Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
Ron Paul 2012 Containment Thread Ron Paul 2012 Containment Thread

12-30-2011 , 09:28 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayo
When does the disparity in negotiating position ever favor the employee here in libertarian world?

I also always enjoy the "my ideas are not very popular, therefore everyone else must be dumb" defense.
The majority is too dumb to ever think of anything other than the status quo. There are plenty of smart people who disagree (although they typically don't favor the status quo, either). I have more respect for hard core communists than the typical soccer mom "yay my team" voter. I guarantee they have thought about the issues more. There are dumb libertarians too "I heard they want to legalize weed maaaan, sweeeet!".

The way the disparity goes toward the employee happens when the employee is highly skilled and not easy to replace. For example, look at top players in any professional sports league. Look at highly skilled technical geniuses. They have tons of leverage. Even moderately skilled technical employees get huge salary increases when they are about to leave sometimes. The less skill you have and more easily replaceable you are, the less leverage you have.

As for fly's comment, there's nothing destined about it. There is a time and place for everything. Now is not the time to try to get widespread support. There needs to be a lot more people who need to understand things strongly. Getting a critical mass is necessary first. But how it will happen is based on showing people it works. Most people cannot believe something until they see it in action. Once they actually see something, then they are more willing to look. That is the time to move for widespread support. Having a thin-based public support as the flavor of the month is not a successful long-term proposition. It's just something that will get co-opted.
12-30-2011 , 09:30 PM
The point here is clearly that such groups are racist and should be frowned upon, just as those who organize for white rights would be considered racists. I have no problem with that part as well.

We shouldn't treat people as members of little groups. We should treat people as people.
12-30-2011 , 09:31 PM
What percentage of employees are so valuable and hard to replace that they have the power to bend their company to their will on anything? Maaaaaaaaybe 1%?
12-30-2011 , 09:33 PM
I'm really curious as to what rights the whites have been fighting for. I'm missing out on the movement.
12-30-2011 , 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayo
What percentage of employees are so valuable and hard to replace that they have the power to bend their company to their will on anything? Maaaaaaaaybe 1%?
No one is that valuable. I can't think of a single employee that would ever be that valuable.

But employees are often in positions where they can more easily find a new job as good as their current one more easily than the company can find a replacement for them of the same quality.
12-30-2011 , 09:35 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by prana
I'm really curious as to what rights the whites have been fighting for. I'm missing out on the movement.
It doesn't exist. But if there was a "Congressional White Caucus" that did form, would you consider it to be some dumbass hick racist organization? Because I surely would.
12-30-2011 , 09:35 PM
Quote:
The less skill you have and more easily replaceable you are, the less leverage you have.
Yes but in today world most don't have that leverage and it's not their fault. However you shape it you will always have like 90%+ of people not having leverage while employer control resources. In normal world those property rights to resources are part of whole social order with rights protecting non-owners to keep the balance and give them chance for decent life even if they are poor and didn't luck out in birth lottery.
What libertarians want is to use men with guns to defend property rights but nothing else. It could happen that very small group of people end up owning everything in libertarian world and dictate the terms to everybody else, you have no protection against that in your utopia.
That also actually happened giving birth to union movement, labor laws etc.
The thing is that there is no reason people should respect property rights unless there are part of fair social system. Things which RP and many libertarians on this board want can't possibly be part of it.
12-30-2011 , 09:35 PM
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/20...wa.php?ref=fpa

Quote:
If you want to use your property, you have to get a lot of permits. If you’re in the development business, from the low-level all the way to the top, you have to get permission from the federal government…I’m fearful because some people would like us to go all the way to the UN and have the UN controlling our lands, too.
Dig up, Ron.
12-30-2011 , 09:36 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins
It doesn't exist. But if there was a "Congressional White Caucus" that did form, would you consider it to be some dumbass hick racist organization? Because I surely would.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus

Edit: Wait, doesn't that make you one of the people Ron Paul is complaining about?
12-30-2011 , 09:37 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ASPoker8
RP on Freedom Watch right now.
That is a rerun. Paul is appearing on Bloomberg at 9pm ET though. That is a new interview.
12-30-2011 , 09:37 PM
Oh noes a politician skeptical of government power and control - the last thing we need!
12-30-2011 , 09:38 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins
No one is that valuable. I can't think of a single employee that would ever be that valuable.
12-30-2011 , 09:38 PM
I much prefer Max Raker to FlyWf ITT. Max's posts were at least tolerable.

Last edited by Fermion5; 12-30-2011 at 09:44 PM. Reason: and Max Raker appears right on cue. lol
12-30-2011 , 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by punter11235
Yes but in today world most don't have that leverage and it's not their fault. However you shape it you will always have like 90%+ of people not having leverage while employer control resources. In normal world those property rights to resources are part of whole social order with rights protecting non-owners to keep the balance.
What libertarians want is to use men with guns to defend property rights but nothing else. It could happen that very small group of people end up owning everything in libertarian world and dictate the terms to everybody else, you have no protection against that in your utopia.
That also actually happened giving birth to union movement, labor laws etc.
The thing is that there is no reason people should respect property rights unless there are part of fair social system. Things which RP and many libertarians on this board want can't possibly be part of it.
I'm not even sure if it's true for a majority of employees. The economy sucks today, but in normal times, people change jobs very easily.

It's been a long time since we've gotten a Bill Gates might by a donut shaped property around mine scare tactic, though. Oh noes, someone might get all of the property!

