The government is a guy with a gun. All enforcement comes down to force. If you don't understand that we have no common ground for any reasonable discussion on the subject.
That would be a contractual violation. If you promise to pay me X amount for my work but you pay me less, then yes, you've reneged on our agreement and are effectively stealing from me. That's not what's being shown in that graph. They don't present any sources so I can't even fact check them, but you can bet your ass that the majority of those "minimum wage violations" are illegal workers and/or students who agreed to accept a wage lower than the set minimum.
You might want to look at what the HRCs have been doing.
He might not be a criminal, but putting personal delusions about gender into the "protected" category opens the floor for the "human rights commissions" to investigate and punish anything they deem to be "hate speech" based on "gender identity". The fact that those investigations do not fall under the criminal system does not change the fact that it is a massive infringement on free speech.
Oh my! That sounds almost as dangerous as Dihydrogen Monoxide!
Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol. For more detailed information, including precautions, disposal procedures and storage requirements, refer to one of the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available for DHMO:
Kemp Compliance & Safety MSDS for DHMO Chem-Safe, Inc. MSDS for Dihydrogen Monoxide Applied Petrochemical Research MSDS for Hydric Acid Original DHMO.org Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for Dihydrogen Monoxide (html)
Counting minimum wage violations as "theft" is idiotic beyond belief. That graph provided no value to any discussion; it's only of value if you're looking to stoke a "The Rich vs The Poor" narrative. It's propaganda straight out of the old soviet block.
Where in the world did you get that idea? Unless the parts of Greenland I've been to just happen to be completely outside the norm, your claim seems to be total bullshit.
Until we gain the capacity to understand that the norm must be judged in relation to making sure that the larger animal is "normal" and has all of its individual "organs" intact, we aren't ready for this.
That sounds like some hocus-pocus mysticism right there. Just because some traits have some advantage in some situations doesn't mean they're "good" in any kind of objective sense, let alone that they need to be kept around. WTF do "success traits in more nomadic societies" have to do with modern human life? Why in the world should we condemn millions of children to living with debilitating autism just because maybe it will result in 1 or 2 more geniuses than we would otherwise have?
These kinds of complaints always sound quasi-religious to me. Except your god seems to be some vague feeling that "nature knows best".
In order to look something up you have to know it exists.
You've obviously never gotten lost on a wikipedia excursion. After a few hours not only do you find things you had no clue existed, you find things you would have never wanted to know about.
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
Everyone on the right agrees that what he did was wrong. He himself apologized for it, donated a bunch of cash, and then turned down a plea bargain which would have let him off with a slap on the wrist and elected to be tried in court. The guy made a mistake in a moment of passion, but all of his actions since then have demonstrated that he has more integrity and honour than the entire Democrat party put together.
Murder is illegal. Though it does not stop all murders. By your argument, we should make it perfectly legal. After all, murders are still happening at an alarming rate. If making murder illegal is not stopping murders, then what is the point?
Because laws don't exist to stop someone from committing a crime; they exist to punish those who commit them, and to remove them from society.
Which, of course, means that a hypothetical law banning guns won't actually stop criminals from owning guns; it will merely punish those who get caught. It will, however, stop millions of law abiding citizens from owning guns. So, if you advocate a gun ban, what you're really saying is you want to take away the legal right of millions of innocent people, for the sole purpose of having one extra law to punish those whom you could have just arrested for robbery/assault/murder instead.
You're comparing an accident with a transportation device with an attempted homicide with a purpose built weapon. Automobiles have plenty of uses besides killing something. Firearms are purpose built weapons. Comparing the two is a false equivalency.
This bullshit gets trotted out all the time, as if it's some clever retort. Who cares what "the purpose" is? Cars kill more people than guns. Period. It doesn't make a lick of difference what they're designed to do. It doesn't matter if I run you over with a car, drown you in a bathtub, shoot you with a gun, or beat you to death with a wooden spoon; you're still just equally dead.
It's normal for children to put blame on objects, as if the object somehow had a sense of agency. A 2 year old will get very upset with a toy that falls on it's head and hurts it. Adults are supposed to have grown out of that, but in the case of people who make these silly "it's purpose is to..." arguments, I have to wonder if they're stuck at the mental age of a 2 year old. Objects have no purpose; people have purpose. Objects are just tools we use in order to achieve a purpose.
