Slaving for 28.8 hours ?

I am not saying the government has a part of this but IT IS NOT A ONE WAY STREET....it is a mutual agreement when you work for someone, and ethics do and should come in to play....and so should give and take...and the attitude like waters is why our wages are going down, this defeatist, business rules all CRAP...just like with our government letting business RULE ALL, and I say, BULLSHIT....that is not what has made America a strong and prosperous nation....we'd be in China if that is what they want...imo.

No argument here. We have the power to affect change without the use of violence though. We can start by refraining from purchasing Volkswagen products and anything related to them as well as telling others about this and encouraging others to do the same.

I suspect some will scoff at this but it has worked to a degree with Wal-Mart.
 
As long as American culture is materialistic expect the amount of hours worked by its members to go up not down.

People love their SUVs, lattes, designer apparel etc. This demand must be met with money that comes from long hours of work.

If we adopted an ascetic lifestyle we would find the demand for cash would plummet.
 
IHateGovernment said:
I stipulated earlier, however, that they are competitive. They are not dominant, no, but that's immaterial. Dominance is not necessary for a healthy economy.

they are competitive especially in some sectors. My original point in this thread was that this was part of the reason the US is dominant. I never said Europe was not competitive at all. As for the value of dominance for the typical American such as Rob this dominance is necessary to preserve our gluttonous lifestyles. Switch to a European model and much must be given up.
Click to expand...
For most Americans there wouldn't be that much to give up. Nor for the wealthiest either. It would only be onerous for the upper middle income people: the bottom two thirds of the top quintile, basically. And even then, I don't think the adjustments would be all that difficult.

We're going to be forced into these lifestyle changes whether we wish to or not. I believe it would be rational -- not to mention easier -- to begin forcing them by regulation now, rather than waiting for the excrement to contact the rotating blades.
 
For most Americans there wouldn't be that much to give up. Nor for the wealthiest either. It would only be onerous for the upper middle income people: the bottom two thirds of the top quintile, basically. And even then, I don't think the adjustments would be all that difficult.

I disagree I see everyone from the upper lower class spending like this all the way to the top. Consumerism and materialism are more entrenched in American culture than ideals of freedom and religion. Consumerism is America's religion. I even call Christmas "Compulsory Capitalism Day" because that is what it is.
 
If people in the country only bought what they deeded, the economy would collapse. Our economy is 2/3 built on what you and I spend.
But if we made it thru the hard times it would come back based more on reality as opposed to waste.
 
We're going to be forced into these lifestyle changes whether we wish to or not. I believe it would be rational -- not to mention easier -- to begin forcing them by regulation now, rather than waiting for the excrement to contact the rotating blades.

You and I differ on this point. I don't believe in forcing people to become agents of social modeling and restructuring. Society must be formed by the actions of the entire body whether the results are beneficial or damning. No man can live in a just society and be conscripted into being an agent for the creation of a social model created by others that will ultimately be crafted in a manner they see as beneficial to their interests.
 
IHateGovernment said:
As long as American culture is materialistic expect the amount of hours worked by its members to go up not down.

People love their SUVs, lattes, designer apparel etc. This demand must be met with money that comes from long hours of work.

If we adopted an ascetic lifestyle we would find the demand for cash would plummet.
Click to expand...
I would hardly call the lifestyle of most western Europeans "ascetic." Don't exagerate the differences. ;)
 
IHateGovernment said:
We're going to be forced into these lifestyle changes whether we wish to or not. I believe it would be rational -- not to mention easier -- to begin forcing them by regulation now, rather than waiting for the excrement to contact the rotating blades.

You and I differ on this point. I don't believe in forcing people to become agents of social modeling and restructuring. Society must be formed by the actions of the entire body whether the results are beneficial or damning. No man can live in a just society and be conscripted into being an agent for the creation of a social model created by others that will ultimately be crafted in a manner they see as beneficial to their interests.
Click to expand...
All government -- all public policy of any kind -- is a form of social engineering. All I'm talking about is making it explicit. Make the choices publicly and openly rather than allowing a small cabal of elite individuals make them for us.
 
When times get hard us country folks will eat. Kinda hard for the city folks to eat SUV's , widescreens and such.
 
I would hardly call the lifestyle of most western Europeans "ascetic." Don't exagerate the differences.

I didn't call it that either. However I still stand by that statement. However the lifestyle of Western Europeans is certainly less materialistic.
 
IHateGovernment said:
I would hardly call the lifestyle of most western Europeans "ascetic." Don't exagerate the differences.

I didn't call it that either. However I still stand by that statement. However the lifestyle of Western Europeans is certainly less materialistic.
Click to expand...
or one could say more realistic.
 
All government -- all public policy of any kind -- is a form of social engineering. All I'm talking about is making it explicit. Make the choices publicly and openly rather than allowing a small cabal of elite individuals make them for us.

I would demand that all forms of social engineering would be limited to that which prevents one from infringing upon the negative rights of others. This is the minimum level of social engineering that can be sustained or minarchy. Failure to do this would actually lead to greater social engineering by some other group with greater power.
 
It isn't fundamentally different but it is still different. The main difference in between what Europeans and Americans value. Until there is convergence there we are talking apples and oranges.
 
IHateGovernment said:
All government -- all public policy of any kind -- is a form of social engineering. All I'm talking about is making it explicit. Make the choices publicly and openly rather than allowing a small cabal of elite individuals make them for us.

I would demand that all forms of social engineering would be limited to that which prevents one from infringing upon the negative rights of others. This is the minimum level of social engineering that can be sustained or minarchy. Failure to do this would actually lead to greater social engineering by some other group with greater power.
Click to expand...
Minarchy is impractical because, when regulation is minimized below the level of the nation-state, wealth begins to accumulate in a very few hands very quickly. With wealth comes power and thus the economic elite -- the plutarchs or oligarchs -- begin to engineer society by economic means rather than political means. This is far less desirable because it is less transparent.
 
IHateGovernment said:
It isn't fundamentally different but it is still different. The main difference in between what Europeans and Americans value. Until there is convergence there we are talking apples and oranges.
Click to expand...
Americans are going to be forced into it, alas. I don't think we're foresighted enough to do it rationally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top