Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 13 Nov 2006 14:43 lucasea(a)sbcglobal.net wrote: > <jmfbahciv(a)aol.com> wrote in message > > > When > > the dictator starts to correct perceived offenses with killing > > the people, it is a viscious dictatorship. > > And what is it called when the dictator makes a unilateral decision, > ignoring his own populace, the United Nations, and his own Congress, to wage > war on the people of *another* country despite the existence of no threats > to the national interests of the dictator's country? It's called a war of aggression and ppl have been tried for it and found guilty ( Nuremburg trials ) Graham
From: unsettled on 13 Nov 2006 14:44 T Wake wrote: > "Eeyore" <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:45586F70.5FF100EE(a)hotmail.com... > >> >>jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: >> >> >>> Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Finding the right thing that's profitable isn't always that easy. >>> >>>It is easy. People around here charge $50 for 15 minutes' worth >>>of housecleaning and they get it. >> >>They do ? >> >>I'm sure they wouldn't here. > > > They do in some places - mainly where people are inordinately rich and > strapped for time. I know people who pay for their laundry to be washed and > ironed for them. The mind does, indeed, boggle. That's your socialist upbringing working on you again. Laundries and dry cleaners in and around major US cities do very well. I know that in some suburbs of Chicago (Winnetka and Glencoe), for example, there are regular weekly routes for pickup and delivery of cleaned/laundered clothing to residences. I would think this is not a unique service. Once a month an invoice is left with freshened clothing, and the payment picked up the next week with the soiled clothes. BTW, this means that a male professional needs to have no less than 15 white shirts, underwear, socks, etc.
From: Eeyore on 13 Nov 2006 14:48 krw wrote: > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >krw wrote: > > > >> ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk says... > > > >> > On Fri, 10 Nov 2006 21:41:23 -0500, krw <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > The fact is that some jobs > > > >> > >aren't worth "minimum wage". > > > >> > > > > >> > Are you saying that you consider some jobs to be so menial that you > > > >> > would actually pay someone less than enough to live on to do them? > > > >> > > > >> You read better than I thought. Believe it or not, there are > > > >> people who don't need a job to "live", though they may need a job > > > >> to learn work skills or pay for a date on Saturday night. > > > > > > > >Eh ? > > > > > > He, as I am, think it's important that kids learn how to work > > > and earn money. It's good training for the time when they > > > are supposed to do this. > > > > I can't disagree with that for sure ! > > ...and you believe that requires a "living wage"? Who said that ? The minumum wage applies to adults not children ! > > > Instead you socialist types are > > > trying to keep all adults in childhood with a nonentity, called > > > govnerment, makes all the decisions of living and life style > > > for you. > > > > You are entirely mistaken. I've been self-employed for 21 years for example. > > That doesn't sound very socialist to me ! > > You still live in a socialist society. Socialism <> communism, > though you'd probably like that too. The UK is not socialist. > > > This is anathema to a lot of people in the USA; however, > > > this allergy appears to be getting cured rapidly. > > > > Your view of Europe is once again in error. > > Nope. Yes it is. Graham
From: Eeyore on 13 Nov 2006 14:49 krw wrote: > Who decides what a "living wage" is? You? The government actually. Graham
From: Eeyore on 13 Nov 2006 14:51
krw wrote: > rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com says... > > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com wrote: > > > Eeyore <rabbitsfriendsandrelations(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > >krw wrote: > > > > > > > >> There are others that don't "need" a "living wage". > > > > > > > >Very rich ppl ? > > > > > > Dependents. > > > > I doubt there are many who fit into that category any more who could afford to > > work for peanuts. > > Afford? Don't be stupid. Afford to in the sense that they're working for 'pin money' as their other expenses are paid for. > > > As in children and teenagers and humans who > > > are about to have to support themselves or be forever > > > on welfare. > > > > Eh ? > > You'd prefer they not work, thus not gain those skills, because the > jobs aren't worth the "living wage". Next step; welfare office. On the contrary. A living wage avoids the need to apply for benefits. Graham |