interpret the Constitution any way it wants, and that it's determination is the only correct one, then you are a fascists. If you were in Germany during the 30s, you would have been saluting the Fuhrer along with all the other Nazis. I can easily imagine you at your war crimes trial explaining how you were just following orders. After all, who questions the decisions of government officials? Certainly not the likes of you.

and thats what makes arguing with liberals so frustrating....we actually have facts and figures to back themselves up as opposed to blind partisan rhetoric spoon fed to them by the FauxNews masters..

What you don't have is a brain capabal of rational independent thought. You believe what you are told to believe. You have already admitted that. You're a goosestepping drone.

You are obviously a slave. Keep enjoying your servitude, serfboy.

You're the one who just admitted that you accept the word of government officials without question. What kind of attituded could be more servile than that?

ETA:

You know whats funny...United States vs Butler which recognized that Congress has this power, stuck down parts of FDR's New Deal....in other words, it was a CONSERVATIVE court ( dominated by Hoover, Taft and Harding nominees )that said this. HAHAHAHAHAH if only you people BOTHERED to even understand your own partys history.

The fact that an incorrect decision may have had some good results does not make it anymore correct.

 

[koshergrl]

And I will add...

Was/IS it government's responsibility to take over the charity role private citizens are quite capable of handling on thier own?

Sorry. You're going to lose me if you expect me to count on the good will of others.

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

 

[copsnrobbers]

Sorry. You're going to lose me if you expect me to count on the good will of others.

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

I'm on your side... greenie on the way!

 

[koshergrl]

why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

i'm on your side... Greenie on the way!

:d

 

[Vidi]

Sorry. You're going to lose me if you expect me to count on the good will of others.

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

Actually I negged you because you and the rest of your ignoramus friends argue with facts, ignore the Constitution, and desperately need a civics class.

 

[bripat9643]

Actually I negged you because you and the rest of your ignoramus friends argue with facts, ignore the Constitution, and desperately need a civics class.

Here's a fact: you're a servile bootlicking Nazi asshole.

 

[Foxfyre]

Sorry. You're going to lose me if you expect me to count on the good will of others.

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

Oh lordy, how will you ever recover from that whopping -7 rep points????? But you're right. It speaks volumes when somebody says they expect anybody to take care of them other than themselves. It goes right to the heart of the entitlement mentality that I put #1 on the list of what has screwed this country up. And the fact that most leftists/liberals cannot or will not see or understand that is another thing that makes arguing with liberals so frustrating.

 

[copsnrobbers]

There is a reason for the Blue below this post. Many have been listed above this post and beyond.

 

[UpAndAbout]

Those who stay in school, actually educate themselves, and graduate. . . .those who stay mostly away from controlled substances and illegal activities. . . those who do whatever apprentice or odd jobs or part time work or take low end "Mcjobs" to learn a trade and/or acquire marketable skills, develop a work ethic, acquire references, etc.. . . .those who wait until they are married to have kids. . . .and those who are willing to start at the bottom in order to move up the ladder and/or get to the top. . . . . such folks will almost always earn a living wage and more.

One of the frustrating things about arguing with many liberals is that they think they are owed or entitled to a living wage among other things. They see it as their right for their employer to pay them that living wage regardless of how much their labor is worth. They see it as their right to have an employer who acts as more of a benevolent monarch providing for the people's every need. Of course many have been conditioned to look at government that way too.

Conservatives look at labor as just another commodity not any different than inputs, raw materials, infrastructure, transportation, or any other costs of doing business.

By the time you figure in waste, employee theft, inventory, and the cost of providing, maintaining, and making usable facilities, record keeping, plus mandatory licensing, taxes, and insurance, the profit on an Egg McMuffin or Quarter Pounder is pretty small. A huge volume is necessary to meet payroll and provide a profit for the employer who is risking a very large chunk of change operating that McDonalds.

Therefore, even in a very good McDonalds, the value of any one employee's labor is worth only as much as the price of product sold because he/she is there less all the costs of producing that product including a reasonable profit for the owner. Pay the worker more than the customer is willing to pay for the product and the business will eventually have to close and the worker will have no income at all.

