register

avenger's picture

avenger

MEMBER FOR 3 years 47 weeks

Fans

avenger is following

recent comments

Newtown to release 911 calls from school shooting

News sources have the right to gather and disseminate information. But they also have a responsibility to make the right decision about releasing the Newtown 911 calls to the public. Does the public's right to know trump the victim's right not to be victimized again?

posted @ Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 09:31

Thieves steal 100 calendars in unusual mall heist

There is always unintended consequences to ill thought out protests. I feel sorry for those who won't get any bonuses.

posted @ Wednesday, December 4, 2013 - 09:23

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: An inanimate object cannot have (or lack) a quality such as morality.

Never said "an inanimate object" either. The operative words were "a non-human entity."

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 16:03

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: I can't agree with your assertion that humans are berift of morality.

Did I say that? Re-read my comment. You are reading something into my comment that isn't there.

...do you agree that unrestrained, unbridled, uncontrolled, capitalism is bereft of moral considerations? Are you like the Supreme Court thinking that a non-human entity is a person?

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 15:27

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: It took all of this for you to figure out that you agree with me.

So, do you agree that unrestrained, unbridled, uncontrolled, capitalism is bereft of moral considerations. And that without restrictions and regulations, capitalism will eventually consolidate wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many? If you do, then we are in agreement. Wink

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 14:41

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: Your beef isn't with Capitalism... It's with people who don't care.

Wow, it took all of this for you to come to this conclusion?

Capitalism is a force without conscience and so it must be balanced by ethical considerations.

Capitalist entities only take human rights into account when they are absolutely forced to, by protest, legislation, boycott, or public embarrassment. And, while it may be possible to find a few exceptions to this general trend, the overall abuses of unbridled capitalism far outweigh the occasional self-motivated acts of conscience.

Capitalism works well if it benefits the MANY and not just the FEW.

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 14:32

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: The fact that you are aware of those factories and their conditions proves my point.

Your point?

Do you actually think that workers in those factories are participants that have any say in regulating their capitalistic business? When workers have no say in regulating their businesses you have the amoral practices that capitalism breeds and rising inequities between the rich and poor. The only say these workers have is whether they want to work or not. And given the poverty in those countries that gives employers the right to exploit, workers really have no choice.

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 13:29

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: Capitalism is regulated by its participants.

Tell that to the workers in the Bangladesh Garment factory or the children working in factories in China. I'm sure they are well regulated by its participants.

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 12:32

For those of you that think guns are the probelm..

A gun by itself does no harm but a gun in the hands of the mentally ill, criminals or the untrained in it's uses does considerable harm with them. Why are laws that restrict the availability of guns to these people (mentally ill, felonious criminals, and untrained gun enthusiasts) an anathema to responsible gun owners?

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 12:01

Pope Francis' Take On Modern Times

Unrestrained, unbridled, uncontrolled, capitalism is bereft of moral considerations.

Without restriction on monopolies/mergers, and without labor rights, capitalism will eventually consolidate wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many.

Capitalism has value as an engine that runs an economy. It is a powerful force, a market economy has the potential to improve standards of living and quality of life, but only when it is directed to do so.

Capitalism is a force without conscience and so it must be balanced by ethical considerations.

Capitalism in its purest form sets no boundaries on the behavior of business. It operates with one clear goal: increasing profits.


Capitalism is in need of regulation because it is amoral, not in possession of a right or wrong motivation.

Capitalism's motivation is the acquisition of wealth, which is neither moral, nor immoral.

It is frequently thought that in the capitalistic sense, greed is good. But, to base a system on greed is to deny that ethical considerations are important, or necessary, in our mode of production. Power doesn't capitulate willingly. Labor rights were not given, but rather won by hard fights and enormous tragedy.

Capitalist entities only take human rights into account when they are absolutely forced to, by protest, legislation, boycott, or public embarrassment. And, while it may be possible to find a few exceptions to this general trend, the overall abuses of unbridled capitalism far outweigh the occasional self-motivated acts of conscience.

http://www.debate.org/debates/Unregulated-capitalism-is-amoral/1/

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 11:53

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: But because you say it's so, it is? Poppycock.

Did I hear an echo? Not because I say it but because many other people who know more than I say it and think it.

Unrestrained, unbridled, uncontrolled, capitalism is bereft of moral considerations.

Without restriction on monopolies/mergers, and without labor rights, capitalism will eventually consolidate wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many.

