Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Stupid British government went along with the stupid EU governing body. Much like governments across the globe and especially here in the US where our own government serves the rich elites interest, and ignores the common citizen.

---

The revolt is against the failures of the progressive Wilsonian federal administrative state . Wilson said the constitution was obsolete .He held that the business of politics( elections)should be separated from the administration of government, which would be overseen by unelected "experts", who would write the regulatory controls the nation is governed under .Unelected and highly trained experts could govern the nation more rationally, effectively, and responsibly than elected representatives. Elected legislatures roles would be diminished . This happened in the US over a century of destruction of constitutional principles . It was introduced in Europe 1st through the introduction of Bismarck and Fabian socialism ...then later expanded with the introduction of the EU .
Trump is not a revolution (he represents the final nail in the coffin of the Republican party), He. would just bring his own 'experts ' into the system. He argues against the incompetence and corruption of the people running the government (much like you do Tal) .He does not speak at all of reforming the big federal system .If anything he call for more of it(just like the inconsistent and incomprehensible babble that came from Bernie Sanders ,and Elizabeth Warren) . You never hear him speak of returning to constitutional governance .

He would be another emperor with a 'pen and a phone'. The only difference is in his mind ,would be the better manager of the leviathan .He would pay for his expansive programs by eliminating “waste, fraud, and abuse”.....he'll 'make deals'.

You don't believe me ? Read the transcripts of his interview about health care :

Donald Trump: Obamacare’s going to be repealed and replaced. Obamacare is a disaster if you look at what’s going on with premiums where they’re up 40, 50, 55 percent.
Scott Pelley: How do you fix it?
Donald Trump: There’s many different ways, by the way. Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, ‘No, no, the lower 25 percent that can’t afford private. But–‘
Scott Pelley: Universal health care.
Donald Trump: I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.
Scott Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?
Donald Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably–
Scott Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?
Donald Trump: –the government’s gonna pay for it. But we’re going to save so much money on the other side. But for the most it’s going to be a private plan and people are going to be able to go out and negotiate great plans with lots of different competition with lots of competitors with great companies and they can have their doctors, they can have plans, they can have everything.

And it is not just in health care . He promises big government executive action on almost every issue be it social security ;be it trade.

Glad to have you back in CE, Tom! Have missed your input.

To the subject at hand, no matter the position or ideology, the lack of consensus action by government is at the heart of the matter. Hillary has a website full of detailed plans trump does not and I agree he seeks to destroy the republican party like he destroyed the primary candidates.

At least he grasps that the ordinary guy has been given a really raw deal and that's a global fact. The Donald cannot destroy repubs without the support of other repubs and they sure have voted for him so far.

Whether you believe he can deliver on his rhetoric is another story, as in Briton, more will be revealed later.

Quote:

---

At least he grasps that the ordinary guy has been given a really raw deal

---

and you think Evita hasn't been complicit in this betrayal ? The fact that she has policy positions authored by someone else does not impress me . I know where she stands . She will repudiate even the moderation that the philanderer in chief had when he ran the DNC and the Presidency after Newt reigned him in. The next 4-8 years will determine whether (in the words of Lincoln ) 'government by the people ,for the people' ,can stand . Neither candidate gives me much hope .

I think it is time to close this thread, because it is no longer about brexit. Now we are talking about political arguments in south america... okay

@Tickle: Brexit didn't develop in a vacuum, nor is it an isolated event either.

This started LONG before Clinton Tom, and well before the decline of industry in the 1970's. Government allowed Big Biz to do as it pleased because there was then, and always has been a huge profit in CHEAP labor, even as technology made jobs OBSOLETE.

This double whammy has profound negative effects on generations of workers throughout the world. So why are we just now taking notice and speaking out? I guess you have to get screwed for years before you say ouch and then a fool comes along to finish scaring the crap out of you.

South America?

I've read the Brits have two years to bring the Exit to pass. I've also read there are mutterings about having a second referendum. What is true?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

@Tickle: Brexit didn't develop in a vacuum, nor is it an isolated event either.

This started LONG before Clinton Tom, and well before the decline of industry in the 1970's. Government allowed Big Biz to do as it pleased because there was then, and always has been a huge profit in CHEAP labor, even as technology made jobs OBSOLETE.

This double whammy has profound negative effects on generations of workers throughout the world. So why are we just now taking notice and speaking out? I guess you have to get screwed for years before you say ouch and then a fool comes along to finish scaring the crap out of you.

---

so why does the party that cares for the workers encourage the illegal immigration of cheap labor into the country ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tickle

I think it is time to close this thread, because it is no longer about brexit. Now we are talking about political arguments in south america... okay

---

This is the type of thing that drove me away from this site .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

so why does the party that cares for the workers encourage the illegal immigration of cheap labor into the country ?

---

Again I go back to the inability of government to reach a consensus which in this case is immigration reform. I also submit in the absence of such consensus, Big Biz exploits cheap labor in many instances across the service industry with not raising wages.

You are well aware of my Walmart argument where workers wages are subsidized by taxpayers aren't you? They are also given huge tax breaks by local governments. I also submit that the party that cares for workers (Your words) is pushing for a minimum wage increase, already adapted in some locations/states (And employers, Walmart being one).