Of course it is a two way street. Without the employees, the employer will also not be able to turn a profit and the business closes. In the free market, the employer and employees negotiate wages that serve the needs of both and still allow a profit for the employer. When that no longer is possible, there is no longer a McDonalds there.

Some of our more leftist/liberal friends here seem to think a profit should not be a factor in what the employees get paid.

So, what do you think? think any liberals own a McDonald's franchise? The businesses that ARE owned by liberals, who do they pay the employees $20.00 an hour? regardless if they've graduated high school or not? somehow I don't think so.

 

[initforme]

The simple cure is never, no matter how much education you dont have, work for less than $10 per hour. Nobody should EVER gladly take those jobs as those I do believe should be OUTLAWED by our laws as a form of slavery. Let those businesses shut down and I will show up and CHEER that they are going down.

 

[Foxfyre]

Those who stay in school, actually educate themselves, and graduate. . . .those who stay mostly away from controlled substances and illegal activities. . . those who do whatever apprentice or odd jobs or part time work or take low end "Mcjobs" to learn a trade and/or acquire marketable skills, develop a work ethic, acquire references, etc.. . . .those who wait until they are married to have kids. . . .and those who are willing to start at the bottom in order to move up the ladder and/or get to the top. . . . . such folks will almost always earn a living wage and more.

One of the frustrating things about arguing with many liberals is that they think they are owed or entitled to a living wage among other things. They see it as their right for their employer to pay them that living wage regardless of how much their labor is worth. They see it as their right to have an employer who acts as more of a benevolent monarch providing for the people's every need. Of course many have been conditioned to look at government that way too.

Conservatives look at labor as just another commodity not any different than inputs, raw materials, infrastructure, transportation, or any other costs of doing business.

By the time you figure in waste, employee theft, inventory, and the cost of providing, maintaining, and making usable facilities, record keeping, plus mandatory licensing, taxes, and insurance, the profit on an Egg McMuffin or Quarter Pounder is pretty small. A huge volume is necessary to meet payroll and provide a profit for the employer who is risking a very large chunk of change operating that McDonalds.

Therefore, even in a very good McDonalds, the value of any one employee's labor is worth only as much as the price of product sold because he/she is there less all the costs of producing that product including a reasonable profit for the owner. Pay the worker more than the customer is willing to pay for the product and the business will eventually have to close and the worker will have no income at all.

Of course it is a two way street. Without the employees, the employer will also not be able to turn a profit and the business closes. In the free market, the employer and employees negotiate wages that serve the needs of both and still allow a profit for the employer. When that no longer is possible, there is no longer a McDonalds there.

Some of our more leftist/liberal friends here seem to think a profit should not be a factor in what the employees get paid.

So, what do you think? think any liberals own a McDonald's franchise? The businesses that ARE owned by liberals, who do they pay the employees $20.00 an hour? regardless if they've graduated high school or not? somehow I don't think so.

Dunno. I know a few McDonald (and Burger King and Wendy's and Arby's etc.) owners, but never inquired into any of their politics or ideology. (In my recently closed business, I audited several such chains on a regular basis.)

But whether a person is a flaming tree hugging liberal or a radical Bible thumping, gun toting conservative, it doesn't make any difference. If they are paying more for labor than that labor generates in profits, they won't be able to stay in business for long. And again, those who make themselves more valuable than their starting wage usually don't stay at that wage for long either.

And as probably most of us accepted mininum wage or well below the median prevailing wage when we first entered the work force--I've done it many times when we were frequently moving from place to place--I strongly object to any suggestion that nobody accept less than a 'living wage' and just let all those lower paying businesses go out of business. I can think of no better prescription for doubling unemployment over night and ensuring that our young people never develop a work ethic and never have a chance to acquire marketable skills.

