Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson 1

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

In the way they were being used? Hell yeah.

If a KNOWN terrorist is calling the U.S., and/or somebody in the U.S. is calling a KNOWN terrorist.... I don't see the problem.

That's your problem. The problem is not policing agencies doing their job, it's when security trumps your liberty and the *huge* potential for abuse. Warrant-less wire taps, removed a layer of protections from your individual liberty. Take it to an extreme and your freedom will be gone.

It would not be a problem if human beings were moral and honest. Of course if they were moral and honest, we would not need any laws. And police agencies have never been devoid of corrupt people. Did I just prove my point?

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

I'm just saying that: its the government. If they can abuse something and misuse it, they WILL.

Yep, it's something to look out for.

 

[All Else Failed]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

So up until 8 years ago you had confidence in the US government?

Nope.

 

[All Else Failed]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Read what you just wrote--"Harmful to the American People." Who decides what's "harmful?" I think unions are harmful to the American People. So should we prevent them from lobbying Congress? I'd be all for any law that did that, but I suspect you would disagree and I also suspect it would run afoul of the 1st Amendment.

Anyway, there are literally thousands of lobbying groups all of which are doing things that from someone's perspective is harmful to someone or some group. Do you see my point?

How are unions harmful to American people? Especially the worker? Unions are the major reason why you have most of the workers rights you have now.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

How are unions harmful to American people? Especially the worker? Unions are the major reason why you have most of the workers rights you have now.

I can speak for Fox , "err, um, it's because unions cut into corporate profits, cost us taxpayers money, and provide workers with a better life and it's just not fair.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

How are unions harmful to American people? Especially the worker? Unions are the major reason why you have most of the workers rights you have now.

Totally missing the point--we can have a union debate in another thread--who decides what's "harmful" to the American people--you use the term as though there is some absolute answer to that and I propose to you it all depends on whose perpective---so again, answer the question I posed.

BTW--the major reason we have worker rights are wage and labor laws, not Unions. Unions are the reason we have lost millions of jobs--better a bad job than no job at all.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Unions are the reason we have lost millions of jobs--better a bad job than no job at all.

We've lost millions of jobs because corporations see dollar signs in cheap foreign labor pools.

"Better a bad job than no job" is your way of advocating accept your lot in life. None of us have to, nor do I have to agree that your argument is based on some kind of moral high ground. It's completely self serving to your political agenda.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

We've lost millions of jobs because corporations see dollar signs in cheap foreign labor pools.

"Better a bad job than no job" is your way of advocating accept your lot in life. None of us have to, nor do I have to agree that your argument is based on some kind of moral high ground. It's completely self serving to your political agenda.

I don't care if you accept it or not--I simply stated a fact and it has nothing to do with a political agenda. For you the issue is personal--you've got your own self interest tied up in unions--you can't (or refuse) to recognize the realiity because your own bread is buttered--a selifish and understandable attitude. I have no relationship with unions--I don't work for one (and wouldn't if I was starving) so there is nothing personal in my stake. The issue really has far less to do with money, which is very important to you, and far more to do with personal satifaction and achievement. People feel much better knowing they've accomplished--unions take that away from you and replace it with a few extra dollars--its a very bad trade. But people do what they have to do--for you, again its a matter of money being paramount, which I find ironic as you accuse corporations of greed.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Mulder, just a real quick word association exercise, okay? Work with me.

Bill Clinton was a _[adjective]__ President because __[50 word or less explanation]__

Horny Bastard?

Actually, Slick Willie was an "OK" President--the best thing he did was stay out of the way and let the blazing economy of the 90s spawned by the Tech and Internet Revolution blaze on without trying to regulate it (since Algore invented it and all, I think that was pretty big of him). What I did not like about Slick was he did everything by popularity polls--that is he didn't make a move without a poll to determine which move would be the popular move. I think when you elect a President you need one that's going to make unpopular decisions even if means he/she is going to pay for it personally. That's what I admire about George Bush--there plenty I don't approve of but the man is not afraid to make a decision regardless of the perceived popularity.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

I don't care if you accept it or not--I simply stated a fact and it has nothing to do with a political agenda.

Deny it all you want, but you too have an agenda. It's your view of how the world should be. If someone was willing to work for free, you'd be all for free labor and U.S. employees can just take a hike.

And for me it's not personal other than my view is based what looks fair to me just as you think it's fair that if someone in India is willing to fly my plane for $1 an hour, I should just quit my job and stand aside for market value.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Deny it all you want, but you too have an agenda. It's your view of how the world should be. If someone was willing to work for free, you'd be all for free labor and U.S. employees can just take a hike.

And for me it's not personal other than my view is based what looks fair to me just as you think it's fair that if someone in India is willing to fly my plane for $1 an hour, I should just quit my job and stand aside for market value.

