|
Tom Perez B/K/M? This poll is closed. |
|||
|---|---|---|---|
| B |
|
77 | 25.50% |
| K |
|
160 | 52.98% |
| M |
|
65 | 21.52% |
| Total: | 229 votes | ||
|
JeffersonClay posted:You claimed I was contradicting myself, and the evidence you found was...a discussion about tariffs that does not contradict what I posted at all. Your reading comprehension is poo poo and you are a dumb leftist. On the previous page, you were arguing that blanket bans on sweatshops were bad if they don't provide the people with something better. Now these posts say that providing the people with something better comes with costs and would be bad! I'll grant you that these positions aren't contradictory, they are fully consistent with your apparent world view that the status quo with respect to sweatshops should be preserved both for the continued employment of these people and for the benefit to the first world of their exploited labor. However, these two arguments read together do depict you as a supporter of current sweatshop practices, something you denied on the previous page. You owe Kilroy an apology and you should be ashamed both for being oblivious to your inconsistency and for supporting the status quo because any change to it has COSTS that you just do not believe anyone should have to bear, you worthless spineless piece of poo poo.
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
MooselanderII posted:On the previous page, you were arguing that blanket bans on sweatshops were bad if they don't provide the people with something better. Now these posts say that providing the people with something better comes with costs and would be bad! Of course providing people with something better has a cost, you're just incensed that I won't participate in your collective hallucination where we can improve people's lives for free. And again, saying "it's not clear that the benefits would outweigh the costs" is not the same as calling something bad. The effort this thread is taking to construct some whiff of hypocrisy to dismiss an argument defending the interests of undocumented immigrants and foreign workers, rather than attacking the ostensible leftists who think they'd be doing the "illegals" a favor by forcing them to self-deport, is, well, utterly predictable. Ytlaya posted:There are ways to disagree while still indicating that you consider the issue important. Like, you could just say "directly un-employing sweatshop laborers would just make things worse off, so I think we should enforce better labor standards (or whatever) instead." This clearly indicates that you at least understand and share the same general concerns. That's literally what I did here. I said I didn't have a problem with a narrative where we promote better working conditions for foreign workers, but a narrative where they lose their jobs obviously leaves them worse off. But then the regressive left got mad and made false accusations of hypocrisy.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 21:49
|
|
|
Dude, you're a two-bit sweatshop supporter. That you try to put a nice spin on your insistence that screwing the proles actually is helping them doesn't make things better. EDIT: Also "regressive left" fukken lol. Mask's slipping awfully hard here.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 21:52
|
|
|
Leftists advocating self-deportation for undocumented immigrants are absolutely regressive.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 21:58
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:That's literally what I did here. I said I didn't have a problem with a narrative where we promote better working conditions for foreign workers, but a narrative where they lose their jobs obviously leaves them worse off. But then the regressive left got mad and made false accusations of hypocrisy. Most of your posts didn't do this, and I think the one where you did had it accompanied with a "but that also has its downsides" which is the sort of thing that is weird to mention unless you think there's a reasonable chance of those downsides being equal to or greater than the benefits. edit: It's sorta like saying "ending slavery has its downsides" which I guess is technically true but kinda a bizarre thing to mention since the thing ended was super terrible and transparently immoral. JeffersonClay posted:Leftists advocating self-deportation for undocumented immigrants are absolutely regressive. I mean, "self-deportation" could obviously be the natural result of requiring all businesses pay a reasonable living wage (since undocumented labor would no longer have a competitive advantage) but it's kinda hosed up to think that's an excuse for keeping the status quo.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:05
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Of course providing people with something better has a cost, you're just incensed that I won't participate in your collective hallucination where we can improve people's lives for free. And again, saying "it's not clear that the benefits would outweigh the costs" is not the same as calling something bad. The effort this thread is taking to construct some whiff of hypocrisy to dismiss an argument defending the interests of undocumented immigrants and foreign workers, rather than attacking the ostensible leftists who think they'd be doing the "illegals" a favor by forcing them to self-deport, is, well, utterly predictable. For someone who likes to cry strawman and accuse others of reading comprehension issues, you sure are generating this "we can improve their lives for free!" argument out of whole cloth. What people take issue with is that you are ready to call chicken little at the suggestion that the practices should be changed because it suggests you don't think the costs should be borne by ANYONE and that makes you a spineless defender of the status quo. We can certainly sit around and split hairs about how much cost is too much cost, but something tells me that the very idea of any cost at all will make you go home wailing about the idea that this "best system there is!" should be altered at all.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:06
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Leftists advocating self-deportation for undocumented immigrants are absolutely regressive. Cerebral Bore posted:That you try to put a nice spin on your insistence that screwing the proles actually is helping them doesn't make things better.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:09
|
|
|