Capitalism has value as an engine that runs an economy. It is a powerful force, a market economy has the potential to improve standards of living and quality of life, but only when it is directed to do so.

Capitalism is a force without conscience and so it must be balanced by ethical considerations.

Capitalism in its purest form sets no boundaries on the behavior of business. It operates with one clear goal: increasing profits.


Capitalism is in need of regulation because it is amoral, not in possession of a right or wrong motivation.

Capitalism's motivation is the acquisition of wealth, which is neither moral, nor immoral.

It is frequently thought that in the capitalistic sense, greed is good. But, to base a system on greed is to deny that ethical considerations are important, or necessary, in our mode of production. Power doesn't capitulate willingly. Labor rights were not given, but rather won by hard fights and enormous tragedy.

Capitalist entities only take human rights into account when they are absolutely forced to, by protest, legislation, boycott, or public embarrassment. And, while it may be possible to find a few exceptions to this general trend, the overall abuses of unbridled capitalism far outweigh the occasional self-motivated acts of conscience.

These thoughts were well presented in a debate, Unregulated Capitalism Is Amoral: http://www.debate.org/debates/Unregulated-capitalism-is-amoral/1/

posted @ Tuesday, December 3, 2013 - 10:12

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: And I contend that unrestrained, unbridled, uncontrolled, capitalism is bereft of moral considerations.

Without restriction on monopolies/mergers, and without labor rights, capitalism will eventually consolidate wealth into the hands of a few at the expense of the many. And isn't this a form of servitude, slavery?

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 16:36

UGA's Richt on defensive staff: 'Everybody should be back'

@theold33: If that happens I will become liberal

Now that is a hoot! Big smile

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 16:29

UGA's Richt on defensive staff: 'Everybody should be back'

@theold33: I was trying to be conservative. Georgia seems to always lose a couple of games they shouldn't. Wink The liberal in me says they will go undefeated and national champs.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 16:16

UGA's Richt on defensive staff: 'Everybody should be back'

@theold33: Nope, didn't steal it from Obama. I predict a SEC-East Championship and a 10-2 regular season record.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 15:58

Fast-food protests planned for 100 cities

@OCCountry: History has shown that raising the minumum wage increases unemplyment in teens and those without a high school diploma. The key is that the mimum wage is an entry point. Get in, work hard, and get promoted.

Of course you realize that the majority of fast food workers are no longer teenagers?

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2013/08/08/2433601/fast-food-workers-yo...

In 1992, the minimum wage in New Jersey increased from $4.25 to $5.05 per hour (an 18.8% increase) while the adjacent state of Pennsylvania remained at $4.25. David Card and Alan Krueger gathered information on fast food restaurants in New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania in an attempt to see what effect this increase had on employment within New Jersey. Basic economic theory would have implied that relative employment should have decreased in New Jersey. Card and Krueger surveyed employers before the April 1992 New Jersey increase, and again in November–December 1992, asking managers for data on the full-time equivalent staff level of their restaurants both times. Based on data from the employers' responses, the authors concluded that the increase in the minimum wage increased employment in the New Jersey restaurants.

Card and Krueger expanded on this initial article in their 1995 book Myth and Measurement: The New Economics of the Minimum Wage. They argued that the negative employment effects of minimum wage laws are minimal if not non-existent. For example, they look at the 1992 increase in New Jersey's minimum wage, the 1988 rise in California's minimum wage, and the 1990–91 increases in the federal minimum wage. In addition to their own findings, they reanalyzed earlier studies with updated data, generally finding that the older results of a negative employment effect did not hold up in the larger datasets.

In 2005, T.D. Stanley showed that Card and Krueger's results could signify either publication bias or the absence of a minimum wage effect. However, using a different methodology, Stanley concludes that there is evidence of publication bias, and that correction of this bias shows no relationship between the minimum wage and unemployment. In 2008, Hristos Doucouliagos and T.D. Stanley conducted a similar meta-analysis of 64 U.S. studies on dis-employment effects and concluded that Card and Krueger's initial claim of publication bias is still correct. Moreover, they concluded, "Once this publication selection is corrected, little or no evidence of a negative association between minimum wages and employment remains."

— Wikipedia

So while we’ll all the old arguments and counter arguments are being trotted out once again, I urge folks to remember: analysis of the historical record shows that increasing the minimum wage has its intended effect of raising the earnings of low-wage workers who need the raise without harming their employment prospects.  It won’t transform the labor market or rebuild the middle class, but it is a vital if small part of the connective tissue that used to bind even our lowest wage workers to the more broadly shared prosperity that has eluded them for decades.

