I think my Presidential aspirations would vaporize...

ShawshankShawshank Posts: 1,018
edited September 2011 in A Moving Train
...about the time Rick Perry grabbed my wrist and pointed his finger at me...I cannot stand that man, I cannot stand him. I'd be in jail after this. There is literally no one I'd rather see become President less than this asshole...

Ron Paul Debate: Rick Perry Physically Grabs Him, Points at His Face
http://img.ibtimes.com/www/articles/20110908/210639_ron-paul-debate-rick-perry-gop-debate-september-7.htm
Post edited by Unknown User on

Comments

  • It will be interesting to see how this plays out. Paul probably won't make a big deal out of it once it's all over the news later today... But he could. I've seen his campaign play more "politics" in the last 48 hours than in the 4 years that I have been following him.
  • Godfather.Godfather. Posts: 12,504
    judging by the look on Paul's face I would have to say I would have bitch slapped Perry...well it would have been my first thought anyway but as a politician I guess I would have let the media eat him up.


    Godfather.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    i don't think the media will do much with this.

    let's think about this for a minute.

    if the media supposedly has a liberal bias, why would they want to report on a spat between the front runner and middle of the pack runner from the other side? that would only give them both more press, which if i am a boss at msnbc i am not going to give any more airtime to perry than i have to.

    fox is going to have to choose how they want to cover it. paul could maybe get some sympathy from undecided voters, or perry can be written off as a hothead unworthy of the office, just like sonny corleone.

    either way, to me it is a good thing that perry is showing who he really is, while paul seems to be taking the high road...
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Shawshank wrote:
    ...about the time Rick Perry grabbed my wrist and pointed his finger at me...I cannot stand that man, I cannot stand him. I'd be in jail after this. There is literally no one I'd rather see become President less than this asshole...

    This would fire me up, but not to the point that I'd take a swing at him. If somebody can't take me in reasoned discourse, I'm not going to walk away with my tail between my legs. Perry is only exposing himself as a childish, arrogant fool who can't stand it when things don't go his way. If he can't even stand the pressure of a candidate's debate, how does he think he's going to manage in the oval office. I'd literally laugh at the situation.

    Paul's biggest failing IMO is that he's too nice. Perry is a clown, but nobody is taking the steps needed to bury him. I sit way further left than either of these men, but I respect that Ron Paul is an intelligent man who is doing what he believes is right. As for Perry; nominating him would virtually guarantee Obama a second term.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    when they say paul wants to get rid of minimum wage does that mean hes okay with people working for LESS than what is deemed now as minimum wage?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • when they say paul wants to get rid of minimum wage does that mean hes okay with people working for LESS than what is deemed now as minimum wage?

    It's not that he's OK or in favor of it, but it should be permissible. It's the same thing with the whole "he would legalize heroin or prostitution" debate. It's not that he's in favor of people doing heroin or selling themselves for sex, but it's their body, their choice, and as long as they're not hurting anyone else, it should be permissible. It's all about voluntary exchanges between consenting adults. If someone wants to work for less than the current minimum wage, it is up to them. In some ways, having a minimum wage just sets the lowest bar higher, while the rest of the economy raises its prices to adjusts to that rate. What's the difference between the minimum wage being $5 and a sandwich costing $5, and the minimum wage being raised to $8 with the sandwich price then being $8? Sure, having a minimum seems like a good idea in theory, but does it really provide an overall benefit?
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    i don't like the idea of lowering the minimum wage at all. these are the working poor that we hear so much about. like a single mother of 3 trying to make a living by working at taco bell.

    i like the idea of having a minimum wage. but the whole idea of "i WOULD pay you less but legally i CAN'T!" seems wrong to me.

    i fail to see how dr paul lowering the minimum wage actually helps the working poor.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    What Perry did was assault. I guess he really can't handle the truth when it pertains to his past.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    unsung wrote:
    What Perry did was assault. I guess he really can't handle the truth when it pertains to his past.
    i agree with you. but if you want to get technical, it was actually battery :ugeek:

    :lol:
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    Ok, but no need to laugh at me.


    I gained more respect for RP, I'm glad he called out the phony for what he is.
  • gimmesometruth27gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 23,303
    unsung wrote:
    Ok, but no need to laugh at me.


    I gained more respect for RP, I'm glad he called out the phony for what he is.
    i wasn't laughing at you. i was laughing because i actually knew enough about law/legal terminology to get to use the ubergeek icon. i rarely get to use that one.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • unsung wrote:
    What Perry did was assault. I guess he really can't handle the truth when it pertains to his past.
    i agree with you. but if you want to get technical, it was actually battery :ugeek:

    :lol:

    If you want to be really technical, it was actually assault & battery. Touching Paul's arm was battery, but the finger gesture would still be assault (the perceived threat of violence).
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    when they say paul wants to get rid of minimum wage does that mean hes okay with people working for LESS than what is deemed now as minimum wage?