I'm not really sure what's difficult about this, if your solution is "force all illegals to leave" you're officially on Team Trump--that's what the giant step-up in ICE raids and talk of freezing every city in the nation out of the budget is about. Self-deportation isn't a bloodless panacea solution and it's not carried out by serving papers to the businesses sustaining illegal immigration, because those businesses are part of the power structure and can't be tampered with without massive political blowback. Self-deportation is a Mitt Romney idea, effectively a series of jackboots kicking in doors in perpetuity and never solving the problem, i.e. another version of the drug war. If your solution involves just letting things be as is, you're a lot of things but certainly not a leftist. You can easily incentivize above-board agribusiness with progressive policy and fundamentally change the economy for the better, but the current crop of Nativists in congress stand in the way of that. Name Change fucked around with this message at 22:18 on May 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:16
|
|
|
If you put illegal labor on the same status of legal labor then the undocumented workers will become unemployed and self deport. People need to stop pretending that they are employed through some virtuous relationship between employee/employer. They are exploited labor.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:17
|
|
|
Torpor posted:If you put illegal labor on the same status of legal labor then the undocumented workers will become unemployed and self deport. No, because their labour is still needed for a huge part of US agribusiness to function, and lol if you think that Americans are going to do backbreaking farmwork for minimum wage. The idea that every single migrant worker will immediately be out of a job is absurd. The only major casualty will be the profit margins of modern day slavers, which I suspect that is the real concern of the Jeffersonclays of the world.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:24
|
|
|
MooselanderII posted:For someone who likes to cry strawman and accuse others of reading comprehension issues, you sure are generating this "we can improve their lives for free!" argument out of whole cloth. What people take issue with is that you are ready to call chicken little at the suggestion that the practices should be changed because it suggests you don't think the costs should be borne by ANYONE and that makes you a spineless defender of the status quo. We can certainly sit around and split hairs about how much cost is too much cost, but something tells me that the very idea of any cost at all will make you go home wailing about the idea that this "best system there is!" should be altered at all. I guess by "ready to call chicken little" you mean "discussed the costs and benefits of trade policy months ago". I'm not the one who brought this up. And yes, I'm comfortable calling out people who have repeated failures to read and comprehend, like you, in this post, where you conflate "a policy that hurts the US poor and benefits foreign labor is hard to evaluate" with "we cannot ever change the status quo". Ytlaya posted:edit: It's sorta like saying "ending slavery has its downsides" which I guess is technically true but kinda a bizarre thing to mention since the thing ended was super terrible and transparently immoral. I've repeatedly advocated legal status and labor protections for undocumented immigrants. Requiring businesses to pay legal wages, when accompanied by legal status for the undocumented, would not result in all the newly documented immigrants becoming unemployed. The analogy here would be emancipation. Regressive leftists are arguing for strict enforcement of the ban on employing undocumented labor, with the benefit that the undocumented will return to their foreign homes and not trouble US workers with competition for wages. The analogy here would be the racist repatriation movements in the antebellum US that led to the creation of Liberia.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:If you want me to stop calling you a dumb leftist you have to meet me halfway and stop posting dumb poo poo.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:No, because their labour is still needed for a huge part of US agribusiness to function, and lol if you think that Americans are going to do backbreaking farmwork for minimum wage. The idea that every single migrant worker will immediately be out of a job is absurd. I don't think the issue is limited even a little bit by agribusiness. For that something could be worked out.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:37
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:The only major casualty will be the profit margins of modern day slavers, which I suspect that is the real concern of the Jeffersonclays of the world. We both are advocating for legal status and labor protections for undocumented immigrants, you illiterate turd.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:44
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:I guess by "ready to call chicken little" you mean "discussed the costs and benefits of trade policy months ago". I'm not the one who brought this up. And yes, I'm comfortable calling out people who have repeated failures to read and comprehend, like you, in this post, where you conflate "a policy that hurts the US poor and benefits foreign labor is hard to evaluate" with "we cannot ever change the status quo". Not sure that is purely racism. And if it was pure racism in not sure granting some form of amnesty with either full or partial citizenship or LPR status is a logical move in response. Like a ton of people over stay visas and cross a border without permission and then work in various jobs again without permission. Citizens are upset by that. You can't really fix that by granting status to the immigrants. That might cause further issues and represent a moral hazard.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:46
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:We both are advocating for legal status and labor protections for undocumented immigrants, you illiterate turd. no, you're arguing that slavery is better than not being slaves
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:47
|
|
|
Not every undocumented worker works for sub-minimum wages namaste
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Liberia is also a really lovely comparison for a lot of reasons. For one thing the undocumented labor most likely knows where they were born and had family residing in the home country. I really don't understand how unemploying undocumented labor so they return home is some kind of immoral act. A huge amount of undocumented labor already goes home after a while, a lot did in the Great Recession. It isn't as though they are being marooned on a desert island. Edit: I think you guys have lost the tune.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:52
|
|
|
Note that buried in JC's reasoning is an assumption that if you emancipate slaves without giving them something else to do, they'll just wither away and die. He grants them neither agency nor potency. It probably never even crossed his mind that, while it's not really ideal, people are better off being left alone to find their own way than they are being made into loving slaves. So it's a pretty short hop from that to "you need to support slavery and slavers unless you're willing and able to create an entire alternative economic engine out of whole cloth and overnight".