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/raising-the-minimum-wage-the-debate-begins...

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 15:32

Sam Champion to exit ABC News for Weather Channel

Congratulations and I hope you have a successful career at the Weather Channel.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 15:07

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: We can get in a war of semantics all day. Communism, used by any entity, will cause starvation. On the plus side, the Pilgrams had better thank their lucky stars that it was a corporation that imposed the foul stench of Communism upon them. If it had been the State, change would not have come for years and years. long after the first, second, and third wave of Pilgrams had died with empty bellies.

Poppycock. Just because you say so, it isn't so.

I believe you are confused. This is what happens as Socialism morphs into Communism. People lose thier individuality and become nothing more than cogs in a great machine which can be removed an replaced, at will, by the State.

Slavery helped finance the Industrial Revolution in England. Plantation owners, shipbuilders, and merchants connected with the slave trade accumulated vast fortunes that established banks and heavy industry in Europe and expanded the reach of capitalism worldwide. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/178651.Capitalism_and_Slavery

But as scholars delve deeper into corporate archives and think more critically about coerced labor and capitalism -- perhaps informed by the current scale of human trafficking -- the importance of slavery to American economic history will become inescapable. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-01-24/how-slavery-led-to-modern-capit...

Capitalism, The System Of Modern Slavery: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6OwZaFTRJw

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 15:01

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: I never said it wasn't. The corporation used a foolish system that cannot work. Many different countries have tried the same thing. Many, on these boards, still want to use the same stupid concepts that have been proven time an time again, not to work.

Didn't you say: It was Communism, imposed by a corporation, that starved the Pilgrims. Communism did not impose starvation on the Puritans, a corporation did.

Look at the "poor" in a "Capitalist" country vs/ the poor in a Socialist country. As to more shoppers spending less. We will see more and more of that as we continue this stupid flirtation with Socialism.

Comparing apples to oranges and not taking into context the standard of living associated with poor and rich countries.

Countries that are the most successful have integrated socialism into their capitalistic systems. I have no problems with regulated capitalism that gives workers a level playing field with their employers. But I do have a huge problem with unregulated capitalism. Because capitalism left to it's own devices will eventually impose slavery on it's people.

Capitalism increases the degree of dehumanization and depersonalization implicit in the institution of slavery. While it had been normal in other forms of slavery for the slave to be legally defined as a thing, a piece of property, in America he also became a form of capital. Here his life was regimented to fill the needs of a highly organized productive system sensitively attuned to the driving forces of competitive free enterprise.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 14:02

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: Communism is a concept, not an entity. It cannot impose itself on anything. It takes an entity (a church, a state, a corporation, etc) to impose a concept.

So, it was the corporation that was responsible. Thank you for finally coming around to what I originally said.

You mean those, in the middle class, who just spent Friday fighting over "good deals" on big screen TV's, and other assorted toys?

Ah, so fighting over good deals is your notion that capitalism is working for the many and not the few? And that does not even count those on the lower end of our economic scale. This year there were more shoppers but they spent less.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 12:14

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: You can sit on your computer, drink your coffee, go to the toilet and wipe your butt with soft toilet paper, get in your car, drive to town and get something to eat, go out buy your spouse a Christmas gift etc etc. When you can't do those things, then and only then can you tell me that Capitalism only benefits the few.

Tell that to most of our middle class who has seen no benefits from creating more productivity every year for their companies and corporations.

The concept if flawed, so, any entity that used the flawed concept of Socialism/Communism is at fault, be it State or Corporation.

It's not communism who implemented a failed system, it was a corporate entity. So an entity was responsible for implementing a concept?

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 11:26

Pitts: Teen girl sounds like Gandhi

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: The truth is always objective.

Physical truth, yes. Mental and spiritual truths are subjective. And truth is objective to WHO you are and WHAT you are.

So, truth is NOT ALWAYS objective.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 11:18

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

@Farmer GA: So it was a concept and not an entity that was responsible?

The Merchant Adventurers, like the Fortune 500 companies of today, was a chartered corporation that depended entirely on benefits and legal privileges conferred by the state. The living arrangements it attempted to impose on the Plymouth settlers were the same as the extractive arrangements that prevailed on an English manor, enforced by the legal privileges the state conferred on the landed nobility. And the new system the Pilgrims replaced them with were the age-old open field system that peasant villages had spontaneously created for themselves, in the absence of coercive interference, since neolithic times.

