(October 19, 2016 at 4:00 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Thing is, though, is it really okay to put illegals to work for sub minimum wages and fail to pay taxes -etc- on their labor?

It certainly isn't OK. But even over here in Europe there are jobs - legal, taxed and fully insured jobs - no citizen of the richer country would touch with their fingertips. Cleaning - oh, pardon me - it's called maintanance now when you rub off the shit from a soiled toilet, orderlies at hospitals and nursing the elderly, flipping burgers, bus driving even, only to mention a few of them. Mostly they are done by immigrants from Eastern European countries with hospital work, for some reason being a Philipino domain.

I guess it's the same in the US. The ones bawling at the top of their lungs over restricting immigration would be the first ones to complain if these services were no longer available. Or if they had to stoop to that level of employment.

Well, it's not going to be anything I'm doing that changes shit.  I do proof of concepts and economic feasibility studies.  Kind of fell into this when I worked for the Resource Conservation and Development Council.  Did some shit for the NRCS (formerly the US Soil Conservation Service) and EPA.  Not the average redneck with a tractor, more a metrics guy with an engineering background who sometimes dabbles in customer management and public relations, lol. Best part of the job was giving tours to geriatrics and kindergarteners.

We were assessing the economic feasibility of water reclamation in commercial agriculture (specific to the area and it;s main cropping sequence), and sort of stumbled onto a use for it as an input in alternative ag after our corporate partners abandoned us to cash in on some easy money during a bad year, by blaming us for their bad year, ofc.

Now, I'm just a hobbyist (rather than a lobbyist), lol. Every once in awhile I dream about plugging in with some of the groups up here who are working on things I;m interested in - but that would cut into my me-time. Couldn't post here anymore, for example, lol. It'd be bad for business. Too much exposure.

(October 19, 2016 at 4:40 pm)Rhythm Wrote: Well, it's not going to be anything I'm doing that changes shit.  I do proof of concepts and economic feasibility studies.  Kind of fell into this when I worked for the Florida West Coast RCD.  Did some shit for the NRCS (formerly the US Soil Conservation Service) and EPA.  Not the average redneck with a tractor, more a metrics guy with an engineering background who sometimes dabbles in customer management, lol.

We were assessing the economic feasibility of runoff water reclamation in commercial agriculture, and sort of stumbled onto a use for it as an input in alternative ag after our corporate partners abandoned us to cash in on some easy money during a bad year

Ok, my bad.

So . . . no tractor?   At least tell me you own a plaid work shirt. I'll take that.

@abaris
I bet you'd find that  americans wouldn't have a problem scrubbing toilets or picking oranges for the pay in EU countries...we probably already do it for less. 

@Cross
...nah man...nah. I;m a florida boy. I wear polo shirts, cargo pants and flip flops to work. The most redneckish I get are metal leg-guards. Fuckin snakes. No, wait, wait, would a curled straw cowboy hat count?

(October 19, 2016 at 4:55 pm)Rhythm Wrote: I bet you'd find that  americans wouldn't have a problem scrubbing toilets or picking oranges for the pay in EU countries...we probably already do it for less. 

I'm not betting you on that. But many Americans don't even know. They don't inform themselves outside their own news networks, which report shockingly little on the rest of the world.

(October 19, 2016 at 3:41 pm)Rhythm Wrote:

(October 19, 2016 at 3:32 pm)Asmodee Wrote: Wait, wait, wait.  You are telling me that ONE HUNDRED PERCENT of gun deaths are suicide and meth heads???  Let me check the math here....6/10 are suicides....the remaining 4 is drugs....that sure seem to add up to 100%.  At least you have an objective opinion here, not at all tainted by bullshit statistics you just pull right out of your ass or anything.

Sure do, but only if you accept cdc and doj stats and decades of reporting by organizations like the new york times as objective.  The reason we have a gun problem in this country is that we can't get anti-gun folks to focus on the gun problem in this country...even though they seem to be, and see themselves as, the ones most motivated to solve it.   You've got google, let wonder lead you to knowledge.  


I hope you don't mind that I snipped the rest, I don't feel like bickering with you over irrelevancies, or backtracking you through every jot and tittle of your statements.  It would be tiresome.  The forums exist, the posts are there.  Good enough for me.

I don't mind at all that you snipped the rest.  These discussions can grow quickly tiring.

But I don't see you actually answering the question there.  100% of gun deaths in America are suicides and drug related?  You know that isn't true.  I've read at least 3 or 4 articles in the past few months about toddlers shooting people because of careless gun owners.  There are PLENTY of accidental deaths by gun.  And the Pulse night club was a crazy person, not 49 suicides while scoring a fix.

Look, I know you weren't really saying that 100% of gun deaths are suicides and drug related.  I know you don't really believe that.  What I am attempting to point out is that artificially changing the statistics in your favor shows a bias and maybe you're not really being objective here.  Artificially changing those numbers to be 100% in your favor is taking it to a ludicrous level of bias.