Hmm... wonder who uses cheap illegal immigrants labor in the US? Wonder what happens if Trump gets his way and destroys NAFTA? I doubt we could help our friends the Brits deal with their BREXIT!

Have to add that Mexicans have come north to work for many decades before it was illegal, and the work is STILL here, but they aren't the only illegal immigrants here.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Again I go back to the inability of government to reach a consensus which in this case is immigration reform. I also submit in the absence of such consensus, Big Biz exploits cheap labor in many instances across the service industry with not raising wages.

You are well aware of my Walmart argument where workers wages are subsidized by taxpayers aren't you? They are also given huge tax breaks by local governments. I also submit that the party that cares for workers (Your words) is pushing for a minimum wage increase, already adapted in some locations/states (And employers, Walmart being one).

Hmm... wonder who uses cheap illegal immigrants labor in the US? Wonder what happens if Trump gets his way and destroys NAFTA? I doubt we could help our friends the Brits deal with their BREXIT!

Have to add that Mexicans have come north to work for many decades before it was illegal, and the work is STILL here, but they aren't the only illegal immigrants here.

---

All right Tal what price a MEXIT. The Britons will have their BREXIT because Britain will never join the UNITED STATES OF EUROPE and give away their soveriengty. This was about more than trade, it was about more than immigration, Germany has been driving an agenda allowing them to at last conquer Europe.
The US faces the problem of migration from Mexico, not content with jobs flowing south, the mexicans seek to take over the US by migration, this can be slowed by repudiating NAFTA, closing the border and deporting illegals. Your free trade philosophies have backfired, you have given away the industries and still they come, because they don't just want work as peons, they want the life style too

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Again I go back to the inability of government to reach a consensus which in this case is immigration reform. I also submit in the absence of such consensus, Big Biz exploits cheap labor in many instances across the service industry with not raising wages.

You are well aware of my Walmart argument where workers wages are subsidized by taxpayers aren't you? They are also given huge tax breaks by local governments. I also submit that the party that cares for workers (Your words) is pushing for a minimum wage increase, already adapted in some locations/states (And employers, Walmart being one).

Hmm... wonder who uses cheap illegal immigrants labor in the US? Wonder what happens if Trump gets his way and destroys NAFTA? I doubt we could help our friends the Brits deal with their BREXIT!

Have to add that Mexicans have come north to work for many decades before it was illegal, and the work is STILL here, but they aren't the only illegal immigrants here.

---

Given your argument that companies are evil money grubbing greedy bass turds ; what do you think the REAL effect of minimum wages will be ? What impact do you think it will have on the small business that can barely afford to pay their employees now ? I thought you guys cared about mom and pop businesses on Main Street . Guess not . They will either close, hike up their prices in the hopes that the consumer understands(customers won't ) , flee the town , or consolidate positions and eliminate jobs. You ask what the impact of the min wage increase to $15 will have and is having on municipalities where it already initiated ? Any employee who cannot produce $15 an hour in value for their employers cannot legally work in that town . That includes high school and college students who are looking to pay for their education and have some pocket change ,but don't plan on slicing bologna the rest of their lives . Oregon lawmakers passed their law before state hired economists checked in. They concluded that the new law will cost Oregon 40,000 jobs that low wage workers would've filled .
Forbes Welcome

$15 Minimum Wage Sends California Businesses Fleeing | The Daily Caller

You pay lip service to helping the low wage and unskilled worker . But your actions speak another language .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

South America?

I've read the Brits have two years to bring the Exit to pass. I've also read there are mutterings about having a second referendum. What is true?

---

Brexit is too good to be true . So it probably won't happen. The vote that took place is not binding. Parliament has the final say on whether the U.K. leaves the EU. Also ,as you say ,there is already a movement being orchestrated by the elites in London to have another referendum.

Article 50 of the EU says that the EU must be informed by the country leadership before secession can take place. Cameron already said he is leaving that to a successor .There are some who say the PM should not invoke Art 50 until Parliament passes an approval. Most of Parliament is opposed to Brexit .Parliament will have to be dissolved with new elections ,and pro-Brexit MPs installed .
There is also a possibility that the Scottish Parliament could nix it .

Even if Art 50 is invoked ,it takes 2 years to negotiate the terms of dissolution .

Lip service Tom is giving an employer the right to place a value on another human. Profits over PEOPLE. Austerity for those that have no value and can be justified by calling them a lazy drag on the economy, and the haves are entitled to unbridled profits and growth.

How has that business model worked so far, using the US, Briton, and the EU as examples? Be honest and count the growing discontent in the aforementioned countries. You can't ignore it any longer, and the elite policy makers do so at their own peril.

You hate the nanny state and push for the DADDY state, that doles out the LOVE to the select few who align with such self entitled thinking. Very convenient to justify ignoring and vilifying the have NOT'S, but be warned that it easy to oppress the few, until the few become the many, so best find a good place to run and hide with your extracted gains because the many you have denied any value will certainly REVOLT!