Capitalism works well for stock holders and corporate entities ( the 5%) today but not so well for those who actually produce the goods that make the capital. Capitalism works well if it benefits the MANY and not just the FEW.

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 10:49

Stossel: Early colonial history and 'tragedy of commons'

It was a corporation and not communism that starved the Pilgrims.

In the received version the Puritans, motivated by a misguided idealism, initially set out to restore the primitive Christian communism of the Book of Acts, “holding all things in common.” Stossel characterizes the arrangement as sounding “like something out of Karl Marx.” When the obvious incentive problems entailed in this practice led to starvation, the settlers accommodated themselves to reality and divided up the land and worked it individually. Output skyrocketed, starvation was averted, and everybody was happy.

But that’s not the way things actually happened.

Richard Curl’s history of cooperatives in America, For All the People, fills in some missing details that change the meaning of the story entirely. Curl supplements Bradford’s history with material from J. A. Doyle’s English Colonies. According to Doyle, the agreement between the Pilgrim Separatists and the Merchant Adventurers corporation provided that

“[a]ll settlers … were to receive their necessaries out of the common stock. For seven years there was to be no individual property or trade, but the labor of the colony was to be organized according to the different capacities of the settlers. At the end of the seven years the company was to be dissolved and the whole stock divided.

Two reservations were inserted, one entitling the settlers to separate plots of land about their houses, and the other allowing them two days in the week for cultivation of such holdings. The London partners, however, refused to grant these concessions, and the agents of the emigrants withdrew them rather than give up the scheme.”

So the proper analog to what almost killed off the Pilgrims is not, as Stossel says, “Karl Marx” or “today’s [presumably left-wing] politicians and opinion-makers.” It’s the lord of an English manor — or a Fortune 500 corporation. But the story as it actually happened is still a testament to the evils of statism and the benefits of voluntary cooperation. The Merchant Adventurers, like the Fortune 500 companies of today, was a chartered corporation that depended entirely on benefits and legal privileges conferred by the state. The living arrangements it attempted to impose on the Plymouth settlers were the same as the extractive arrangements that prevailed on an English manor, enforced by the legal privileges the state conferred on the landed nobility. And the new system the Pilgrims replaced them with were the age-old open field system that peasant villages had spontaneously created for themselves, in the absence of coercive interference, since neolithic times.

http://c4ss.org/content/22792

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 10:12

Pitts: Teen girl sounds like Gandhi

@Thomas Jefferson Snodgrass: If Mr. Pitts would write objectively and truthfully like this all the time, there would be less occasion to disagree with him.

Even the TRUTH can be un-objective. Truth, whether one agrees with it or not, is still the truth.

But you who equate disagreement with hate are possibly the real American Taliban, squashing dissent at every turn.

Some folks think you've lost the high ground, if you invoke the Taliban as a comparison, much like those who uses Hitler comparisons.

Truth. Indeed!

posted @ Monday, December 2, 2013 - 09:58

Find us on Facebook & Twitter

Find us on Facebook Find us on Twitter

blogs

  • Andrew
    Shearer

    Blog: Can we please fix the Oscars?

    Summary:  Fun facts: The first-ever Oscar ceremony, held in 1929, ran a brisk 15 minutes. By contrast, the longest was in 2002, clocking in at a monstrous 4 hours and change. As usual, there are things I loved about it and things I didn't. Rather than be snarky or complain, I'll offer a few suggestions on how the organizers might bring the show into the 21st century. Fun facts: The first-ever Oscar ceremony, held in 1929, ran a brisk 15 minutes. By contrast, the longest was in 2002, clocking in at a monstrous 4 hours and change. As usual, there are things I loved about it and things I didn't. Rather than be snarky or complain, I'll offer a few suggestions on how the organizers might bring the show into the 21st century. First, a few thoughts on the winners: read more

  • Joe
    Johnson

    Winter storm drama

    Athens-Clarke County police officers responded to Pinewood Estates North on a 911 call concerning a heated domestic dispute. it reportedly was an argument over the lack of heat and food in a family's trailer and a woman was threatening to stab anyone who tried to take away her 7-month-old child. State patrol responded also, from their post nearby on U.S. Highway 29 North. The situation apparently was resolved. An officer reported he was driving the woman and infant to another home in Athens. read more

see more blogs