And the CDC can't study gun violence and haven't been allowed to for 20 years, so I'm not sure where these numbers from the CDC you mentioned are supposed to be coming from.

But you know what?  We really shouldn't be hijacking the thread for a personal side discussion.  We disagree and that's okay.  Go ahead and get in another response if you like and then what say we call it good after that?  We are unlikely to convince each other, we probably have more common ground than we realize anyway and, really, it doesn't matter.  We don't agree on something because we're not robots with a hive mind.  It's not a big deal.

(October 20, 2016 at 11:25 am)Asmodee Wrote: I don't mind at all that you snipped the rest.  These discussions can grow quickly tiring.

But I don't see you actually answering the question there.  100% of gun deaths in America are suicides and drug related?  You know that isn't true.  I've read at least 3 or 4 articles in the past few months about toddlers shooting people because of careless gun owners.  There are PLENTY of accidental deaths by gun.  And the Pulse night club was a crazy person, not 49 suicides while scoring a fix.

Look, I know you weren't really saying that 100% of gun deaths are suicides and drug related.  I know you don't really believe that.  What I am attempting to point out is that artificially changing the statistics in your favor shows a bias and maybe you're not really being objective here.  Artificially changing those numbers to be 100% in your favor is taking it to a ludicrous level of bias.

I'm comfortable ommitting a statisically irrelevant fraction of a percent when discussing our gun problem..because our gun problem isn't the statistically irrelevant fraction of a percent.  Our gun problem is the 6 suicides and 3.9repeating drug war related shootings.  If you'd like to discuss that fraction of a percent that's fine. I'd only tell you that it's a problem with not prosecuting people for clear violations of laws already on the books....not a gun problem. This, too, can easily be checked and referenced.

Quote:And the CDC can't study gun violence and haven't been allowed to for 20 years, so I'm not sure where these numbers from the CDC you mentioned are supposed to be coming from.

That doesn;t prevent them from listing causes of death, and those numbers are useful regardless of whether or not they;re allowed to publish a study.  The doj -is- allowed to publish a statement and study, they have, and they back up the numbers presented -by- the cdc and reported on for decades by organizations which I accept as reliable sources of expositional journalism. I told you to google it, I can see that you haven't. You don;t accept me as a credible source and you won;t seek out a source you accept to be credible. Where are we supposed to go from here?

Quote:But you know what?  We really shouldn't be hijacking the thread for a personal side discussion.  We disagree and that's okay.  Go ahead and get in another response if you like and then what say we call it good after that?  We are unlikely to convince each other, we probably have more common ground than we realize anyway and, really, it doesn't matter.  We don't agree on something because we're not robots with a hive mind.  It's not a big deal.

It is a big deal, our gun problem is a big deal, and the inability of people to accept it for what it is...prefering instead to turn it into a political wedge issue...or even worse, something we agree to disagree on...intentionally or unintentionally, is a travesty..imo.

Also...last word!  

(October 19, 2016 at 4:55 pm)Rhythm Wrote: @Cross
...nah man...nah.  I;m a florida boy.  I wear polo shirts, cargo pants and flip flops to work.  The most redneckish I get are metal leg-guards.  Fuckin snakes.  No, wait, wait, would a curled straw cowboy hat count?

Yes, that will do.

Awesome, glad I saved my redneck street cred with the judicious application of strategic hat choice.  

Getting back to what we were bsin about, though....I'm hard pressed to find a candidate who does more to effect the changes we might want than the people down at the bottom digging the holes, mortaring the cracks.  Does hillary do more for children and families (she loves hammering that one) than those families have done for themselves and their children?  More than local food banks, business owners, or charitable organizations?  Does she do anything at all, or does she just claim credit for the work those people do in order to aggrandize herself as a political candidate who's worthy of our vote?  I'd ask the same of trump, but that fucker doesn't do anything to begin with...so, lol?  It just seems like an artifact of a time when the men on high handed down scraps and favors, and we were all hostages to their whims and ticks. I don;t think that;s actually the case anymore, though I can see why those on high would be incentivized to either promote the narrative by presenting themselves as the man come to save us from ourselves....or at the very least by allowing conned people to perpetuate that very same notion without correcting our mis-perceptions.

What's it going to take, I wonder, to get people to abandon the top down dream....expressed in a hundred ways (from trickle down economics to the anti-establishment candidate be it bernie or trump, or the stiff cuff of hillary's jacket, lol)?

(October 19, 2016 at 2:52 pm)Crossless1 Wrote: I have a better idea. Dismantle the government apparatus underpinning the drug war, and let those involved find honest work for a change. Maybe they can help build your stupid wall.

It's not my stupid wall, I'm not American.