Nah, it's like the "your original comment was stupid, and here's why" of the alt-right. And my response is the "now stop doubling down on stupid" of the alt-right.
When was the last time you went to Radioshack (ha!) and bought a bunch of VACUUM TUBES to fix your multi-million dollar airplane. Well, the military has that exact problem.
I doubt that. The B-52s were all upgraded long ago; it's not as if the ones being flown today are the exact same aircraft as the ones in 1955. There are almost certainly no vacuum tubes in them.
There definitely are problems with parts acquisitions for old fleets though. I've heard stories of personnel tasked to monitor ebay in the hope of snatching up any parts that get listed.
Because women are underrepresented, so they have to make up some way to explain the disparity, and Teh Patriarchy helps them push the overarching narrative.
A human being who knows absolutely nothing about the situations, people, how aggressive or inappropriate the actions were, yet still chooses to dismiss them.
We're talking generalities, not specific instances. No, I don't need to know every specific situation, person, etc. involved, in order to make a general statement. What you're doing here is the equivalent of arguing that I can't know if global warming is real because I don't know the exact temperature in every part of the world.
That thinks that his worldview overrides other people's personal experiences.
Well, yes, absolutely. There's this pernicious idea that "personal experiences" can't be questioned, let alone dismissed. I'm sorry to shake up your world, but that's clearly bullshit. This kind of postmodernist my-perceptions-are-everything-because-there's-no-objective-truth kind of philosophy might fly in the art community, but it's the height of absurdity when applied to reality. No, your perceptions of an experience are not the gold standard for what we consider real. Yes, other people can and will question and dismiss your experiences when they fly in the face of evidence or common sense. If you tell me that you were abducted by aliens I may agree that you experienced something, and I may agree that it had a negative impact on your life, but I certainly don't have to agree that your interpretation of it is what actually happened, let alone that your interpretation was a reasonable one.
Really, if a proportion claims to having unwanted sexual advances then who are you to tell them that that's absurd?
A rational human being?
I get a lot of unwanted advertisements, but sometimes I get advertisements I like which help me purchase something I want. You can't really have one without the other. Same goes for "advances". You can't have wanted advances without also having unwanted ones. That's going to continue being true until such a time as all humans develop the ability to read minds.
Many of them would probably argue against the draft, but they'd argue against it for both men and women.
In any case, the draft is irrelevant... conscription isn't compatible with the needs of a high-tech military.
Yes, precisely; they don't mind saying they're in favour of an "equal draft" because they know it's unlikely to be used, and they know that in the case that any government were thinking about using it they could just protest it in it's entirety. And having women registered for the draft would make it even more difficult for a future government to actually put it into effect.
We can look at other inequality metrics though. How often have you heard feminists bemoan the lack of female coal miners? How vocal have they been in addressing the incredible overrepresentation of men in workplace deaths?
Sure, feminists will pay lip service to these things, just as they do to the inequality of the draft, but that's as far as it goes. It costs them nothing to say "yeah that's really unfair and we would like it changed". But they do nothing to actually address those issues because they're quite happy when it's men on the losing side of the bargain.
Slashdot Mirror
The guy ran a 22:37.4 for 5K while shaking hands and leaving a trail of women in near orgasm.
You talking about Bruce Jenner?
The government is a guy with a gun. All enforcement comes down to force. If you don't understand that we have no common ground for any reasonable discussion on the subject.
That would be a contractual violation. If you promise to pay me X amount for my work but you pay me less, then yes, you've reneged on our agreement and are effectively stealing from me. That's not what's being shown in that graph. They don't present any sources so I can't even fact check them, but you can bet your ass that the majority of those "minimum wage violations" are illegal workers and/or students who agreed to accept a wage lower than the set minimum.
You might want to look at what the HRCs have been doing.
He might not be a criminal, but putting personal delusions about gender into the "protected" category opens the floor for the "human rights commissions" to investigate and punish anything they deem to be "hate speech" based on "gender identity". The fact that those investigations do not fall under the criminal system does not change the fact that it is a massive infringement on free speech.
Really? Which means of production were owned by which "Native American" state?
"No, that sharpened stick isn't yours; it belongs to the glorious motherland, as does the rabbit you killed with it."
