QuoteWhat does one thing have to do with the other?? You are very confused.

The competition for a job depends on how many apply. Any fault the the employer might perceive will put you further down the list.

If the past enforcement of things like the civil rights bill, immigration or regulations is any indication of the history of the government to control business I rather be business than the employed.

I don't buy particularly much stuff from China, but I still buy some.  Why?  At the very least, sometimes it's my only choice, and I don't care to launch my own AC adapter-manufacturing business to make a point.  I only have so much energy and capital to spend (and Chinese-manufactured products are going to be at a competitive advantage, not just because they pay slave wages, but because the country is manipulating its currency), so I pick my battles.  It may sound cold-hearted, but I can't achieve every goal I want without drastically minimizing what I can do (which makes it hard to actually make good things happen) or without getting some help -- however, I do try to keep sight of what is the right thing to do.

The issue of Chinese-manufactured products (and similarly produced products) is better dealt with through foreign policy and regulating imports (which I would fully support -- there is a cost to pay, but I find it much more palatable than making my own parts).  It's much like having roads to drive on; it takes a community, not just individuals acting on their own, to get them built.

Quotelisa: only a large reduction in world population will get us out. ENDA is not a solution.
Laura: What does one thing have to do with the other?? You are very confused.
lisa: The competition for a job depends on how many apply.

That's not very relevant.  If you cut 90% of the population, then about 90% of the jobs will be gone (because 90% of the consumers will be gone).  While addressing resource scarcity in this way has some practical benefits, most of the scarcity is not tied to hard resource limits but too much demand outstripping output (and output's going to be way down if you take out 90% of the population).  Nothing is an end-all solution (short of annihilating the entire human race, and that's not a very good solution), but you can talk about ideas that help.  ENDA, as LordKAT mentions, helps.

Quotemost of the scarcity is not tied to hard resource limits

Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of "Energy Independence"


Blue Covenant: The Global Water Crisis and the Coming Battle for the Right to Water


It has little to do with labor or consumers. It has to do with limited renewable resources, materials, and climate.

The world is in competition for survival and giving special privilege to some takes away rights of others.

I somehow don't completely buy the thought that people don't know what's best for them. This may be true for some people, but I can't see a government having the authority to determine what's best for them. Does this uniformity and social acceptance make it the best for society as a whole? I don't believe it does.

I see the closest practical application of  philosophy being sovereign cities independent of each other's laws, therefore establishing local governments, but a lack of a national government. Less concentrated power means less corruption and more local control. Like the states or Greeks each can form an alliance for defense against aggressors.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 09:01:02 AM

---

Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed


edited for commercial links

Quote from: lisagurl on June 06, 2010, 12:55:07 PMIf the past enforcement of things like the civil rights bill, immigration or regulations is any indication of the history of the government to control business I rather be business than the employed.

Anyone who doesn't support government regulation of private industry should read Upton Sinclair's, The Jungle.

We had unregulated business at one point, as pointed out, there were reasons to regulate it.

QuoteIt has little to do with labor or consumers. It has to do with limited renewable resources, materials, and climate.

These are nowhere near the entire economy.  Sometimes manpower is the limiting factor, and curtailing population cannot help the manpower issue.

QuoteDoes this uniformity and social acceptance make it the best for society as a whole?

Sometimes.  If competitors can produce goods in a way that (1) gives them a competitive advantage and (2) involves practices that are abusive [currency manipulation] or are illegal [child labor] within the consuming country, the government *may* regulate or block imports produced from such an advantage (to protect goods and services produced within its own borders).  "May" is a key word, because discretion is in order -- one foreign company may employ children as young as 14 instead of 16, or the country may have slightly more lax environmental restrictions, but it still generally operates under similar rules.

QuoteWhat does reducing the world population have to do with ENDA? If I found a way to kill 4 billion people at once, trans issues would still exist.

As long as there is competition, trans do not fair well on a competitive scale. They in general fail to be aggressive and take charge of  giving back to the community. Because they disagree with the community culture and standards the community shuns their behavior. If the community needed their services they would be more accepting but as long as there is cheap abundant labor willing to be slaves they have no reason or incentive to hire someone that disturbs their culture and could be a legal threat.  Demanding more legal power only makes TS less desirable.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 07:19:21 PM

---

Quote" "Sometimes manpower is the limiting factor,"

"
===========
Manpower in not a problem with 10% unemployed and another 18 % underemployed and many more just have given up. It is certain skills that can be lacking and the TS community is not interested in accruing those skills or want to perform those jobs.

Quote" the government *may* regulate or block imports produced from such an advantage (to protect goods and services produced within its own borders).  "

"

This does not work because the materials we need and do not have come from other countries. If we block their goods we will not get what we need.

Quotelax environmental restrictions, but it still generally operates under similar rules.

In this country we would be asking for the death penalty for many of the crimes that go into the making of our imports.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 08:23:27 PM

---

QuoteWe had unregulated business at one point, as pointed out, there were reasons to regulate it.

There has always been standards set by the community. Failure to meet those standards would be met by people unwilling to buy. Today there is too much consumption so people do not care about companies meeting standards before they buy. People spend too much time thinking about money rather than their fellow citizen.

