Pill boy smirks at Congressional hearing.

[Brian37]

Lewis Black, I think, summarized my entire position on the matter.  I'm not sure that life (particularly in this case the maintenance thereof) should be a for-profit enterprise.

Unfortunately life didn't evolve with a barter free reality, we are social animals and long before coins and paper, humans used goods as money.

So unless we can figure out how to get rid of bartering and still be social, the best we can do is insure the game isn't rigged or monopolized.

Humans run every aspect of life, economic, political and religious so whatever system is up, or gets knocked down and replaced with something else, there still will be those who are greedy and seek power.

[Minimalist]

At the same time Reagan started deregulation and union busting, that was also the beginning of the GOP well funded anti "commie" "religious" "anti patriotic" propaganda, and voter apathy didn't help either.

Absolutely.  The senile old fuck was the beginning of the end of the US as a major power.

[The Grand Nudger]

I doubt that's the best we can do.  People save peoples lives without payment with fair regularity.  The argument has always been that profit motivates....and that's fine, I suppose..but when profit is only motivating the pursuit of further profit, rather than the delivery of life saving services or products... or even innovation....it's lost it's justification.

And remember, the context of failure in life, for these businesses..is that people die. The purpose of a for profit hospital or medication, despite all of the bullshit they put in the pamplets, is not to save life, it's to generate money. So people die even when these businesses succeed.

Now, we have laws against people profiting by buying and selling people, but apparently so long as you merely hold their life hostage rather than outright declare ownership of it, that's a-okay.

[Brian37]

I doubt that's the best we can do.  People save peoples lives without payment with fair regularity.  The argument has always been that profit motivates....and that's fine, I suppose..but when profit is only motivating the pursuit of further profit, rather than the delivery of life saving services or products... or even innovation....it's lost it's justification.

And remember, the context of failure in life, for these businesses..is that people die.  The purpose of a for profit hospital or medication, despite all of the bullshit they put in the pamplets, is not to save life, it's to generate money.  So people die even when these businesses succeed.

Now, we have laws against people profiting by buying and selling people, but apparently so long as you merely hold their life hostage rather than outright declare ownership of it, that's a-okay.

I agree, but that isn't just about health care, our planet depends on reducing pollution by getting off fossil fuels, it depends on more food sources and better pay and education for women and workers WORLDWIDE.

Unfortunately whatever good uses the stock market started out as, it simply has become a global Ponzy scheme. It is simply the rich shuffling money around. They have gone from a priority of innovation and improving the human condition to thinking money is literally something you plant like a seed. The rich are the ones that literally think money grows on trees.

Now again, that is not all wealth, just that the CLIMATE has produced just enough bad apples to cause otherwise what would be sensible business practices to become a chase for profit. It simply cannot just be profit for profits sake.

[The Grand Nudger]

It's not like they can be anything other than profit for profits sake.  It's how they are arranged (it;s how they got big relative to the others, fewer mitigating factors concerning what to do in -x- situation, you just follow the money), they can't do anything else and continue to be what they currently are simultaneously.  

The law, the climate...... isn't even a factor.  When the law inconveniences, business breaks the law - it's cheaper to pay the penalty than to pay the "market price" they're always pumping up as super-awesome and a great way to do things. They won't pay it, even after all the lip service. If we use our "free market" privilege to stop buying their shit or get it from someone else........ they try to prevent us from doing that by law..forcing us to buy their product or preventing anyone else from selling it.

Even -they- know they're full of shit, judging by their actions.

[Brian37]

I doubt that's the best we can do.  People save peoples lives without payment with fair regularity.  The argument has always been that profit motivates....and that's fine, I suppose..but when profit is only motivating the pursuit of further profit, rather than the delivery of life saving services or products... or even innovation....it's lost it's justification.

And remember, the context of failure in life, for these businesses..is that people die.  The purpose of a for profit hospital or medication, despite all of the bullshit they put in the pamplets, is not to save life, it's to generate money.  So people die even when these businesses succeed.

Now, we have laws against people profiting by buying and selling people, but apparently so long as you merely hold their life hostage rather than outright declare ownership of it, that's a-okay.

I hope I didn't imply there is no room for improvement, hell yes there is room for improvement. All I meant by "the best we can do" didn't mean stop, it simply means that humans are not monochromatic and lust for power will always exist, so the best we can do, and certainly we can do a better job keeping power in check. 

Right, I agree, you shift the rules around, you can still be a dick but market it as "what everyone wants". Being a hostage due to pay gap is really no better than slavery.

[The Grand Nudger]

Meh, that's taking it a bit far.  Not having the money to pay the man to ride the donkey is -alot- better than being owned by the man, and -being- the donkey.  Though, admittedly, it can get difficult to tell which situation a person is in sometimes.

