Those '2 private sides' are in a power balance only when the employees are organized. One organization (employer) against the other (employee's organization--let's call them 'unions').
The whole point is that employers are easily organized in small groups, laborers aren't, due to the sheer amount of them.
So in order to balance the power between employers and employees, you need an organization of laborers: let's call them 'unions'.
The income disparity in the last decades has only steadily improved, while unionization has steadily declined.
This more or less proves my point.
QED
So in order not to be foolish you want to be a criminal?
In order to keep this scheme going you have to eliminate every single one that threatens to throw a wrench in the gears.
Saddam Hussain, Chavez, Khomeini/Iran, Ghaddafi.
Heck! Why not iceland? But that would involve central banking which plays an intertwining role.
Central banking was the reason that Ghaddafi's gold was immediately shipped off, and why the Libyan 'rebels'' first act was to establish a new central bank.
I mean... what the heck are genuine rebels doing with a central bank??
Anyway, no more independent central banks allowed.
Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan central banks were 'westernized' in 'the process', we're still working on Venezuela and North Korea.
People don't 'invest' in dollar denominated assets because they want to, but because they have little choice.
America exports dollars because they are needed by other countries to buy oil, due to the deal Kissinger struck with the Saudis to demand dollars for payment of the oil. So they manufacture products and send them to the US for dollars, which they then can use to buy oil from the OPEC, which has not much choice than either sit on them, or invest them back into the US.
I think Obama thought, or was told, that this was a great deal, that the Americans don't even need to produce anything, because they can always import it, forgetting that people who don't produce have no job and can not buy anything.
hmmm... Are they really that stupid?
Well, anyway, we can now understand why Saddam Hussain had to 'go' after starting selling his oil in Euros. That went quick. And Ghaddafi. And Chavez, who was planning the same, plus many other 'forbidden' things.
And then there are the central banks, but that's a completely different story. Or is it?
If however there exists an optimum level of collectivity, then decreasing the collectivity in China, and raising the level of collectivity in the US could be an improvement for both countries.
Reagan once joked that the most dangerous statement is: "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."
Regarding 'collectivism': do you want a health insurance, or do you want to gamble and pay your health (disease rather) expenses yourself?
Where did you get that?
And maybe it's better for him to be solitarily confined in jail, then to be a CP offender in a shared prison cell.
I guess his best chance is to sit in jail until the normal term for CP is over, then give his password, be trialled and set free because he spent already his term in jail.
In earlier times, the English king could throw anybody in 'the Tower' if he didn't like him.
I thought it was exactly to prevent this that the bill of rights was made, and now the judges are the new king?
What if he really forgot the password?
Like the sticker note with the password on the bottom of the laptop.
"I don't know the pw, it's on the bottom of the laptop."
Police: "..." Unless of course they filmed the whole arrest and house visit.
And about the 'forgone conclusion' and the fact they aren't simply starting the trial based on the evidence that led to this conclusion:
I think it's quite possible that law enforcement told the judges, confidentially, that they already have hacked the disks using a secret back-door or other procedure, but just can't (won't) make that public. In that case a trial wouldn't work either.
And where is the proof that the files are actually on his HD and that he hasn't deleted them already?
He could admit downloading them (out of curiosity), but erasing them immediately upon discovering their true nature.
Which leaves the testimony of his sister to deal with, who must have been really pissed off by the pictures she's seen on his phone--maybe her own child was involved, that she witnessed against her own brother?
Correction: The US was MUCH more happy in general before the charter on the FED and income taxes was accepted. After that it continuously went down hill.
You're just bitching around and actually not contributing much to the discussion.
If you don't have the time to add to the conversation then by all means don't.
Or limit yourself to replies that are more positive.
Or not, if you're hard headed...
Slashdot Mirror
Comparing the number of deaths from terrorism with those resulting from medical failures might change the narrative completely.
Some western country's proverb: "The head that sticks out the most above the grass gets chopped off."
Those '2 private sides' are in a power balance only when the employees are organized. One organization (employer) against the other (employee's organization--let's call them 'unions').
Yo! Exactly what I meant!
-- enough rum?
The whole point is that employers are easily organized in small groups, laborers aren't, due to the sheer amount of them.