I'm not sure how to answer your "why". We are comparing two completely different things.
Case 1: a guy with a gun says I have to pay you $10 an hour if you work for me. I offer you $8. You accept, and we don't tell the guy with the gun.
Case 2: I point a gun at you and make you give me your money.
Do you seriously see those as in any way equivalent? Where does your "why" come in?
Oh my! That sounds almost as dangerous as Dihydrogen Monoxide!
Dihydrogen Monoxide (DHMO) is a colorless and odorless chemical compound, also referred to by some as Dihydrogen Oxide, Hydrogen Hydroxide, Hydronium Hydroxide, or simply Hydric acid. Its basis is the highly reactive hydroxyl radical, a species shown to mutate DNA, denature proteins, disrupt cell membranes, and chemically alter critical neurotransmitters. The atomic components of DHMO are found in a number of caustic, explosive and poisonous compounds such as Sulfuric Acid, Nitroglycerine and Ethyl Alcohol.
For more detailed information, including precautions, disposal procedures and storage requirements, refer to one of the Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) available for DHMO:
Kemp Compliance & Safety MSDS for DHMO
Chem-Safe, Inc. MSDS for Dihydrogen Monoxide
Applied Petrochemical Research MSDS for Hydric Acid
Original DHMO.org Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) for Dihydrogen Monoxide (html)
http://www.dhmo.org/facts.html
Where are all the Japanese slums, then?
Or did you forget about the interment camps and the confiscation of wealth which effected that community relatively recently?
Counting minimum wage violations as "theft" is idiotic beyond belief. That graph provided no value to any discussion; it's only of value if you're looking to stoke a "The Rich vs The Poor" narrative. It's propaganda straight out of the old soviet block.
Much of the actual land is below sea level.
Where in the world did you get that idea? Unless the parts of Greenland I've been to just happen to be completely outside the norm, your claim seems to be total bullshit.
You've managed to respond to all of my points without answering a single one of them. I hope the OP gives it a shot.
Until we gain the capacity to understand that the norm must be judged in relation to making sure that the larger animal is "normal" and has all of its individual "organs" intact, we aren't ready for this.
That sounds like some hocus-pocus mysticism right there. Just because some traits have some advantage in some situations doesn't mean they're "good" in any kind of objective sense, let alone that they need to be kept around. WTF do "success traits in more nomadic societies" have to do with modern human life? Why in the world should we condemn millions of children to living with debilitating autism just because maybe it will result in 1 or 2 more geniuses than we would otherwise have? These kinds of complaints always sound quasi-religious to me. Except your god seems to be some vague feeling that "nature knows best".
i'm thinking it has to be something big like a fridge or some other appliance.
I got it for a defective tea kettle, so it doesn't have to be that big.
In order to look something up you have to know it exists.
You've obviously never gotten lost on a wikipedia excursion. After a few hours not only do you find things you had no clue existed, you find things you would have never wanted to know about.
I seem to remember a recently elected Congressman from the Midwest pleading guilty to bodyslamming a reporter. Or by "recent" do you mean only within the last few days?
Everyone on the right agrees that what he did was wrong. He himself apologized for it, donated a bunch of cash, and then turned down a plea bargain which would have let him off with a slap on the wrist and elected to be tried in court. The guy made a mistake in a moment of passion, but all of his actions since then have demonstrated that he has more integrity and honour than the entire Democrat party put together.
Murder is illegal. Though it does not stop all murders. By your argument, we should make it perfectly legal. After all, murders are still happening at an alarming rate. If making murder illegal is not stopping murders, then what is the point?
Because laws don't exist to stop someone from committing a crime; they exist to punish those who commit them, and to remove them from society.
Which, of course, means that a hypothetical law banning guns won't actually stop criminals from owning guns; it will merely punish those who get caught. It will, however, stop millions of law abiding citizens from owning guns. So, if you advocate a gun ban, what you're really saying is you want to take away the legal right of millions of innocent people, for the sole purpose of having one extra law to punish those whom you could have just arrested for robbery/assault/murder instead.
Seems pretty stupid to me.
You're comparing an accident with a transportation device with an attempted homicide with a purpose built weapon. Automobiles have plenty of uses besides killing something. Firearms are purpose built weapons. Comparing the two is a false equivalency.