That's what BREXIT is all about, and that's what the US election is about. Unbridled capitalism, doesn't work for the many Tom, never has in the history of man! That's not lip service, it's historical fact.

Circulate some of them profits you greedy hoarding B@STARDS!! You hear me you money grubbers?!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Lip service Tom is giving an employer the right to place a value on another human.

---

This exemplifies the failure of Progressive logic. Equating a person's labor to their worth as a human is the viewpoint of a slavemaster, not that of an employer. Was Thomas Edison's work as a patent clerk his total worth? Hardly. Is Justin or Maria or Lashanda only worth their ability to make change at the drive-thru? Again, no. But does Jerome their employer have to pay for Justin's artwork or Maria's music or Lashanda's athletics? The Progressive slavemaster would say yes.

Tom is always in favour of capitalism and tricle down economics, no one told Reagan it didn't work. The nanny state can be too much of a good thing, it enables politicians to maniputate the electorate as the Labor Party, read socialist, did in Australia in the recent election campaign

https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/attach...id=48378&stc=1

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

Tom is always in favour of capitalism and tricle down economics, no one told Reagan it didn't work. The nanny state can be too much of a good thing, it enables politicians to maniputate the electorate as the Labor Party, read socialist, did in Australia in the recent election campaign

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Catsmine

This exemplifies the failure of Progressive logic. Equating a person's labor to their worth as a human is the viewpoint of a slavemaster, not that of an employer. Was Thomas Edison's work as a patent clerk his total worth? Hardly. Is Justin or Maria or Lashanda only worth their ability to make change at the drive-thru? Again, no. But does Jerome their employer have to pay for Justin's artwork or Maria's music or Lashanda's athletics? The Progressive slavemaster would say yes.

---

You made my point, or misunderstood it. All men are created equal, and a burger flipper shouldn't have to be on welfare to pay rent! No working person should! That's why progressives want a new higher minimum wage.

Sorry if that cuts into your PROFITS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

a burger flipper shouldn't have to be on welfare to pay rent

---

Why should said burger flipper be paid $15.00 (or whatever) when he produces $9?

Quote:

---

According to Reuters' financial information (Jack In The Box Inc (JACK.O) Financials), Jack in the Box's annual profit per employee is $4,314. The average front-line fast food worker works 24 hours/week; let's guess that most Jack in the Box workers are working about that much, and some of them work more, and use 30 hours/week average. That would be 1,560 hours worked per employee per year on average. Divide $4,314 by 1,560 and you get $2.77 profit per man-hour.

---

https://www.quora.com/How-much-value...reate-per-hour

Quote:

---

All men are created equal, and a burger flipper shouldn't have to be on welfare to pay rent! No working person should! That's why progressives want a new higher minimum wage.

---

Feel good nonsense . Cats is right ,you should be paid based on the value you produce. I can guarantee you that the job is on the fast track to automation ,and it will arrive there much faster if you progressives get your way . I'll repeat the findings of Oregon's own government economists ......the new law will cost Oregon 40,000 jobs that low wage workers would've filled .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

You made my point, or misunderstood it. All men are created equal, and a burger flipper shouldn't have to be on welfare to pay rent! No working person should! That's why progressives want a new higher minimum wage.

Sorry if that cuts into your PROFITS.

---

I agree Tal there should be a fair living minimum wage, but at the same time you have to be careful otherwise you wind up as you did in the communist system with everyone being paid the same and all incentive destroyed. What also has to be realised is that in a welfare state you have a situation develop that is called the poverty trap where you can't afford to take a minimum wage job. This is another reason why the minimum wage needs to also be an incentive to quit welfare

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Feel good nonsense . Cats is right ,you should be paid based on the value you produce. I can guarantee you that the job is on the fast track to automation ,and it will arrive there much faster if you progressives get your way . I'll repeat the findings of Oregon's own government economists ......the new law will cost Oregon 40,000 jobs that low wage workers would've filled .

---

What are you going to do with all those low paid workers with no jobs and no incentive, to automate low paid jobs is a foolish idea, to automate dangerous jobs is a good idea

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by paraclete

I agree Tal there should be a fair living minimum wage, but at the same time you have to be careful otherwise you wind up as you did in the communist system with everyone being paid the same and all incentive destroyed. What also has to be realised is that in a welfare state you have a situation develop that is called the poverty trap where you can't afford to take a minimum wage job. This is another reason why the minimum wage needs to also be an incentive to quit welfare


What are you going to do with all those low paid workers with no jobs and no incentive, to automate low paid jobs is a foolish idea, to automate dangerous jobs is a good idea

---

I love going to the ATM instead of having to walk into the bank and interact with a teller .Saves me a lot of time . I love using the self check out in the grocery store .It's the only place in the store I don't have to wait in a long line to pay for my food.
By Tal's and your standard evaluation the restaurant owners are greedy bass turds . So if they are forced to pay more for low skill labor ,they are naturally going to push back and find ways to reduce payroll.

Carl's Jr. wants to open automated location - Business Insider

New McDonald's In Phoenix Run Entirely By Robots - News Examiner - Examine Your World