QuoteManpower in not a problem with 10% unemployed and another 18 % underemployed and many more just have given up. It is certain skills that can be lacking and the TS community is not interested in accruing those skills or want to perform those jobs.

Bull.  The Trans community is too small to be credited for these employment numbers (regardless of fault, besides the idea that discrimination is a more credible explanation than innate Trans-specific character).

A great deal of these unemployment numbers can easily be attributed to the sub-prime disaster.  While the market likes to have freedom (which you so love), the market also enjoys having certainty (among other characteristics, such as innovation).  The disruption associated with ill-advised sub-prime loans created a lot of uncertainty, leading to a ripple effect on the economy (even with governments stepping in), and unemployment has been affected by that.  While energy prices had gone up during this time, the price of oil is about where it was in 2005 (in inflation adjusted dollars), when unemployment was at about half of where it is today. So much of this unemployment is demonstrably unrelated to resources.

It probably doesn't help that the US is fairly light on competition.  In many fields, there are coercive monopolies and oligopolies that place too many barriers to entry for new competitors, and it means that prices will be artificially high and supply will be artificially low, which drives up unemployment as well.

It's not that resource limitations are not relevant, but they haven't really come to a head yet in the United States in the way you suggested.  Interestingly, if you are looking for a way for the US to deal with resource limitations, it could try instituting regulations and incentives encouraging "good behavior," namely using renewable energy sources and conserving finite resources.  But, you know, that requires government intervention, which you generally seem to be against.

QuoteThis does not work because the materials we need and do not have come from other countries. If we block their goods we will not get what we need.

If our own country is that dependent on an ill-behaved country, what chance does an individual have of fighting against it?

QuoteIn this country we would be asking for the death penalty for many of the crimes that go into the making of our imports.

Those crimes are prime candidates to ban imports for.  Like I said, minor violations and discrepancies are not the point.  It's to go after blatant and egregious violations.

QuoteSo much of this unemployment is demonstrably unrelated to resources.

People have spent more than they have made and defaulted on the loans because there is not enough resources to provide everyone with all the products they have borrowed to buy.

Quote, if you are looking for a way for the US to deal with resource limitations, it could try instituting regulations and incentives encouraging "good behavior," namely using renewable energy sources and conserving finite resources.  But, you know, that requires government intervention, which you generally seem to be against.

There is no such thing as renewable energy sources. They require material and resources from the earth to work and the amount of energy produced over there lifetime is less  than what they require to build and maintain. What you have is just another Government ponzi scheme to keep people paying taxes.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 07:17:27 PM

---

If you want good behavior reward people with time off from work not money. Make less desirable and slow down multitasking. Stress quality not quantity.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 08:20:07 PM

---

QuoteIf our own country is that dependent on an ill-behaved country, what chance does an individual have of fighting against it?

Stop buying things we do not need for survival such as computers, cell phones, entertainment, automobiles, TV, etc.

---

Post Merge: June 07, 2010, 09:23:33 PM

---

QuoteIt's to go after blatant and egregious violations.

But our leaders such as Clinton have signed and agreed that it is OK to have slaves and pollution as long as we do not see it. We have been sold down the river with propaganda and ENDA is part of it.

QuoteThere is no such thing as renewable energy sources. They require material and resources from the earth to work and the amount of energy produced over there lifetime is less  than what they require to build and maintain. What you have is just another Government ponzi scheme to keep people paying taxes.

Solar energy is "renewable" as long as the Sun remains in place (and while the panels needed involve scarce resources, we are not in immediate danger of running out of such supplies), and wind power will remain viable for as long as wind remains (and while the means of harnessing the power also involves scarce supplies, we are not running out in foreseeable future).  If we are faced with a limiting factor, it will fall upon us to innovate more efficient means.  Tidal and geothermal energy provide similar benefits.  The fact that the government has done very little to actually facilitate these tools show these aren't schemes wielded by the government, much less ponzi schemes.  Unless you're talking about the likes of ethanol, "clean coal," electric not backed by a renewable resource, or any similar fake renewable resource, in which case you're not getting any argument from me, but that's a case of where some (rather than all) "renewable" resources don't live up to their billing.

QuoteIf you want good behavior reward people with time off from work not money. Make less desirable and slow down multitasking. Stress quality not quantity.

Government-mandated holidays or time off can help (most of the developed world actually uses them).  Not mandating employers to provide benefits to its full-time employees (which compels employees to work "full-time") but instead having the government provide or facilitate access to those benefits might work (as it is, it is mainly the underemployed in the middle who don't get them).  Improving quality can come from the government instituting higher product standards can help, although making this practical would require the same standards be applied to imports.  The government can also publish reports that reflect quality of life and not just GDP can help.  However, getting to a lot of these answers seems to involve government intervention, with the only example of loosening regulation coming from ending employer mandates... and that's only going to shift some responsibility to the government (since I'm pretty sure the working masses are going to want to retain easy access to services like medical coverage).  I'm open to these kinds of solutions myself, but will they work for you?