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:54
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:Not every undocumented worker works for sub-minimum wages namaste That isn't a point in favor of it.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:55
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:We both are advocating for legal status and labor protections for undocumented immigrants, you illiterate turd. The difference being that I don't think sweatshops are a good thing, you goddamn ghoul.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 22:57
|
|
|
Another thing to consider is that a huge number of jobs are going to be automated away in the next couple decades. That in itself will likely send a lot of then unneeded labor back to home but also cause literal societal catastrophes in the US. Edit can't English Torpor fucked around with this message at 23:07 on May 12, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:05
|
|
|
Kilroy posted:Note that buried in JC's reasoning is an assumption that if you emancipate slaves without giving them something else to do, they'll just wither away and die. He grants them neither agency nor potency. It probably never even crossed his mind that, while it's not really ideal, people are better off being left alone to find their own way than they are being made into loving slaves. So it's a pretty short hop from that to "you need to support slavery and slavers unless you're willing and able to create an entire alternative economic engine out of whole cloth and overnight". The difference here is undocumented workers are emancipated. They already have the right to quit, and to return to their home country, which actual slaves do not. The reason you feel comfortable calling them slaves is they're forced to make a choice between exploitative work or starvation. So, obviously, kicking them out of their job, without providing for another job, is bad because they'll starve. If they won't starve after being fired or quitting, and they have the potency and agency to find their own way to a spiffy new job, that means they're not slaves in the first place. In discussing actual slaves being actually emancipated, yes, providing for their wellbeing after emancipation is critical. Have you ever heard of Reconstruction? 40 acres and a mule? The failure of the US government to provide for the welfare of the freedmen and the abandonment of reconstruction in the 1870's caused massive harm and suffering that was totally avoidable. Unless you think sharecropping was totally fine because plucky freedmen were just using their agency to make their own way.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:19
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:In discussing actual slaves being actually emancipated, yes, providing for their wellbeing after emancipation is critical. oh word? a pity you're using this to support the continued existence of slavery
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:31
|
|
|
Torpor posted:Another thing to consider is that a huge number of jobs are going to be automated away in the next couple decades. That in itself will likely send a lot of then unneeded labor back to home but also cause literal societal catastrophes in the US. To some degree that's true, but there is still a pretty massive labor shortage in the agricultural sector at the moment. That's going to get worse before it get better, either through automation or through saner immigration policy. (ie: pathway to citizenship)
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:42
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Leftists advocating self-deportation for undocumented immigrants are absolutely regressive. I'll say it again, there is nothing more reactionary than a policy that allows free flow of exploitable labor between countries. Immigration is really about worker protections, that's what you neoliberals never get.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:48
|
|
|
Confounding Factor posted:I'll say it again, there is nothing more reactionary than a policy that allows free flow of exploitable labor between countries. Immigration is really about worker protections, that's what you neoliberals never get. While there is some truth to that, I think by far the more reactionary move is to punish the most vulnerable people in the equation, who are only trying to get jobs that their family can survive on.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:53
|
|
|
This Russia thing needs to become the new Benghazi. Regardless if it's true or not. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2017 23:59
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:This Russia thing needs to become the new Benghazi. Regardless if it's true or not. What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Well, I have good news for you - it's already bigger than Benghazi. I'm pretty certain there is something at the center of this. It probably isn't as sexy as Putin directly controlling Trump, but I think it's something along the lines of Trump having done business with the Russian mob that has caused him to become compromised. That may not sound like much, but as the hoary old maxim goes, the coverup is worse than the crime. It was the case with Watergate, and it is the case, and will continue to be the case going forward, with Trump.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 00:02
|
|
|
Majorian posted:Well, I have good news for you - it's already bigger than Benghazi. I'm pretty certain there is something at the center of this. It probably isn't as sexy as Putin directly controlling Trump, but I think it's something along the lines of Trump having done business with the Russian mob that has caused him to become compromised. That may not sound like much, but as the hoary old maxim goes, the coverup is worse than the crime. It was the case with Watergate, and it is the case, and will continue to be the case going forward, with Trump. Yeah. Honestly, I will be VERY surprised if anyone goes to jail over this or suffers in any way, but it's a good way of casting a shadow over the GOP.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 00:12
