eeguy wrote: » If it's such an important issue then why aren't the rest of the staff out in solidarity?
tomwaterford wrote: » I know people whove not spoken to some of their neighbours in nearly 30 years (longer than im alive) over 1 crossing a picket
Permabear wrote: » This post had been deleted.
Havockk wrote: » The point is that if inequality is not addressed, and there is no signs that the notion is even being taken seriously, (beyond lip service) then history shows us what the response is.
end of the road wrote: » i don't know, i presume it is because they aren't effected so wouldn't have a mandate to strike.
Butters1979 wrote: If all the money in the country was evenly distributed across the population we would be back where we started within a generation. Wealth inequality is not some social conspiracy. It is the natural result in the difference of ability, hard work and application of people. Sure some are born into it. But why wouldn't parents pass wealth down.
Butters1979 wrote: Those who think inequality needs to be 'addresed' tend to be he ones incapable or unwilling to create their own wealth, and by pure chance if they ever did would change their tune very quickly.
Butters1979 wrote: History has shown us that when the poor rise up to steal and plunder what is rightfully not theirs, they destroy their nations economy for generations. You can have a society of various different levels of wealth where the worst off are subsidised through welfare or you can have a society where everyone has an even share and everybody is dirt poor.
Havockk wrote: » People are stupid and thus deserve to be poor. Jesus. Not sure Ive seen anything that drips with this much entitlement since Milton Friedman walked and talked. If it's not obvious by now, even by your own standards there that something is very wrong with the capitalist system that would accept a statistic like you just quoted then there is no convincing you. By the way, it's an argument for a better education, free and for everyone.
__Alex__ wrote: » And I think that is bullying nonsense and it would make me more determined to not give in, tbh. I take each strike as it comes and decide whether I support it. I don't blindly support all strikes. I don't understand the mentality of "Never cross a picket" nor do I care for the mob mentality it seems to be inspire. Also, I'm from a small town and that bare minimum of service thing... yeah, that wouldn't be long-term and anyone who would keep that up would just come across like an oddball. Rightfully.
Havockk wrote: » You have just literally repeated the same thing over again. That just doesn't wash with me, I know exactly what you meant and I called you on it.
Shenshen wrote: » Hang on, I just want to make sure I understand your position here : you don't believe that there are people who are more adept at earning, investing, and overall simply keeping money than others?
Havockk wrote: » I'm not saying that doesn't happen. I'm pointing the finger and asking why we are not talking about the root cause of such an issue and how we can change it. Let us not forget that response came in opposition to the question of wealth distribution. The poster offered literally nothing other than to say 'it happens.' And given his ideological persuasions I'm not taking an insane leap of logic with the suggestion that a MORE laissez-faire approach with FEWER regulations is in any way going to help. It is my sincere hope that this clears it up for you.
Butters1979 wrote: » If all the money in the country was evenly distributed across the population we would be back where we started within a generation. Wealth inequality is not some social conspiracy. It is the natural result in the difference of ability, hard work and application of people. Sure some are born into it. But why wouldn't parents pass wealth down. Those who think inequality needs to be 'addresed' tend to be he ones incapable or unwilling to create their own wealth, and by pure chance if they ever did would change their tune very quickly. History has shown us that when the poor rise up to steal and plunder what is rightfully not theirs, they destroy their nations economy for generations. You can have a society of various different levels of wealth where the worst off are subsidised through welfare or you can have a society where everyone has an even share and everybody is dirt poor.