    It's not that he's OK or in favor of it, but it should be permissible. It's the same thing with the whole "he would legalize heroin or prostitution" debate. It's not that he's in favor of people doing heroin or selling themselves for sex, but it's their body, their choice, and as long as they're not hurting anyone else, it should be permissible. It's all about voluntary exchanges between consenting adults. If someone wants to work for less than the current minimum wage, it is up to them. In some ways, having a minimum wage just sets the lowest bar higher, while the rest of the economy raises its prices to adjusts to that rate. What's the difference between the minimum wage being $5 and a sandwich costing $5, and the minimum wage being raised to $8 with the sandwich price then being $8? Sure, having a minimum seems like a good idea in theory, but does it really provide an overall benefit?


    minimum wage at least gives a minimum value for someones worth. it pisses me off no end that all that seems to matter is the bottom line.. fuck the worker and lets maximise profits.. i cant be down with that. its bullshit. if it wasnt for the workers, the capitalist system would crash.. so lets treat them with the respect they deserve.
    i dont believe that anyone would want to work for less than minimum wage and to suggest so is offensive. to have people so desperate to work that they lower themselves to less than minimum wage is just an appalling indictment on our society.

    lets me ask you vinny.. would you be prepared to work for less than minimum wage? cause i sure as hell wouldnt.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • unsungunsung I stopped by on March 7 2024. First time in many years, had to update payment info. Hope all is well. Politicians suck. Bye. Posts: 9,487
    If you can agree in another form of compensation, why not?

    Waiters work for less than minimum wage from their employers and there are millions of people doing that job.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    unsung wrote:
    If you can agree in another form of compensation, why not?

    Waiters work for less than minimum wage from their employers and there are millions of people doing that job.

    but dont waiters work for less than minimum wage because theyre reliant on tips makingup the shortfall??? and consequently tips are expected. if youre okay with that then im not sure theres anything i can say. im not okay with it. tips arent an expected part of the service experience of my culture.

    a few years ago i found myself in a tavern in NYC. i was with 2 americans.. anyhoo... we ate a meal in this tavern... if memory serves me, it was on the lower west side. the bill was paid and the waitress came back to our table and pointed out that a tip wasnt factored into our payment. my initial thought was wtf! the service was basic. the food was delivered to our table but the alcohol that we consumed was acquired by one of us going up to the bar and ordering it. how is that deserving of a tip? imo and experience, it isnt.. and yet it was expected. if workers were paid a decent wage then they wouldnt be reliant on tips.
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • when they say paul wants to get rid of minimum wage does that mean hes okay with people working for LESS than what is deemed now as minimum wage?

    It's not that he's OK or in favor of it, but it should be permissible. It's the same thing with the whole "he would legalize heroin or prostitution" debate. It's not that he's in favor of people doing heroin or selling themselves for sex, but it's their body, their choice, and as long as they're not hurting anyone else, it should be permissible. It's all about voluntary exchanges between consenting adults. If someone wants to work for less than the current minimum wage, it is up to them. In some ways, having a minimum wage just sets the lowest bar higher, while the rest of the economy raises its prices to adjusts to that rate. What's the difference between the minimum wage being $5 and a sandwich costing $5, and the minimum wage being raised to $8 with the sandwich price then being $8? Sure, having a minimum seems like a good idea in theory, but does it really provide an overall benefit?


    minimum wage at least gives a minimum value for someones worth. it pisses me off no end that all that seems to matter is the bottom line.. fuck the worker and lets maximise profits.. i cant be down with that. its bullshit. if it wasnt for the workers, the capitalist system would crash.. so lets treat them with the respect they deserve.
    i dont believe that anyone would want to work for less than minimum wage and to suggest so is offensive. to have people so desperate to work that they lower themselves to less than minimum wage is just an appalling indictment on our society.

    lets me ask you vinny.. would you be prepared to work for less than minimum wage? cause i sure as hell wouldnt.