Its got nothing whatsoever to do with fairness or agenda or Repubican or Democrat or politics at all anymore than algebra or geometry have an agenda in arriving at the correct answer--its economics--its somethng neither you nor I can control or change by legislation or union extortion. Water in the deepend of a pool is always deeper than the shallow end no matter how much water you poor into the shallow end--you can make ripples and you can make fleeting temporary changes, but you can't change the laws of physics or economics. Unions can't create economic equality--all they can do is change the inequality from one group to another or some individuals from another. As I said, make no mistake about it many many Americans have suffered for you to have your extra dollar at the end of the day. Now you can rationalize it all you want--you can villainize your employer or whomever you wish but at the end of the day you've taken food out of someone else's mouth for your own gain--there is really no other economic reality your perception of reality nothwithstanding.

 

[IntruderLS1]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

On Unions:

You are both (Fox & Minor) absolutely correct on your view of unions, but from different vantage points. It's always going to be a balancing act with them, and I don't see actual long term resolution coming any time soon, as that would require both the lack of greed, AND a strongly ingrained work ethic in the majority.

In a perfect world, a non-regulated market place will always keep wages fair out of necessity. If you want to be the best, you have to hire the best, and you have to pay the best. The problem is there are unspoken cartels that form without design or effort. They start industry specific, but then grow like a cancer. Eventually, you have a situation where the "little" guy is a prisoner to industry.

In come unions. Labor organization forces "at gunpoint" (to borrow a colorful expression) industry to treat the "little guy" with respect. Balance is restored.

Now what? Now power is shifted, and the abuse starts to fly in a different direction. The unions demand more and more and more, and always with the thread of "give us, or else." Business is now the hostage. They can no longer be competitive in a world economy, and are forced to look overseas to grow.

Poor little guy all over again.

Union is destroyed, little guy is screwed and out of luck. Labor becomes more available and profitable for business to continue in our home country. Repeat as necessary.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

On Unions:

You are both (Fox & Minor) absolutely correct on your view of unions, but from different vantage points. It's always going to be a balancing act with them, and I don't see actual long term resolution coming any time soon, as that would require both the lack of greed, AND a strongly ingrained work ethic in the majority.

In a perfect world, a non-regulated market place will always keep wages fair out of necessity. If you want to be the best, you have to hire the best, and you have to pay the best. The problem is there are unspoken cartels that form without design or effort. They start industry specific, but then grow like a cancer. Eventually, you have a situation where the "little" guy is a prisoner to industry.

In come unions. Labor organization forces "at gunpoint" (to borrow a colorful expression) industry to treat the "little guy" with respect. Balance is restored.

Now what? Now power is shifted, and the abuse starts to fly in a different direction. The unions demand more and more and more, and always with the thread of "give us, or else." Business is now the hostage. They can no longer be competitive in a world economy, and are forced to look overseas to grow.

Poor little guy all over again.

Union is destroyed, little guy is screwed and out of luck. Labor becomes more available and profitable for business to continue in our home country. Repeat as necessary.

I more or less agree with this summary. Maybe we need to try Socialism!

 

[IntruderLS1]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

I more or less agree with this summary. Maybe we need to try Socialism!

:willy_nilly:

Bite your tongue!!

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Now that I've slept on it, any system of government that I can imagine, to be of value to the populace must be set up so that full time jobs must pay a living wage and a standard of a clean environment and good health care is a must. I realize this may be easier said than done.

Regardless, corporations don't have to go overseas to excel, they go over because as pragmatists they see a relatively easy way to increase their profits, and their employees are expendable. It's that simple. Corporations don't care as they are designed only to make profits. Morality is something separate. Owners may or may not exhibit morality. They may care deeply about their employees, but large corporations tend to be the opposite, viewing employees ONLY as expenses. We, this country, should view ourselves as a team or a family, a group of people and we look out for each other. Large corporations in many cases don't fit that mold and don't give a damn. That's why I say the government is the only chance the working class has. It must value the workers and take steps to be sure they are not taken advantage of.

In the ideal world that benefits all, the Corporations will just have to accept profits of a billion dollars instead of 10-100x that because they don't want to share a decent piece of pie with their workers.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Now that I've slept on it, any system of government that I can imagine, to be of value to the populace must be set up so that full time jobs must pay a living wage and a standard of a clean environment and good health care is a must. I realize this may be easier said than done.

You still don't grasp basic economics 101, do you? If you did, you'd realize how utterly ridiculous that statement is. You honestly need to Google Economics, supply and demand, minimum wage, etc--its also why you have such a difficult time understading why unions do not work for the worker in general (certainly for the few who happen to be members it works). What you are advocating is communism in a nutshell.

Let me give you an example. Let's say we pass legislation that says every American must be paid a "living wage". Government studies are done and its determined that $20 an hour is a living wage. So now the minimum wage is raised to $20 an hour. And remember that you also have to raise all people on SS and disability to $20 an hour as well. Let's put aside for the time being the effect of the outside economy (i.e., the rest of the world and assume the US is a self sufficient economy with no reliance on outside countries goods and services). Now WTF do you think is going to happen to the cost of goods and services? Seriously--think that through and then you yourself can come back and tell me why your statement is so ridiculous--I have confdience you will figure this out.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

You still don't grasp basic economics 101, do you? If you did, you'd realize how utterly ridiculous that statement is. You honestly need to Google Economics, supply and demand, minimum wage, etc--its also why you have such a difficult time understading why unions do not work for the worker in general (certainly for the few who happen to be members it works). What you are advocating is communism in a nutshell.

