Bush relaxes wildlife law limits

Originally posted by howardgee
Oh what a surprise; NoBrain is a right wing fascist who actually approves and encourages sweatshops so that he only has to pay $200 for a pair of his favourite nike trainers.

Way to go, moron.

Would you be a man of principle Howie or a H Y P O C R I T E, which is a form of D I S H O N E S T Y, which would make you a L I A R.

Take a look around you, the clothes you wear, the shoes (not neccessarily Nike) the computer you tap out your vile philosophy on.

Now after doing all that tell us what the minimum wage should be and test it against some of those great products and how they were produced.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
It depends on how you define left and right, which is not clear-cut. Fascism has leftist elements, it advocates a large and strong government.

The definition I use without googling and wiki is:

Left: On personal issues a little more freedom orientated i.e. drugs, gay marriage, abortion, euthanasia, but when it comes to the economy oh my lawd hold onto your wallet, they want to control every aspect of it.

Right: A reputation as being free market but in reality far from it, all that can be said is they are a little more freedom orientated than the Left. Tend to take a dim view of personal freedoms.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
[b]"...fascism is far right..."

It depends on how you define left and right, which is not clear-cut. Fascism has leftist elements, it advocates a large and strong government.

If all countries were civilised enough to enforce this concept, then sweatshops would not exist.

Actually, some countries with extensive redistribution policies have no minimum wage.[/b]

"Actually, some countries with extensive redistribution policies have no minimum wage"

So What?
Your statement does nothing to prove nor discredit my assertion.
Unless you can name a country with a minimum wage AND sweatshops, then keep your non sequitors to yourself.

Originally posted by Wajoma
The definition I use without googling and wiki is:

Left: On personal issues a little more freedom orientated i.e. drugs, gay marriage, abortion, euthanasia, but when it comes to the economy oh my lawd hold onto your wallet, they want to control every aspect of it.

Right: A reputation as being free market but in reality far from it, all that can be said ...[text shortened]... e a little more freedom orientated than the Left. Tend to take a dim view of personal freedoms.

A piece of good advice to you:

"If no thought your mind doth visit, keep your speech not too explicit".

Originally posted by howardgee
A piece of good advice to you:

"If no thought your mind doth visit, keep your speech not too explicit".

Come on Howie, what is the minimum wage according to Howie?

How many products have you purchased that have been handled by people earning a fraction of that Howie minimum?

Howie = unprincipled hypocrite

Originally posted by Wajoma
Come on Howie, what is the minimum wage according to Howie?

How many products have you purchased that have been handled by people earning a fraction of that Howie minimum?

Howie = unprincipled hypocrite

So what if I have...why does that make me a hypocrite?
It is hard to know which of the 99% of goods made in China come from sweatshops.

I may criticise capitalism in general, but I am forced to partake in its system.

Originally posted by howardgee
So what if I have...why does that make me a hypocrite?
It is hard to know which of the 99% of goods made in China come from sweatshops.

I may criticise capitalism in general, but I am forced to partake in its system.

You leave yourself more wiggle room then Chubby Checker ever had.

GRANNY.

Originally posted by normbenign
The $1/day [that I cited] was at the time that Nike built there. That was about 30 years ago, so by your own calculations people are better off now than then. It was only 90+ years ago that American workers were making $1/day, and were offered $5/day by Henry Ford.

First you said the $1/day thing was 15 years ago. Now you say it was 30 years ago. Seems rather sloppy when we are talking about real humans, real exploitation, real destitution. Which is it to be? a 30 year old stat? Or a 15 year old stat? There are people still on $1 a day, now. Is your point still valid if your understanding is based only on a slapdash bit of think-of-a-figurey? I don't think so.

And then you come up with an odd example: It was only 90+ years ago that American workers were making $1/day, and were offered $5/day by Henry Ford. Well, why don't the Henry Fords of Today, a.k.a. Nike Adidas et al, go and do the same thing in Indonesia rather than paying as little as they possibly can? Why don't they pay $2 an hour? Still way less than the hourly rate they'd have to pay in the U.S. And their profits would still be massive. Why can't it be part of their corporate strategy to foster prosperity in the countries they are based in?

Why is the corporate strategy always always always to pay infrahuman wages? Isn't economics and development a little more involved than that? Are the only imperatives mathematical ones? Are there simply no imperatives related to human welfare & dignity and holistic development? Do you really believe that this system you champion is held in place without the hidden (and often not so hidden) hand of threatened force? If you do you are quite simply naive.

Originally posted by FMF
First you said the $1/day thing was 15 years ago. Now you say it was 30 years ago. Seems rather sloppy when we are talking about real humans, real exploitation, real destitution. Which is it to be? a 30 year old stat? Or a 15 year old stat? There are people still on $1 a day, now. Is your point still valid if your understanding is based only on a slapdash bit of ...[text shortened]... (and often not so hidden) hand of threatened force? If you do you are quite simply naive.

Once a no-brainer...always a no-brainer