This bullshit gets trotted out all the time, as if it's some clever retort. Who cares what "the purpose" is? Cars kill more people than guns. Period. It doesn't make a lick of difference what they're designed to do. It doesn't matter if I run you over with a car, drown you in a bathtub, shoot you with a gun, or beat you to death with a wooden spoon; you're still just equally dead.
It's normal for children to put blame on objects, as if the object somehow had a sense of agency. A 2 year old will get very upset with a toy that falls on it's head and hurts it. Adults are supposed to have grown out of that, but in the case of people who make these silly "it's purpose is to ..." arguments, I have to wonder if they're stuck at the mental age of a 2 year old. Objects have no purpose; people have purpose. Objects are just tools we use in order to achieve a purpose.
What about Richard Spencer who was wearing a pin of Pepe when he got famously punched in the face on camera? Just a conincidence im sure.
He was also wearing a Hugo Boss suit. Hugo Boss is now a symbol of white supremacy!
What about the tons of pepe meme I find on alt right facebook groups?
Don't forget the Facebook logo on those pages. OMG Facebook is a symbol of white supremacy!
Nah, it's like the "your original comment was stupid, and here's why" of the alt-right. And my response is the "now stop doubling down on stupid" of the alt-right.
When was the last time you went to Radioshack (ha!) and bought a bunch of VACUUM TUBES to fix your multi-million dollar airplane. Well, the military has that exact problem.
I doubt that. The B-52s were all upgraded long ago; it's not as if the ones being flown today are the exact same aircraft as the ones in 1955. There are almost certainly no vacuum tubes in them.
There definitely are problems with parts acquisitions for old fleets though. I've heard stories of personnel tasked to monitor ebay in the hope of snatching up any parts that get listed.
Because women are underrepresented, so they have to make up some way to explain the disparity, and Teh Patriarchy helps them push the overarching narrative.
Yep, it's trivially easy to disprove a strawman. Certainly much easier than addressing what I actually said.
A human being who knows absolutely nothing about the situations, people, how aggressive or inappropriate the actions were, yet still chooses to dismiss them.
We're talking generalities, not specific instances. No, I don't need to know every specific situation, person, etc. involved, in order to make a general statement. What you're doing here is the equivalent of arguing that I can't know if global warming is real because I don't know the exact temperature in every part of the world.
That thinks that his worldview overrides other people's personal experiences.
Well, yes, absolutely. There's this pernicious idea that "personal experiences" can't be questioned, let alone dismissed. I'm sorry to shake up your world, but that's clearly bullshit. This kind of postmodernist my-perceptions-are-everything-because-there's-no-objective-truth kind of philosophy might fly in the art community, but it's the height of absurdity when applied to reality. No, your perceptions of an experience are not the gold standard for what we consider real. Yes, other people can and will question and dismiss your experiences when they fly in the face of evidence or common sense. If you tell me that you were abducted by aliens I may agree that you experienced something, and I may agree that it had a negative impact on your life, but I certainly don't have to agree that your interpretation of it is what actually happened, let alone that your interpretation was a reasonable one.
Really, if a proportion claims to having unwanted sexual advances then who are you to tell them that that's absurd?
A rational human being?
I get a lot of unwanted advertisements, but sometimes I get advertisements I like which help me purchase something I want. You can't really have one without the other. Same goes for "advances". You can't have wanted advances without also having unwanted ones. That's going to continue being true until such a time as all humans develop the ability to read minds.
Many of them would probably argue against the draft, but they'd argue against it for both men and women.
In any case, the draft is irrelevant ... conscription isn't compatible with the needs of a high-tech military.
Yes, precisely; they don't mind saying they're in favour of an "equal draft" because they know it's unlikely to be used, and they know that in the case that any government were thinking about using it they could just protest it in it's entirety. And having women registered for the draft would make it even more difficult for a future government to actually put it into effect.
We can look at other inequality metrics though. How often have you heard feminists bemoan the lack of female coal miners? How vocal have they been in addressing the incredible overrepresentation of men in workplace deaths?
Sure, feminists will pay lip service to these things, just as they do to the inequality of the draft, but that's as far as it goes. It costs them nothing to say "yeah that's really unfair and we would like it changed". But they do nothing to actually address those issues because they're quite happy when it's men on the losing side of the bargain.