    I would not work for less than the minimum wage, no. This is a major part of my reasoning of why it should NOT be mandated-- to me, it's a fairly obvious CHOICE as it is to you. The fact is that a minimum wages SETS the bottom rung for worker's wages, and raising it only raises the floor, with the rest of the pricing structure of society following behind it. Maybe abolishing it would mean that more people would demand a decent wage by their own volition instead of relying on a fail-safe by the state? Simply put, why can't people decide for themselves what they are worth, even if it is less than the current minimum? To say that people cannot decide what they are worth for themselves borders on offensive.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    I would not work for less than the minimum wage, no. This is a major part of my reasoning of why it should NOT be mandated-- to me, it's a fairly obvious CHOICE as it is to you. The fact is that a minimum wages SETS the bottom rung for worker's wages, and raising it only raises the floor, with the rest of the pricing structure of society following behind it. Maybe abolishing it would mean that more people would demand a decent wage by their own volition instead of relying on a fail-safe by the state? Simply put, why can't people decide for themselves what they are worth, even if it is less than the current minimum? To say that people cannot decide what they are worth for themselves borders on offensive.

    dude ... if there was no minimum wage ... the prosperity gap would be even bigger than it is now ...
  • polaris_x wrote:
    I would not work for less than the minimum wage, no. This is a major part of my reasoning of why it should NOT be mandated-- to me, it's a fairly obvious CHOICE as it is to you. The fact is that a minimum wages SETS the bottom rung for worker's wages, and raising it only raises the floor, with the rest of the pricing structure of society following behind it. Maybe abolishing it would mean that more people would demand a decent wage by their own volition instead of relying on a fail-safe by the state? Simply put, why can't people decide for themselves what they are worth, even if it is less than the current minimum? To say that people cannot decide what they are worth for themselves borders on offensive.

    dude ... if there was no minimum wage ... the prosperity gap would be even bigger than it is now ...

    I don't see it that way. No minimum wage would yield higher employment. More employment also means more chance for advancement in employment, which would translate to higher wages for workers that do a good job. More employment also means less welfare and unemployment payments which do place a burden on people already in the workforce. People currently working at the mandated minimum become more prosperous if others are willing to work for less than them. If the problem is that society is not valuing labor, putting a mandatory low value on labor is NOT the solution.

    Would raising the minimum wage $10 / hour solve anything? For a short time, workers currently making the minimum would be able to acquire more than previously, until their employers and the market decides to charge more for to cover the rising costs. At that point, 18.50 is no better than the current 8.50 (or whatever it is).

    I just don't understand, for all that is permissible in America, such as free speech, why do we not allow people to determine for themselves what their labor is worth?
  • ShawshankShawshank Posts: 1,018
    The unfortunate reality is, that as minimum wage increases, so do the costs of production, and so does the cost to the consumer. It's like a treadmill...you may be running faster but you're getting no where.
  • Shawshank wrote:
    The unfortunate reality is, that as minimum wage increases, so do the costs of production, and so does the cost to the consumer. It's like a treadmill...you may be running faster but you're getting no where.

    Exactly.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    I don't see it that way. No minimum wage would yield higher employment. More employment also means more chance for advancement in employment, which would translate to higher wages for workers that do a good job. More employment also means less welfare and unemployment payments which do place a burden on people already in the workforce. People currently working at the mandated minimum become more prosperous if others are willing to work for less than them. If the problem is that society is not valuing labor, putting a mandatory low value on labor is NOT the solution.

    Would raising the minimum wage $10 / hour solve anything? For a short time, workers currently making the minimum would be able to acquire more than previously, until their employers and the market decides to charge more for to cover the rising costs. At that point, 18.50 is no better than the current 8.50 (or whatever it is).

    I just don't understand, for all that is permissible in America, such as free speech, why do we not allow people to determine for themselves what their labor is worth?

    minimum wage allows for a quality of life ... no minimum wage would yield higher employment but ultimately lower earnings for workers ... who will then still not be able to afford anything to support the economy ...

    directly correlating minimum wage as costs directly attributed to the consumer is not really fair ...

    also the notion that america is some land of liberty is also a myth ... one example would be the raw milk farmers in california ... liberty is doled out by the same people who would benefit from the removal of a minimum wage ...
  • polaris_x wrote:
    also the notion that america is some land of liberty is also a myth ... one example would be the raw milk farmers in california ... liberty is doled out by the same people who would benefit from the removal of a minimum wage ...

    No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

    In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway? ;)
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

    In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway? ;)

    haha ... no ... that's some form of communism or something which i don't believe in ...

    society in general does not benefit from people living below the poverty line ... nor does it benefit when labour is exploited ...
  • polaris_x wrote:
    No argument here. That's why every post I make on here is that liberty shouldn't be doled out. It should just exist for everyone, pure and simple.

    In socialist utopia, doesn't everyone work for FREE anyway? ;)

    haha ... no ... that's some form of communism or something which i don't believe in ...

    society in general does not benefit from people living below the poverty line ... nor does it benefit when labour is exploited ...

    A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

    Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.
  • polaris_xpolaris_x Posts: 13,559
    A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

    Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.

    we have that already ... it's called unions ...
  • polaris_x wrote:
    A change in attitude about the value of labor as well as a steadfast effort on the part of laborers to maintain their own standards with regards to wages is far more warranted and useful for the cause than mandates that set the bar for labor low to begin with.

