Subject:
|
Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 21 Jan 2000 01:26:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2482 times
|
| |
|
|
On Thu, 20 Jan 2000 15:44:00 GMT, Christopher Weeks
<clweeks@eclipse.net> wrote:
> Jasper Janssen wrote:
> > Yup. There are very good reasons not to let economic refugees cross
> > into your country freely. Most especially if you are richer than your
> > neighbours.
>
> My stance on this is surely colored by the history of the US, but I feel
> that the primary reason that I live in the greatest nation in the world
> is the melting pot effect. I would be completely open to allowing
> anyone who wanted a fair shake to come live and work in the US. Today,
> that might not work because we have a minimum wage and welfare, but in
> the ideal world, we'd have neither and it would be a good thing for our
> country and the world.
Maybe it'd be a good thing for the country or the world -- but not
necessarily for the individual voter. Anyway, we currently get enough
non-economic refugees here in .nl that it severely skews the
population count -- and in some cases we're talking here about people
who don't even make a concerted effort to learn the language, but
instead prefer to sit around hoping someone will feed them.
On a micro-scale, you can see the same thing happening in the majority
of third-world countries. Only there it's the trek from the
countryside to the cities. The result? Vast slums, health problems, as
well as depopulation problems on the surrounding country. Not pretty.
The US could do that in the beginning of its lifetime because there
were vast empty (well, after the cavalry came they were empty, anyway)
swathes of land to be settled.
> > The problem isn't that the market wouldn't provide food. It's that the
> > market would not provide enough home-grown food, instead preferring to
> > import from somewhere cheaper. The problem with that in times of war
> > is very obvious.
>
> OK, I hadn't thought of that. There is a good reason to keep a farming
> infrastructure up and running. I still rebel at the thought of
> subsidies. I'll need to think on this.
I don't know how the subsidies are handled near you, but the Eu does
it like this: they guarantee farmers a 'subsistance price' for their
produce (IOW, if you can't sell it for more than this, you can sell it
to us), and if they have to buy stuff they either use it to feed the
armies, feed the third-world poor, or sell it off, depending on whim
AFAICT. Apart from "what you do with it afterwards", I quite like the
system.
> I beleive you are (at least in some cases) wrong. I have never been an
> agrarian, but I did spend the past eight years living in an agricultural
> region - attending the largest ag college within 300 miles and I know
> people who were paid to leave corn fields fallow rather than grow. I
> also know people who report having taken that pay and grown stuff (like
> pot) anyway.
Hehe. True enterprising spirit. I shall really have to get me a few
seeds sometime. "Nether-weed" is supposed to be among nthe best in the
world, but most of it is consumed locally so you wouldn't know that ;)
>
> > > 2) People are better off with free trade than with tariffs.
> > > You have to have some basic faith in the market, but I bet most
> > > people answer this one with a yes.
> >
> > In some cases. This one isn't black and white no matter how you look
> > at it.
>
> I think 'people' in the aggregate are better off with free trade. I
> think that is black and white. But, there are many who would be 'hurt'
> changing from the current system to a free one.
How about regulatory tariffs, like tabacco, alcohol, and gas, to name
the three most wellknown ones?
>
> > > 3) Minimum wage laws cause unemployment. Repeal them.
> > The first statement is marginally correct, but that is irrelevant.
>
> How is it irrelevant? When I was 20, I worked at a mid-sized custom
> photo lab as a dark-room technician. Minimum wage went up and two kids
> got canned. I should have, but my work was too good - or so I was told.
Minimum wage in principle is good. Setting it too high is bad. Minimum
wage should be a (preferably area-adjusted) _minimum_ living
condition.
Cause, well, I'd rather see somebody starve fast than slow, if they
have to starve. Less chance of them taking up criminal lifestyle.
> > More thasn fairly. Both your parties are extremely moderate by your
> > own standards, and both are right-wing by global standards (by
> > actions, not words, that is).
>
> A little right wing. Not a whole lot. We might be fairly right wing by
> European standards, but not the rest of the world - as I understand things.
Discounting the undemocratic nations.. the average democratic nation
is fairly left wing, AFAICT. China... Russia is going back to the
communists... etc.
If you count Pol Pot and Ceaucescu, why yes, the US is downright
liberal.
Jasper
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| Jasper Janssen wrote in message <3889b27e.4370108@lu...et.com>... (...) One problem with this is that in the US, minimum wage for 40 hrs/week isn't really a minimum sufficient wage (for most parts of the country). I do think that companies have to (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit (...) Right, but you've set yourselves up for that. By having all those friendly social programs, you paint a great big target on your chest. My grandfather expatriated to (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| (...) Just a quite note on gasoline: One of the engineers here at AEI has a husband who is an electrical engineer for a certain car manufacturer (I won't divulge too much) They have been working on hydrogen fuel cell cars. It has been so successful (...) (24 years ago, 21-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: stuff (was: Art Debate Was: [Re: Swearing?])
|
| (...) My stance on this is surely colored by the history of the US, but I feel that the primary reason that I live in the greatest nation in the world is the melting pot effect. I would be completely open to allowing anyone who wanted a fair shake (...) (24 years ago, 20-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