 

[IndependntLogic]

Those who stay in school, actually educate themselves, and graduate. . . .those who stay mostly away from controlled substances and illegal activities. . . those who do whatever apprentice or odd jobs or part time work or take low end "Mcjobs" to learn a trade and/or acquire marketable skills, develop a work ethic, acquire references, etc.. . . .those who wait until they are married to have kids. . . .and those who are willing to start at the bottom in order to move up the ladder and/or get to the top. . . . . such folks will almost always earn a living wage and more.

One of the frustrating things about arguing with many liberals is that they think they are owed or entitled to a living wage among other things. They see it as their right for their employer to pay them that living wage regardless of how much their labor is worth. They see it as their right to have an employer who acts as more of a benevolent monarch providing for the people's every need. Of course many have been conditioned to look at government that way too.

Conservatives look at labor as just another commodity not any different than inputs, raw materials, infrastructure, transportation, or any other costs of doing business.

By the time you figure in waste, employee theft, inventory, and the cost of providing, maintaining, and making usable facilities, record keeping, plus mandatory licensing, taxes, and insurance, the profit on an Egg McMuffin or Quarter Pounder is pretty small. A huge volume is necessary to meet payroll and provide a profit for the employer who is risking a very large chunk of change operating that McDonalds.

Therefore, even in a very good McDonalds, the value of any one employee's labor is worth only as much as the price of product sold because he/she is there less all the costs of producing that product including a reasonable profit for the owner. Pay the worker more than the customer is willing to pay for the product and the business will eventually have to close and the worker will have no income at all.

Of course it is a two way street. Without the employees, the employer will also not be able to turn a profit and the business closes. In the free market, the employer and employees negotiate wages that serve the needs of both and still allow a profit for the employer. When that no longer is possible, there is no longer a McDonalds there.

Some of our more leftist/liberal friends here seem to think a profit should not be a factor in what the employees get paid.

So, what do you think? think any liberals own a McDonald's franchise? The businesses that ARE owned by liberals, who do they pay the employees $20.00 an hour? regardless if they've graduated high school or not? somehow I don't think so.

Dunno. I know a few McDonald (and Burger King and Wendy's and Arby's etc.) owners, but never inquired into any of their politics or ideology. (In my recently closed business, I audited several such chains on a regular basis.)

But whether a person is a flaming tree hugging liberal or a radical Bible thumping, gun toting conservative, it doesn't make any difference. If they are paying more for labor than that labor generates in profits, they won't be able to stay in business for long. And again, those who make themselves more valuable than their starting wage usually don't stay at that wage for long either.

And as probably most of us accepted mininum wage or well below the median prevailing wage when we first entered the work force--I've done it many times when we were frequently moving from place to place--I strongly object to any suggestion that nobody accept less than a 'living wage' and just let all those lower paying businesses go out of business. I can think of no better prescription for doubling unemployment over night and ensuring that our young people never develop a work ethic and never have a chance to acquire marketable skills.

Very solid post. Logical, smart and devoid of the usual whackjob ranting. While I believe there should be a minimum wage ( as do most people who have lived in countries where there isn't one - I would never want to see us become like India or China), I don't believe in the "living wage" BS that so many have been spewing lately. I would prefer not to pay $15 for a Big Mac tyvm. Also, a wage that high for menial jobs eliminates the motivation to improve one's self so you can get a better job.
I remember having to work for really low wages as a youngster and all I could think was "when I'm older, I'm going to do what it takes to earn more than THIS!". That wouldn't have happened if I had been making the equivalent of $20 / hour - which would have been all the money in the world to a kid.

 

[Foxfyre]

So, what do you think? think any liberals own a McDonald's franchise? The businesses that ARE owned by liberals, who do they pay the employees $20.00 an hour? regardless if they've graduated high school or not? somehow I don't think so.

Dunno. I know a few McDonald (and Burger King and Wendy's and Arby's etc.) owners, but never inquired into any of their politics or ideology. (In my recently closed business, I audited several such chains on a regular basis.)

But whether a person is a flaming tree hugging liberal or a radical Bible thumping, gun toting conservative, it doesn't make any difference. If they are paying more for labor than that labor generates in profits, they won't be able to stay in business for long. And again, those who make themselves more valuable than their starting wage usually don't stay at that wage for long either.