Calling the wage gap "no better than slavery" shits on anyone who's ever been a slave. Pretty sure that plenty of liberated slaves preferred their menial jobs to their status as property. Don't get me wrong, if big business had their way they wouldn't even be doling out menial jobs. Slavery is a fucking wet dream for the pursuit of profit. Big Sugar was the originator, the ancestral model for all subsequent international big biz...........and we know how they felt about slavery. They're marginally better today, after 400 years of "ethical progress"...in that they now pay a wage...but they still just dump illegals and migrants on the curb of a hospital, if they even help at all.. when they get snakebit. Bit like dropping off a mangy stray at a shelter in the middle of the night to avoid paying any fee or filling out paperwork. No, wait, not a bit like that, that's -exactly- what they're doing.

Bonus, you rarely have to pay them that last weeks wage..they get deported before they can complain.

Thankfully, beet farmers have taken this market away from the old guard (cane ranches)...and the conditions they offer are marginally better still..most through no effort of their own, mind you, but at least they can claim it.

[Brian37]

Meh, that's taking it a bit far.  Not having the money to pay the man to ride the donkey is -alot- better than being owned by the man, and -being- the donkey.  Though, admittedly, it can get difficult to tell which situation a person is in sometimes.

Calling the wage gap "no better than slavery" shits on anyone who's ever been a slave.  Pretty sure that plenty of liberated slaves preferred their menial jobs to their status as property.  Don't get me wrong, if big business had their way they wouldn't even be doling out menial jobs.  Slavery is a fucking wet dream for the pursuit of profit.  Big Sugar was the originator, the ancestral model for all subsequent international big biz...........and we know how they felt about slavery.  They're marginally better today, after 400 years of "ethical progress"...in that they now pay a wage...but they still just dump illegals and migrants on the curb of a hospital, if they even help at all..  when they get snakebit.   Bit like dropping off a mangy stray at a shelter in the middle of the night to avoid paying any fee or filling out paperwork.  No, wait, not a bit like that, that's -exactly- what they're doing.  

Bonus, you rarely have to pay them that last weeks wage..they get deported before they can complain.

Thankfully, beet farmers have taken this market away from the old guard (cane ranches)...and the conditions they offer are marginally better still..most through no effort of their own, mind you, but at least they can claim it.

Hold on, not being able to pay your bills most certainly is a form of slavery, no not the ownership part, but by proxy, "hostage". You can train a dog and a horse with a leash at first, but train them long enough, they walk by you without the leash. You still depend on the trainer for survival.

Even Martin Luther King Jr had the attitude that when minorities do well everyone does better. It still amounts to a society is as only as good as it's weakest link. 

I only agree that the brutality physically yes was far worse and also based on bible based bigotry. But you don't need physical chains on you to be stuck in poverty and be dependent on your master.

Same difference between a parent being physically abusive, and another being merely mentally abusive, you don't have to be physically abusive to make people desperate and dependent.

Poverty is a form of slavery, it allows the rich to pass the poor around like poker chips.

[The Grand Nudger]

Again, shitting on anyone who has ever been a slave.  Poverty can be used to oppress, as slavery was used to oppress, sure.  That doesn't make them the same thing.  It;s kind of amusing, because back in the day, the pro slavery side used to claim and imply that slaves would rather be slaves than be poor.........Now Cletus, if you leave this farm how will you pay your bills, how will you eat?  

..I think they were wrong about that.

I've been paid shitty wages, and I've paid shitty wages...I have never been nor have I ever owned any slaves.  We have to leave a little room for things to be themselves, to have identity, otherwise everything is everything and our comments on anything boil down to nothing.

Years ago, when I first came here and I was just starting out in being "the boss" in my own life, my own private business...I was a big "wage slave" guy.. (a quick post search would confirm, lol). I've since come to think that this is not representative and entirely disrespectful..even though I don't think much more of "wage slave" jobs or the situation that those people are in. It is undeniably a far, far cry from the reality of slavery...imo.

[Brian37]

Again, shitting on anyone who has ever been a slave.  Poverty can be used to oppress, as slavery was used to oppress, sure.  That doesn't make them the same thing.  It;s kind of amusing, because back in the day, the pro slavery side used to claim and imply that slaves would rather be slaves than be poor.........Now Cletus, if you leave this farm how will you pay your bills, how will you eat?  

..I think they were wrong about that.  

I've been paid shitty wages, and I've paid shitty wages...I have never been nor have I ever owned any slaves.  We have to leave a little room for things to be themselves, to have identity, otherwise everything is everything and our comments on anything boil down to nothing.

Years ago, when I first came here and I was just starting out in being "the boss" in my own life, my own private business...I was a big "wage slave" guy.. (a quick post search would confirm, lol).  I've since come to think that this is not representative and entirely disrespectful..even though I don't think much more of "wage slave" jobs or the situation that those people are in.  It is undeniably a far, far cry from the reality of slavery...imo.

Dude, not shitting on anyone. I think you are reading more into it than I am actually saying. 

Poverty is used to oppress and slavery was used to oppress. THAT WAS MY POINT. I was never claiming I can know what it was like to be abused and forced labor, no. I most certainly DONT equate myself to being a pre civil war slave at all. But that does not change that our pay gap is is allowing the rich more control  over workers. 

We are not in disagreement. I was using metaphor. Now if you want to argue you don't think that was a good analogy make that argument. 

My point was the wage gap increasing allows the rich to control workers more which creates desperation and dependency on the rich.