|
|
|
Majorian posted:While there is some truth to that, I think by far the more reactionary move is to punish the most vulnerable people in the equation, who are only trying to get jobs that their family can survive on. It is a bit of stretch to equate what is going on with 'survival'.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 00:31
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:Leftists advocating self-deportation for undocumented immigrants are absolutely regressive. It's the modern equivalent of the attitudes many of abolitionists back in the 1800's. Who felt slavery is bad... but now that your free black people you should probably go back to Africa.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 00:32
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:In discussing actual slaves being actually emancipated, yes, providing for their wellbeing after emancipation is critical. Have you ever heard of Reconstruction? 40 acres and a mule? The failure of the US government to provide for the welfare of the freedmen and the abandonment of reconstruction in the 1870's caused massive harm and suffering that was totally avoidable. Unless you think sharecropping was totally fine because plucky freedmen were just using their agency to make their own way.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 01:39
|
|
|
It means "emancipate the slaves, get out of the way and let their potency and agency lead them to a better life" was a real dumb idea then and it still is now. It's a libertarian fantasy.Confounding Factor posted:I'll say it again, there is nothing more reactionary than a policy that allows free flow of exploitable labor between countries. Immigration is really about worker protections, that's what you neoliberals never get. What you're proposing won't protect undocumented workers one iota. The only thing that will is legal status. That's what you regressive leftists never get. JeffersonClay fucked around with this message at 02:03 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 01:57
|
|
|
JeffersonClay posted:It means "emancipate the slaves, get out of the way and let their potency and agency lead them to a better life" was a real dumb idea then and it still is now. It's a libertarian fantasy. gently caress off with your "regressive left" bullshit. The only regressive here is you.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:08
|
|
|
Kilroy stop. You're not making the point you want to make.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:15
|
|
|
Obviously the correct answer is "seize the plantations immediately and give freedmen the land, with a free education", which worked where it was tried.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:23
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:Kilroy stop. You're not making the point you want to make. Didn't Malcolm X say something to the effect of, "If we don't take action ourselves (protest/riots/disobedience/etc.), the whites will just keep saying, 'Be patient, it takes time,' forever- and never actually do anything?"
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:33
|
|
|
Triskelli posted:Obviously the correct answer is "seize the plantations immediately and give freedmen the land, with a free education", which worked where it was tried. Exactly. Everyone here is so adamant about proving JC wrong you're ignoring that while overt slavery stopped under emancipation, we still had poo poo like sharecroppers which was, for all intents and purposes, slavery. Okay we didn't lynch or beat African Americans as much, but they were let down by the American governemnt, and the rifts caused back then still haunt us today. quote:In discussing actual slaves being actually emancipated, yes, providing for their wellbeing after emancipation is critical. Have you ever heard of Reconstruction? 40 acres and a mule? The failure of the US government to provide for the welfare of the freedmen and the abandonment of reconstruction in the 1870's caused massive harm and suffering that was totally avoidable. Unless you think sharecropping was totally fine because plucky freedmen were just using their agency to make their own way. is on point. Nobody is arguing "oh so slavery WAS good" but we are arguing that worker protections are necessary and we saw very real consequences for when the government took drastic action and then went "eh, fukkit good enough" Mister Facetious posted:Didn't Malcolm X say something to the effect of, "If we don't take action ourselves (protest/riots/disobedience/etc.), the whites will just keep saying, 'Be patient, it takes time,' forever- and never actually do anything?" You're a day late and a dollar short. Ze Pollack already beat you to your shitpost, and lemme tell ya bud, you ain't topping him. Seraphic Neoman fucked around with this message at 03:01 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 02:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 16:55 |
|
|
SSNeoman posted:You're a day late and a dollar short. Ze Pollack already beat you to your shitpost, and lemme tell ya bud, you ain't topping him. I'm being serious. Civil Rights never would have happened in the sixties without blacks stirring up poo poo and scaring Kennedy's Democrats, who weren't about to do gently caress all without outside intervention. That said, got a link/page number so I can read it? I'm sure I've read it, but I don't remember it. Mister Facetious fucked around with this message at 03:09 on May 13, 2017 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2017 03:02
|
|