QuoteStop buying things we do not need for survival such as computers, cell phones, entertainment, automobiles, TV, etc.

If I don't have a computer or a phone, I don't have a have a job.  And if I don't have my automobile, then my maternal grandmother would probably be dead now.  And if you don't have a computer, then you probably aren't having this online discussion.

Like I said, I need the government to intervene so "legitimate" competitors can exist.  The government can fight another country better I can.

QuoteBut our leaders such as Clinton...

Bad policy is bad policy, whether it came/comes from Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush, Reagan, or anyone before that.  (Actually, laws generally come from Congress rather than the President, but that's besides the point).  If you want to discuss environmental policy, I would agree that none of these have done much to improve it.  However, while the ENDA in practice has shortcomings (and we've discussed them here a while ago), the principle of ENDA is a good thing.  An even this ENDA in practice is probably still going to blow the last three decades of environmental regulation out of the water (not that it's saying much).

No surprise, Vexing upside down thinks she's smarter than Newton.  Well, a Fig Newton at least.

Energy can neither be created or destroyed.  But don't let real science interrupt your fantasy land.  After all, that's pretty much the most fundamental point in physics, or don't they teach that in New Zealand?  Perhaps you were hom-scooled by Southern Baptists?

It was most likely a day you missed school out hittin' the crack pipe, but the difference between 'theory' and 'law' in science is kinda huge.

And, just for the sake of conversation, nothing in string theory disproves or goes against conservation of energy.  But your so good at talking out your ass that I'm surprised that Revlon hasn't created a shade of lipstick to match your butt cheeks.

It says no such thing.  It says that there are infinite possibilities, not an infinite reality.  Huge difference.  It also very clearly states that there may be, as well as infinite universes, only one universe.  Either - and all points in between - are possible, but not all are equally likely.  And, in the end, whatever the number of universes are, it is, when counted, finite.

And I have never abused drugs, I've creatively used them for recreational purposes.  You might try it.  At this point, what could it hurt, certainly not your personality.

I worked with the guys in the DOE who invented it.  I'm pretty sure I do, but then again I did graduate school in hard science, not just a high school course.

QuoteYou clearly don't understand String Theory.

You clearly do not live in this physical reality.

---

Post Merge: June 09, 2010, 11:07:12 AM

---

QuoteLike I said, I need the government to intervene so "legitimate" competitors can exist.  The government can fight another country better I can.

Would there be no fighting on large scale if we did not believe in Governments?

The only successful thing government does is propaganda.  " Public Opinion" by Walter Lippman

You clearly do not live in this physical reality.

As awesome as that would be, it would be awfully hard to use a computer if I didn't.

Clearly, you have never been to a ______________CON event where most of the guys there are total virgins because even their hands won't have sex with them dressed in that Wookie/Star Trooper costume.

I'm not sure you have enough people in NZ to have a ____Con.  I mean you don't have nuclear weapons, I'm kinda shocked you have the internet.  Well, except for the fact that you have American corporations there.  Really.  The largest export your nation had this decade was the LotR movies.  And, at that, I bet the money that LotR made was deposited in LA banks, not NZ banks.  In California, movies are not even even in the top three moneymakers here.

How many people do you need?

One real fat girl (who really, really needs deodorant) to dress like Princess Leia in the Jabba the Hut scene.
One fat boy (who really, really, really needs dental work) to dress like Luke Skywalker
One kid with so much acne that the Stormtroopers outfit is the only choice
And one very fat crossdresser (who needs both the deodorant and the dental work) to dress like a 12 year old girl

And a bunch of very, very fat guys in sweatpants and an classic rock band Tshirt that almost hits 3 inches above the waist band of the sweatpants selling comic books by the pound.

Oh yeah, and about 1/2 a personality between them all, with even less social skills.

Quote from: ƃuıxǝʌ on June 07, 2010, 10:46:50 PM
That's some pretty backward thinking. The Earth is a speck circling a slightly larger speck in a galaxy containing billions of specks - which is one of billions of galaxies.
The Earth isn't the only resource in this massive Universe.
Think beyond your tiny box.

I don't think that's how it works but even assuming for a second it dose work like that. Whereas before we had 1 universe and 1 problem now you've hypothetically given us a billion universes with a billion problems, not helping the situation.

Although I agree with you if I had no choice I'd choose dishonourable life over honourable death. The fact that I'm a ->-bleeped-<- now instead of a headstone is proof of that. How true is that for any of you guys.

Quote from: tekla on June 10, 2010, 01:19:53 AM
How many people do you need?

One real fat girl (who really, really needs deodorant) to dress like Princess Leia in the Jabba the Hut scene.
One fat boy (who really, really, really needs dental work) to dress like Luke Skywalker
One kid with so much acne that the Stormtroopers outfit is the only choice
And one very fat crossdresser (who needs both the deodorant and the dental work) to dress like a 12 year old girl

And a bunch of very, very fat guys in sweatpants and an classic rock band Tshirt that almost hits 3 inches above the waist band of the sweatpants selling comic books by the pound.

Oh yeah, and about 1/2 a personality between them all, with even less social skills.

Thank heavens Star Trek conventions aren't like that!!