And as probably most of us accepted mininum wage or well below the median prevailing wage when we first entered the work force--I've done it many times when we were frequently moving from place to place--I strongly object to any suggestion that nobody accept less than a 'living wage' and just let all those lower paying businesses go out of business. I can think of no better prescription for doubling unemployment over night and ensuring that our young people never develop a work ethic and never have a chance to acquire marketable skills.

Very solid post. Logical, smart and devoid of the usual whackjob ranting. While I believe there should be a minimum wage ( as do most people who have lived in countries where there isn't one - I would never want to see us become like India or China), I don't believe in the "living wage" BS that so many have been spewing lately. I would prefer not to pay $15 for a Big Mac tyvm. Also, a wage that high for menial jobs eliminates the motivation to improve one's self so you can get a better job.
I remember having to work for really low wages as a youngster and all I could think was "when I'm older, I'm going to do what it takes to earn more than THIS!". That wouldn't have happened if I had been making the equivalent of $20 / hour - which would have been all the money in the world to a kid.

Yep. Me too. I've worked for as little as 50 cents per hour babysitting and as much as $150/hour for very specialized (and short term) jobs for which I was uniquely qualified. Top of the line medical professionals, lawyers, engineers, architects, etc. can command considerably more than that.

But whether a person is functionally illiterate or holds multiple PhD's, there is only so much value in flipping burgers or fishing french fries out of the deep fryer. People are precious, but the labor they sell to an employer is only going to be worth so much. Those who aspire to or who need more income that what that type of labor is worth should plan to qualify themselves for work that pays more. Or, while they are looking for that better job, they may have to work overtime or take a second job to tie them over.

To an employer who is looking for skilled labor, there aren't too many things on a resume that are more impressive than the fact that the person is currently working and looking to better himself/herself. I have sometimes worried about an applicant being over qualified for the work I had available for him/her, but I have never thought it a negative for a person to be working at menial labor while looking for a better position. Being unemployed isn't necessarily the kiss of death, but it is almost always a negative. And the longer a person is unemployed, the more of a negative it becomes.

 

[koshergrl]

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

Actually I negged you because you and the rest of your ignoramus friends argue with facts, ignore the Constitution, and desperately need a civics class.

Wrong on all counts.

 

[koshergrl]

I wonder what facts I argued against, and who my ignoramus friends are???

 

[Vidi]

It is the primary role of the Supreme Court to decide the Constitutionality of the laws of the land.

That this Constitution has provided continuous democratic government through the periodic stresses of more than two centuries illustrates the genius of the American system of government. The complex role of the Supreme Court in this system derives from its authority to invalidate legislation or executive actions which, in the Court’ s considered judgment, conflict with the Constitution. This power of “judicial review” has given the Court a crucial responsibility in assuring individual rights, as well as in maintaining a “living Constitution” whose broad provisions are continually applied to complicated new situations.*

U.S. Supreme Court Jurisdiction

It's one thing to disagree with the decisions the court makes, it's quite another thing to deny the powers the court has been given by the Constitution.

One is the realm of free thinking citizens ( regardless of their politics ), the other is simply the function of an ignorant mob.

 

[The T]

I wonder what facts I argued against, and who my ignoramus friends are???

You have a friend here. Ignoramus?I've been called worse. That's life hon...



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIiUqfxFttM"]Frank Sinatra - That's Life - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Cecilie1200]

Sorry. You're going to lose me if you expect me to count on the good will of others.

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

Nah. She sent the exact same blank neg to everyone who dared to question or criticize her blind devotion to her beloved, omnipotent, and infallible government instead of falling into rank and shouting, "Heil!" as is proper.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Why on earth do you count on anyone other than yourself in the first place?

vidi negged me for this one. Apparently only dumbasses think people should aim for self sufficiency.

Actually I negged you because you and the rest of your ignoramus friends argue with facts, ignore the Constitution, and desperately need a civics class.

In other words, as I said, Fraulein Vidi negged everyone who dared to disagree with her slavish devotion to the Fatherland and its benevolent, infallible government.