Lou Dobbs Stroking his own EGO on his show!

If the populists had their way, everything that came out of factories would be destroyed (to insure high prices!), there would be no managers, and ditch diggers would be paid more than engineers, and trade with other nationgs would be punishible by death.
 
Darla said:
I see. And when these "competitive prices" are pushed lower and lower, who gets hurt?
Click to expand...

No proof whatsoever that that is likely.

If any of you statist really gave a crap about labor prices then you would concern yourselves more with the government's devaluing of those prices via inflation. Laborers are probably the least equipped to understand and adjust to the distortion of inflation.
 
RStringfield said:
No proof whatsoever that that is likely.

If any of you statist really gave a crap about labor prices then you would concern yourselves more with the government's devaluing of those prices via inflation. Laborers are probably the least equipped to understand and adjust to the distortion of inflation.
Click to expand...


There is no evidence (the correct word) of this whatsoever, really?

So the wages of let us say, construction workers have not fallen when faced with a glut of cheap labor?
 
Since this thread is still at the top of the list I will once again repeat the only thing that ever need be said about Lou Dobbs.

Lou Dobbs is an ignorant, rabble-rousing, protectionist moron.
 
Darla said:
There is no evidence (the correct word) of this whatsoever, really?
Click to expand...

Nothing wrong with the word proof here. Sorry, I don't acknowledge the religious connotations of your definitions, so please don't bore me with horseshit.

So the wages of let us say, construction workers have not fallen when faced with a glut of cheap labor?
Click to expand...

If you can offer some PROOF they have, then do so.
 
RStringfield said:
Nothing wrong with the word proof here. Sorry, I don't acknowledge the religious connotations of your definitions, so please don't bore me with horseshit.



If you can offer some PROOF they have, then do so.
Click to expand...

No it's not a religious thing, it's just how those words are correctly used. Very little, if anything can actually be "proved". When making a case for anything, you don't provide "proof" you provide evidence. This evidence can compile into an overwhelming case for or against something. I'm sorry, I thought it was kind of common knowledge. It's certainly not horseshit, religious or otherwise.

I also thought that the falling wages in the construction business, was common knowledge.

Here is one article about it, I'm sure you can find others if you actually want knowledge, and not just to score points on a message board. Because while it varies from state to state, it is widespread and it has been discussed quite a lot.

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/...2007&base_name=thomas_friedman_explains_immig
 
Darla said:
No it's not a religious thing, it's just how those words are correctly used. Very little, if anything can actually be "proved". When making a case for anything, you don't provide "proof" you provide evidence. This evidence can compile into an overwhelming case for or against something. I'm sorry, I thought it was kind of common knowledge. It's certainly not horseshit, religious or otherwise.
Click to expand...

Proof, used in the context I used, means little more than evidence. "Common knowledge" would read it exactly that way.

http://www.answers.com/topic/proof

The idea that everyone must adhere to your narrow definition strikes me as having religious overtones. I don't really care how you use it, nor do I care about your philosophical confusion about the nature of reality and man's capacity to grasp it.

I also thought that the falling wages in the construction business, was common knowledge.

Here is one article about it, I'm sure you can find others if you actually want knowledge, and not just to score points on a message board. Because while it varies from state to state, it is widespread and it has been discussed quite a lot.

http://www.prospect.org/csnc/blogs/...2007&base_name=thomas_friedman_explains_immig
Click to expand...

Sure took you long enough to find something that is supposedly common knowledge.

This tells us nothing about why the wages declined. Wages, decline and rise in different industries with or without immigration.

Artificially increasing the price, by restricting labor supply, would lower demand for this work meaning less jobs, until the price found it's equilibrium. it is not likely that wages would rise much but you might put a lot more people out of work.

Also, this is a narrow field.
 
RStringfield said:
Proof, used in the context I used, means little more than evidence. "Common knowledge" would read it exactly that way.

http://www.answers.com/topic/proof

The idea that everyone must adhere to your narrow definition strikes me as having religious overtones. I don't really care how you use it, nor do I care about your philosophical confusion about the nature of reality and man's capacity to grasp it.



Sure took you long enough to find something that is supposedly common knowledge.

This tells us nothing about why the wages declined. Wages, decline and rise in different industries with or without immigration.

Artificially increasing the price, by restricting labor supply, would lower demand for this work meaning less jobs, until the price found it's equilibrium. it is not likely that wages would rise much but you might put a lot more people out of work.

Also, this is a narrow field.
Click to expand...


So you are saying that proof means evidence? Actually they are two different things, but lets not get caught up with that, it's unimportant really, i was just surprised you didn't know that. The two words would certainly never be mixed up by an intellectual or an academic and you always seem to be one or the other, but maybe I am wrong, and it's not a big deal.

It didn't take me long at all, just a quick google, believe it or not I was not sitting around and waiting for your answer.

You are spouting here, ideology and offering no evidence whatsoever. That is what you believe, that is what must be. I told you if you are interested in knowledge and not just scoring points and defending an ideology, look into it yourself.

It's widespread, and widely written about. You can probably find articles about it in your own local newspaper archives if you want to find out how it is affecting your own community.
 
Darla said:
So you are saying that proof means evidence? Actually they are two different things, but lets not get caught up with that, it's unimportant really, i was just surprised you didn't know that. The two words would certainly never be mixed up by an intellectual or an academic and you always seem to be one or the other, but maybe I am wrong, and it's not a big deal.
Click to expand...

You don't seem to be able to follow a link so here is the very first definition...

proof (prūf)
n.
The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.
Click to expand...


You are spouting here, ideology and offering no evidence whatsoever. That is what you believe, that is what must be. I told you if you are interested in knowledge and not just scoring points and defending an ideology, look into it yourself.
Click to expand...

You need evidence that prices fluctuate, that construction is not the totality of job market and that higher prices for a good will reduce demand?

It's widespread, and widely written about. You can probably find articles about it in your own local newspaper archives if you want to find out how it is affecting your own community.
Click to expand...

I have found several articles. Even the ones that are critical are not stupid enough to attribute all price fluctuation to immigration.
 
Hey guys... let's stop giving Lou Dobbs the thread satisfaction and attention.

Only President Ron Paul deserves such unchecked popularity.
 
RStringfield said:
You don't seem to be able to follow a link so here is the very first definition...






You need evidence that prices fluctuate, that construction is not the totality of job market and that higher prices for a good will reduce demand?



I have found several articles. Even the ones that are critical are not stupid enough to attribute all price fluctuation to immigration.
Click to expand...

Oh of course not all of it, I don't think I ever said that.

But a glut of cheap labor seems to have driven construction wages downward. Which makes sense, gosh, it's the free market at work, basic supply and demand. I don't know why anyone would argue against that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top