So in order to balance the power between employers and employees, you need an organization of laborers: let's call them 'unions'.
The income disparity in the last decades has only steadily improved, while unionization has steadily declined.
This more or less proves my point.
QED
-- gets some more rum
So in order not to be foolish you want to be a criminal?
In order to keep this scheme going you have to eliminate every single one that threatens to throw a wrench in the gears.
Saddam Hussain, Chavez, Khomeini/Iran, Ghaddafi.
Heck! Why not iceland? But that would involve central banking which plays an intertwining role.
Central banking was the reason that Ghaddafi's gold was immediately shipped off, and why the Libyan 'rebels'' first act was to establish a new central bank.
I mean... what the heck are genuine rebels doing with a central bank??
Anyway, no more independent central banks allowed.
Afghan, Iraqi and Libyan central banks were 'westernized' in 'the process', we're still working on Venezuela and North Korea.
-- gets some more rum
People don't 'invest' in dollar denominated assets because they want to, but because they have little choice.
America exports dollars because they are needed by other countries to buy oil, due to the deal Kissinger struck with the Saudis to demand dollars for payment of the oil. So they manufacture products and send them to the US for dollars, which they then can use to buy oil from the OPEC, which has not much choice than either sit on them, or invest them back into the US.
I think Obama thought, or was told, that this was a great deal, that the Americans don't even need to produce anything, because they can always import it, forgetting that people who don't produce have no job and can not buy anything.
hmmm... Are they really that stupid?
Well, anyway, we can now understand why Saddam Hussain had to 'go' after starting selling his oil in Euros. That went quick. And Ghaddafi. And Chavez, who was planning the same, plus many other 'forbidden' things.
And then there are the central banks, but that's a completely different story. Or is it?
-- get's a new glass of rhum
If however there exists an optimum level of collectivity, then decreasing the collectivity in China, and raising the level of collectivity in the US could be an improvement for both countries.
Reagan once joked that the most dangerous statement is: "Hi, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you."
Regarding 'collectivism': do you want a health insurance, or do you want to gamble and pay your health (disease rather) expenses yourself?
...but not all flamebait is truth.
Hehehe, genious! :)
I think they just want your cell phone number.
Also true...
I think people matter.
If enough people use BTC as money, then it's money.
Where did you get that?
And maybe it's better for him to be solitarily confined in jail, then to be a CP offender in a shared prison cell.
I guess his best chance is to sit in jail until the normal term for CP is over, then give his password, be trialled and set free because he spent already his term in jail.
Definitely if one of them was underage and you not.
In earlier times, the English king could throw anybody in 'the Tower' if he didn't like him.
I thought it was exactly to prevent this that the bill of rights was made, and now the judges are the new king?
What if he really forgot the password?
If you have illegal content on them, then you better shred them completely.
Like the sticker note with the password on the bottom of the laptop.
"I don't know the pw, it's on the bottom of the laptop."
Police: "..." Unless of course they filmed the whole arrest and house visit.
And about the 'forgone conclusion' and the fact they aren't simply starting the trial based on the evidence that led to this conclusion:
I think it's quite possible that law enforcement told the judges, confidentially, that they already have hacked the disks using a secret back-door or other procedure, but just can't (won't) make that public. In that case a trial wouldn't work either.
And where is the proof that the files are actually on his HD and that he hasn't deleted them already?
He could admit downloading them (out of curiosity), but erasing them immediately upon discovering their true nature.
Which leaves the testimony of his sister to deal with, who must have been really pissed off by the pictures she's seen on his phone--maybe her own child was involved, that she witnessed against her own brother?
Or they have been set up against each others by divide-and-conquer supremacy-loving white peoples' governments.
I'm confused... was this a compliment? ;)
Cancer cells aren't 'happy', they are confused.
Correction: The US was MUCH more happy in general before the charter on the FED and income taxes was accepted. After that it continuously went down hill.
You're just bitching around and actually not contributing much to the discussion.
If you don't have the time to add to the conversation then by all means don't. Or limit yourself to replies that are more positive.
Or not, if you're hard headed...
Yugoslavia before Germany and USA started fomenting war there?