It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by jfj123
You're obviously missing my point.
Are you suggesting that there should be absolutely no regulations for anything, anywhere, for any reason? YES or NO?
There really isn't because that would be either slavery or indentured servitude. Are you in favor of slavery?
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by jfj123
You're obviously missing my point.
Are you suggesting that there should be absolutely no regulations for anything, anywhere, for any reason? YES or NO?
YES.
Only property laws, which are laws against theft, fraud, or violence are required. Industrial regulation to prevent theft, fraud, or violence is unnecessary.
There really isn't because that would be either slavery or indentured servitude. Are you in favor of slavery?
Please explain how a corporation could get anyone to work for them if they refused to pay their employees.
Originally posted by jfj123
So you have no need for laws to ensure quality, safety, etc..?
Without regulations, all corporations could, as example, get together and say they are only going to pay workers $1.00 per day and pay them using their own forms of currency which by the way you could turn in for food only at THEIR general store. Oh and by the way, to feed their families, they would go into debt with said corporation which would force them to continue working for them, basically as an indentured servant. The standard of living would be that of a third world country over night. That's your utopia?
Originally posted by mnemeth1
Originally posted by jfj123
So you have no need for laws to ensure quality, safety, etc..?
No, people are smart enough to buy things of the appropriate quality level they desire. If they want cheap junk, they should be able to buy cheap junk.
Without regulations, all corporations could, as example, get together and say they are only going to pay workers $1.00 per day and pay them using their own forms of currency which by the way you could turn in for food only at THEIR general store. Oh and by the way, to feed their families, they would go into debt with said corporation which would force them to continue working for them, basically as an indentured servant. The standard of living would be that of a third world country over night. That's your utopia?
LOL
Originally posted by jfj123
Without regulations, all corporations could, as example, get together and say they are only going to pay workers $1.00 per day and pay them using their own forms of currency which by the way you could turn in for food only at THEIR general store.
Originally posted by civilchallenger
Originally posted by jfj123
Without regulations, all corporations could, as example, get together and say they are only going to pay workers $1.00 per day and pay them using their own forms of currency which by the way you could turn in for food only at THEIR general store.
The LAWS of supply and demand prevent such a thing from happening.
Company scrip was a credit against the accrued wages of employees. In the United States, where everything in a mining or logging camp was run, created and owned by a company, scrip provided the worker with credit when their wages had been depleted. These remote locations were cash poor. Workers had very little choice but to purchase meals and goods at a company store. In this way, the company could place enormous markups on goods in a company store, making workers completely dependent on the company, thus enforcing their "loyalty" to the company.
As for laws pertaining to safety and quality, all such laws are totally redundant and promote fascism. With lawsuits, people resolve safety and quality issues without any specific laws.
If they were sold a truly shabby product they can consider that a form of financial damage and then sue them.
Only property laws, which are laws against theft, fraud, or violence are required.
Ok so let's talk about governing ourselves with absolutely no governmental system. How do you propose that will work? How would you enforce anything ? Please be detailed. Thanks.
Originally posted by Connector
reply to post by mnemeth1
Excellent and astute reply, as if you are making a logical argument with new information / form of DEBATE, rather then constantly repeating your same tired and numerously defeated view. I'm guessing your under 21? I was too at one time.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by mnemeth1
Isn't "debtor's prison" a major reason for founding this country in the first place? I am pretty sure this country was built on the premise that we would never let that happen here? I am pretty sure we also built this country on the idea that we would have sovereign property rights!
I am honestly speechless..... don't know what to say......I feel terrible for not doing more, I know I would fight to the death if this happened to my family, and yet I stand idly by and watch it happen to people around me, because I am too comfortable in my own life and I have some little ones to take care of. What to do, what to do?
Originally posted by jfj123
Originally posted by civilchallenger
Originally posted by jfj123
Without regulations, all corporations could, as example, get together and say they are only going to pay workers $1.00 per day and pay them using their own forms of currency which by the way you could turn in for food only at THEIR general store.
The LAWS of supply and demand prevent such a thing from happening.
Not at all.
Company scrip was a credit against the accrued wages of employees. In the United States, where everything in a mining or logging camp was run, created and owned by a company, scrip provided the worker with credit when their wages had been depleted. These remote locations were cash poor. Workers had very little choice but to purchase meals and goods at a company store. In this way, the company could place enormous markups on goods in a company store, making workers completely dependent on the company, thus enforcing their "loyalty" to the company.
As for laws pertaining to safety and quality, all such laws are totally redundant and promote fascism. With lawsuits, people resolve safety and quality issues without any specific laws.
So you're in favor of laws that regulate quality but not regulations that regulate quality? So if we changed the name of a regulation to a law, you'd be fine with it...hmmm. ok....
Originally posted by Azp420
reply to post by jfj123
Ok so let's talk about governing ourselves with absolutely no governmental system. How do you propose that will work? How would you enforce anything ? Please be detailed. Thanks.
So you agree that a government run on donations would be far more for the people than today's government?
What do you need to enforce? Why can't you just live and let live?
Why are you compelled to violently enforce a certain way of life on others?
If there's a demand, private sector will fill it.
If there's no police but people want to feel secure they would spend the money they would have otherwise spent on police on privatized security (which would be far more efficient at preventing crimes).
It would 'work' (freedom, happiness, power to the people) far better than the current system 'works'.
Originally posted by mnemeth1
reply to post by jfj123
I love how you argue as if you are making logical points.
Originally posted by Connector
reply to post by mnemeth1
Excellent and astute reply, as if you are making a logical argument with new information / form of DEBATE, rather then constantly repeating your same tired and numerously defeated view. I'm guessing your under 21? I was too at one time.
Originally posted by civilchallenger
First of all, they must have been WORSE off before they accepted the job. Why would you accept a job that lowers your quality of life? You wouldn't.
So the company did them a favor already by hiring them (just as the worker does them a favor by working for them). Second of all, these companies could purchase things at the company store and then sell those things for money in order to increase their savings. And if that isn't good enough they can get together and create a logging company. Or, they can get together and go on strike without involving the government.
Or, they could try to find another job.
Yet your preferred solution seems to be to force your way into company headquarters at gun point if necessary in violation of their property rights and force them against their will to hand over what YOU think is fair to the workers as if your opinion on fairness is the end-all that be all that should be forced upon others.
As for laws pertaining to safety and quality, all such laws are totally redundant and promote fascism. With lawsuits, people resolve safety and quality issues without any specific laws.
So you're in favor of laws that regulate quality but not regulations that regulate quality? So if we changed the name of a regulation to a law, you'd be fine with it...hmmm. ok....
I do understand the context. You are talking about either A) Forming laws that lawsuits can already handle, like a law or regulation stating: "All apples must be razor-blade free" or B) laws that are themselves something people don't want such as "All pillows must be coated with fireproofing". If some one were to die because of a particularly hazardous pillow, they could already file a lawsuit against the company and win without a single law,
I'm talking about lawsuits as a solution, not laws or regulations (call them either one).
Why do you suppose doctors are paid more than janitors? Supply & demand. Its economics 101.