I disagree with your conclusion. What I stated is an ideal. When people disagree with you, your habit is to accuse them of being ignorant. There is economics and then there are moral choices. You also assume that ecomomics 101 dictates how greedy you are supposed to be, mired in a view that places the business owner on top and leaves the worker scraping the bottom. You have all these reasons why the most advanced economies of our time can't see fit to pay living wages to it's workers. Basically it's screw-you-employee. Again, I'm focused on large corporations, not small business owners. Especially for them, (small business owners) universal health care would be a good development.

For large corporations taking less but still a healthy profit and taking care of their workers is a good thing. Do you know how many corporations are hiring people into full time jobs then cutting back their hours so they don't qualify for benefits? I know lots of people who are facing this. It's total BS. And when enough people are disenfranchised, that is exactly when you'll see moves to socialism or communism, although I'm not advocating that. If the government does not regulate labor laws adequately, the greedy bastards at the top will end up causing a revolution because the majority will eventually get sick of it.

 

[Fox Mulder]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

I disagree with your conclusion. What I stated is an ideal. When people disagree with you, your habit is to accuse them of being ignorant. There is economics and then there are moral choices. You also assume that ecomomics 101 dictates how greedy you are supposed to be, mired in a view that places the business owner on top and leaves the worker scraping the bottom. You have all these reasons why the most advanced economies of our time can't see fit to pay living wages to it's workers. Basically it's screw-you-employee. Again, I'm focused on large corporations, not small business owners. Especially for them, (small business owners) universal health care would be a good development.

For large corporations taking less but still a healthy profit and taking care of their workers is a good thing. Do you know how many corporations are hiring people into full time jobs then cutting back their hours so they don't qualify for benefits? I know lots of people who are facing this. It's total BS. And when enough people are disenfranchised, that is exactly when you'll see moves to socialism or communism, although I'm not advocating that. If the government does not regulate labor laws adequately, the greedy bastards at the top will end up causing a revolution because the majority will eventually get sick of it.

Minor--I really wish I wasn't going to die and I never ever again had to experience any suffering from loss or anyone in my family---that's an ideal--there is as much chance of every worker being paid a "living wage" as there is me (or you) living forever--you and I can disuss how nice it wouldl be until the cows come home and we acomplish nothing.

I am simply asking you to tell me how you would accomplish paying every working person a living wage? I absolutely don't disagree with the ideal, I am simply asking you how that could possibly be accomplished from an economics standpoint, not from an idealistic standpoint (and please don't lecture us about corporate greed that has absolutely nothing to do with the principles of economics that make your ideal impossible). And while you are talking about corporate greed, you might want to consider what union greed has done to the average worker.

 

[Minor Axis]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

Minor--I really wish I wasn't going to die and I never ever again had to experience any suffering from loss or anyone in my family---that's an ideal--there is as much chance of every worker being paid a "living wage" as there is me (or you) living forever--you and I can disuss how nice it wouldl be until the cows come home and we acomplish nothing.

I am simply asking you to tell me how you would accomplish paying every working person a living wage? I absolutely don't disagree with the ideal, I am simply asking you how that could possibly be accomplished from an economics standpoint, not from an idealistic standpoint (and please don't lecture us about corporate greed that has absolutely nothing to do with the principles of economics that make your ideal impossible). And while you are talking about corporate greed, you might want to consider what union greed has done to the average worker.

Economics 101 does not say that CEOs must make 400x what the average employee makes. You're just like the Republicans who when asked about global warming, don't ask is it possible? but state, "prove it!", a predisposed certainty of what is or is not possible, but more likely an answer based on ideology and preference. In this example, global warming is going to cost business more money so deny, deny, deny and maybe you won't have to change your profit margins.

In regards to any serious job that requires full time skilled employees, a living wage is fair and if the system can't handle it then you should question the system's faults. If it's a non-skilled job, then you do reap the rewards of not putting out any effort.

Regarding union greed, that is just propaganda fostered by people with a vested interest in keeping workers' pay as low as possible. My experience with unions is in the airline industry. Unions help employees and see that they get paid a fair wage, basically demanding a fair piece of the pie, that large corporations instinctually don't want to share.

Your tunnel vision is directed directly at workers, despite bonuses in corporate pay, ceo pay that's skyrocketed to astronomical heights, your only focus is on the workers who without a union have no say and just want to live a decent life. Man they are evil.

 

[Carthage]

Re: Is the Bush Administration Guilty of Illegal Wiretapping? US Constitution--Lesson

I'm just saying that: its the government. If they can abuse something and misuse it, they WILL.

I just couldn't help but think about tax money when a Socialist posted this. Couldn't they establish bogus programs that just end up lining their own pockets?

Sorry this is from the first page and it's been a few since then, but I just had to add that. Carry on.