    Again, agree to disagree with ya. Same end game, different implementations.

    we have that already ... it's called unions ...

    Absolutely.
  • I don't see it that way. No minimum wage would yield higher employment. More employment also means more chance for advancement in employment, which would translate to higher wages for workers that do a good job. More employment also means less welfare and unemployment payments which do place a burden on people already in the workforce. People currently working at the mandated minimum become more prosperous if others are willing to work for less than them. If the problem is that society is not valuing labor, putting a mandatory low value on labor is NOT the solution.

    I've never understood this position. I think it's a bold assumption to assume that lower wages will automatically yield more jobs. Unless there is a greater demand for consumables or services, where is this demand for workers coming from? Moreover, with even lower wages becoming an acceptable practice, where do you suppose these workers will acquire the necessary capital to become contributing consumers in the first place?

    When a person is forced against a wall, they will throw off their dignity and work for nothing. That doesn't mean that they will be successful finding work. There are millions of well-educated, hard-working individuals who are repeatedly labeled as being lazy leeches simply because their circumstances have not afforded them the chance to work. They willingly take jobs beneath their station for marginal wages. You may not be willing to work for less than minimum wage, but there are tons of people out there who already work below the poverty line because they have no options left. Do you really think that everybody who is poor is poor because they are lazy?

    Also, if people desperate for income are willing to work for less than the minimum wage, wouldn't employers looking to get a leg up on their competition will inevitably terminate their current minimum wage flock for a cheaper alternative? The middle class is shrinking rapidly. How would eliminating the minimum wage do anything to remedy this?
    Would raising the minimum wage $10 / hour solve anything? For a short time, workers currently making the minimum would be able to acquire more than previously, until their employers and the market decides to charge more for to cover the rising costs. At that point, 18.50 is no better than the current 8.50 (or whatever it is).

    I just don't understand, for all that is permissible in America, such as free speech, why do we not allow people to determine for themselves what their labor is worth?

    Why do you suppose there has been an ever-widening gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the rest of society? Your free market system is far from free and it's far from perfect. Employers will continue to adjust their costs and streamline their businesses. Do you really think that this would change if there was no minimum wage? Costs will continue to rise irrespective of that fact. Everyone is looking for a bigger share of their respective market. If you want a society that has no real worker's rights, look over in China or India. It won't take that much to squeeze America's middle class out of existence.
  • catefrancescatefrances Posts: 29,003
    what is the minium wage in the US anyway?
    hear my name
    take a good look
    this could be the day
    hold my hand
    lie beside me
    i just need to say
  • Why do you suppose there has been an ever-widening gap between the wealthiest wage earners and the rest of society? Your free market system is far from free and it's far from perfect. Employers will continue to adjust their costs and streamline their businesses. Do you really think that this would change if there was no minimum wage? Costs will continue to rise irrespective of that fact. Everyone is looking for a bigger share of their respective market. If you want a society that has no real worker's rights, look over in China or India. It won't take that much to squeeze America's middle class out of existence.

    You are absolutely correct in saying that "my" free market society is far from free and far from perfect if what you mean is that our current system is nowhere close to a free market system. Our current system is anything but free market, it is crony capitalism / corporatism / economic fascism. And I'm not saying a true free market system would be perfect either, but it would be a lot better than what is currently in place, and would empower the consumer as well as the laborer much more than the current system. The system itself is the biggest reason there is such a huge gap between the uber rich, the middle class, and ultimately the poor. You don't see small business owners receiving corporate welfare and bailouts, no-bid contracts, and subsidies to the tune of billions. On top of all of that, no one knows how much money the Fed doles out in secret to its shareholders, which are private mega banks and the world's biggest corporations, both foreign and domestic. Such things do not exist in a free market, and all businesses, no matter there size would be forced to compete on the quality of their products and services rather than competing for who can bring home the biggest payday courtesy of the American taxpayer. The reason there is such a huge gap between the super rich and the poor is that the richest of the rich are on the government gravy train, and no one is voting to stop that from happening. Monetary inflation, that is, the expansion of the money supply which inevitably results in price inflation gives money to the uber-rich first, and allows them to spend it into existence before that money loses value. By the time it reaches the middle class and the poor, all of the money in circulation and in savings loses value. Inflation is taxation through devaluation and is the most hidden and vicious form of taxation there is because it DOES hit the poor so hard. Until these ideas are really addressed, arguing about whether abolishing the minimum wage would be as fruitful as re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. Although I do believe there should be no minimum wage requirements, it's probably a battle I would not choose to fight all that hard if I personally were running for office.
Sign In or Register to comment.