There would be less consolidation of power than there is today for obvious reasons, though. We already have your worst case scenario, an the terms are already being dictated.
12-30-2011 , 09:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Raker
So valuable, he could get ANYTHING? Could he get a billion dollar contract (if the league allowed it)?
12-30-2011 , 09:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins
So valuable, he could get ANYTHING? Could he get a billion dollar contract (if the league allowed it)?
I wasn't being totally serious....obv there exists some dollar amount that is not worth paying for any employee. But his point was how many people are important enough to where they can change the company and I think Lebron fits that category. Like if he said he would stay in Cleveland iff they hired some specific coach/GM or even something crazy like they can't serve hotdogs during games I think they would have been better off doing it. Of course not literally any request...but certainly for quite a few things.
12-30-2011 , 09:44 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins
It doesn't exist. But if there was a "Congressional White Caucus" that did form, would you consider it to be some dumbass hick racist organization? Because I surely would.
Then I'm curious what groups RP is talking about that got called bigots for organizing to fight for white rights. That quote sure seems to be him saying we should just do away with them because the white groups can't get their foot in the door because when they try they get called bigots.
12-30-2011 , 09:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tea_Party_Caucus

Edit: Wait, doesn't that make you one of the people Ron Paul is complaining about?
You forgot about this guy fly

12-30-2011 , 09:48 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by prana
Then I'm curious what groups RP is talking about that got called bigots for organizing to fight for white rights. That quote sure seems to be him saying we should just do away with them because the white groups can't get their foot in the door because when they try they get called bigots.
lol excellent question
12-30-2011 , 09:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by TomCollins
I'm not even sure if it's true for a majority of employees. The economy sucks today, but in normal times, people change jobs very easily.
It's never exactly "easy" for most people. Especially if you've had to quit your job unexpectedly because your boss was sexually harassing you and that was your only recourse. Now the best case scenario is that you're living off your savings for a few weeks or months until you find another job. And hopefully it's a new job in your hometown so you don't have to sell the house, take the kids out of school, and move a hundred miles down the interstate. Oh and in the meantime you've got no health insurance. And you've lost your retirement benefits you were banking on. Etc, etc, etc.

My point here is that for 90% of us, if we lost our job tomorrow out of nowhere, life would really suck for us, no matter how qualified and desirable an employee we might be. And that is what Ron Paul suggests we be forced to do if we don't want to tolerate being sexually harassed.
12-30-2011 , 09:55 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystery Author
All across the country, black, Hispanic, and Asian clubs and caucuses are thought to be fine expressions of ethnic solidarity, but any club or association expressly for whites is by definition racist. The National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) campaigns openly for black advantage but is a respected "civil rights" organization. The National Association for the Advancement of White People (NAAWP) campaigns merely for equal treatment of all races, but is said to be viciously racist.
Two questions about this block quote, libertarians only please:

1) Do any of you guys have a guess at who wrote this?

2) Is there anything objectionable about it?
12-30-2011 , 09:57 PM
assuming its true i don't have a problem with it.

if the NAAWP (never heard of it) actually campaigns for enslavement of blacks or something instead of equal treatment of all races, obviously it's not cool.
12-30-2011 , 09:59 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Raker
I wasn't being totally serious....obv there exists some dollar amount that is not worth paying for any employee. But his point was how many people are important enough to where they can change the company and I think Lebron fits that category. Like if he said he would stay in Cleveland iff they hired some specific coach/GM or even something crazy like they can't serve hotdogs during games I think they would have been better off doing it. Of course not literally any request...but certainly for quite a few things.
Sure, professional athletes, CEOs, and the very elite are the most likely to be able to demand a LOT and still be worth it. Some people have more leverage than others.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mayo
It's never exactly "easy" for most people. Especially if you've had to quit your job unexpectedly because your boss was sexually harassing you and that was your only recourse. Now the best case scenario is that you're living off your savings for a few weeks or months until you find another job. And hopefully it's a new job in your hometown so you don't have to sell the house, take the kids out of school, and move a hundred miles down the interstate. Oh and in the meantime you've got no health insurance. And you've lost your retirement benefits you were banking on. Etc, etc, etc.

My point here is that for 90% of us, if we lost our job tomorrow out of nowhere, life would really suck for us, no matter how qualified and desirable an employee we might be. And that is what Ron Paul suggests we be forced to do if we don't want to tolerate being sexually harassed.
Who said you have to quit instantly? 90%? You are way off (assuming normal economy).

Quote:
Originally Posted by prana
Then I'm curious what groups RP is talking about that got called bigots for organizing to fight for white rights. That quote sure seems to be him saying we should just do away with them because the white groups can't get their foot in the door because when they try they get called bigots.
There are groups that have formed and they are typically idiots who do it just to make a point. You are missing the point, though. He even says that when you start thinking of us vs. them, it's a counterproductive situation. It's better to just treat people as people.
12-30-2011 , 10:02 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWf
Two questions about this block quote, libertarians only please:

1) Do any of you guys have a guess at who wrote this?

2) Is there anything objectionable about it?
Don't care who wrote it. The part how it's explicitly racist is wrong. There are plenty of white groups that aren't considered racist (Italian clubs, for example). It's possible that NAAWP is more likely to attract racist whites to it.

But if you made a scholarship that was only allowed to have white people get it, it certainly would be considered racist. If you make a scholarship targeted for black people, you are considered someone who cares about the downtrodden. So there is somewhat of a point.
12-30-2011 , 10:02 PM
The author is someone that everyone reading this will have heard of, to clarify my quiz.

      
m