Jihad needs scientists
in [Design]
|
From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 12:45 krw wrote: > jmfbahciv(a)aol.com says... > > > Thanks. I used to thread pipe for my Dad. He never called > > it a tap. He called a threader. > > A pipe "threader" would be called a "die". Not if it was an internal thread. Graham
From: unsettled on 14 Nov 2006 12:45 Don Bowey wrote: > On 11/14/06 8:58 AM, in article > MPG.1fc3a4bd42402541989b33(a)news.individual.net, "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> > wrote: > > >>In article <aa7jl21smbdfqca8rjki6o4mc0c0h1dlek(a)4ax.com>, >>ben.newsam(a)ukonline.co.uk says... >> >>>On Tue, 14 Nov 2006 03:16:44 -0600, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> >>>wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Ben Newsam wrote: >>>> >>>>>On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:50:42 -0600, unsettled <unsettled(a)nonsense.com> >>>>>wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>It might be a part time second >>>>>>job, or a kid might do it. >>>>> >>>>>Send them down the mines or up the chimneys, best place for them. >>>> >>>>That's *your* answer, of course. >>> >>>There's nothing socialist about me, remember. >>> >> >>The very idea of a "living wage" is socialist. > > > Or fair, humanistic, concerned. > > It must be time to organize workers who are receiving less than decent > wages. Oh goody, yet another Bolshevik movement. > Do you really want to improve your personal condition by cheating people out > of a fair share of their country? They should work for what they're worth rather than what you think they're worth.
From: unsettled on 14 Nov 2006 12:46 Don Bowey wrote: > On 11/14/06 8:58 AM, in article > MPG.1fc3a8d14611ef0a989b34(a)news.individual.net, "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> > wrote: > > >>In article <YIqdnVejL9AsT8XYRVnytw(a)pipex.net>, >>usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com says... >> >>>"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote in message >>>news:MPG.1fc11bd2984185bf989af4(a)news.individual.net... >>> >>>><nsadnUzBav053sjYnZ2dnUVZ8sKdnZ2d(a)pipex.net>, >>>>usenet.es7at(a)gishpuppy.com says... >>>> >>>>>I dont agree. However, if that is the case then no minimum wage means no >>>>>one >>>>>has worth. >>>> >>>>BS. The worth is decided by what one is willing to pay for the >>>>services rendered. If it's worth zero, the service isn't very >>>>important, eh? Why should it get done. If it's worth $5 an hour >>>>and someone is willing to do the service for $5 an hour it's worth >>>>*exactly* $5 per hour. Minimum wage means that the government >>>>decrees that there are no jobs worth less. Perhaps there are. >>> >>>Circular argument. >> >>No, it's not. It's called "capitalism". You have a widget I want >>more than $$ and you want $$ more than what I want. We come to an >>agreement on how many $$ the widget is worth. We're both happy. >>Substitute "labor" for "widget" and it's *exactly* the same. Price >>fixing is anti-capitalistic. >> >> >>>If the minimum wage is $5 an hour then jobs that are >>>worth less wont get done. It is the same as if there is no minimum wage. Why >>>should jobs which pay less than $5 an hour get done? >> >>Why is there an artificial limit on what jobs get done? >> >>>What you are saying is there are jobs which are worth so little people >>>should still do them but not be paid a reasonable amount for it. >> >>You don't read well, eh? I'll slow down... If someone is offering >>a job for $4 and someone is willing to do a job for $4 it is >>*worth* $4, no more no less. At $5 the person offering the job may >>decide that it's not worth doing and the person who was willing for >>$4 no makes $0. >> >>What is "reasonable"? Who determines "reasonable"? You? You >>lefties sure like to control others, eh? >> >> >>>>>Surely, your argument is that a persons "worth" is what they are being >>>>>paid? >>>> >>>>Kinda the definition of "worth" isn't it? >>> >>>Well a minimum wage keeps peoples worth up as it is saying no one is worth >>>_less_ than $5 an hour. You seem to say some people should be. >> >>If they're willing to work for $1 and someone is willing to hire >>them for $1, that's the _exactly_ the worth of their effort. >> >> >>>With or without a minimum wage people are free to get better paid jobs. With >>>a minimum wage people desparate for work are protected from over >>>exploitation. >> >>Spoken like a good little party member. >> >> >>>>>That being minimum wage is no different from it being any other poorly >>>>>paid >>>>>wage. If someone is affronted by being told they are worth ?5.15 an >>>>>hour, >>>>>they can get a different job. >>>> >>>>Exactly. >>> >>>So what is wrong with the minimum wage? >> >>The same thing that's wrong with any price fixing. >> >> >>>>>If there is no minimum wage, they will still be affronted working for so >>>>>little, surely? >>>> >>>>Maybe they're willing to work for $4 rather than not work for $5. >>>>Why are you telling them they can't. >>> >>>Why should their employer get away with making people labour for so little? >> >>I didn't think we were talking about slavery. >> >> >>>It is not telling the person they cant choose to work for less money it is >>>telling people they cant make people work for less than what is considered >>>the minimum to live on. >> >>Why should there be an artificial bound? Who decides, komrad? >> >> >>>>>>Do you think the cost of living in east-bumfuck IA is the same as >>>>>>downtown Manhattan? >>>> >>>>>Not at all. I am sure I didnt say that and I hope I didnt imply that. >>>> >>>>Then why do you support a FEDERAL minimum wage, exactly the same >>>>for both? >>> >>>Because a minimum wage is better than none. >> >>That's exactly what's wrong with the minimum wage; the "none" part. >> >> >>>Where the cost of living is >>>greater less people will work for minimum wage. >> >>So why would people work for less than it takes to live without the >>minimum wage? You're the circular one here. >> >> >>>You seem to be arguing for higher minimum wages here. This flies in the face >>>of your previous arguments. >> >>Again, you don't read well. I'm arguing for NO minimum wage. Let >>the market decide what a "fair" wage is, just like it decides what >>a "fair" price is. >> >>>>>You said you didnt think anyone worked for the minimum, and I asked if >>>>>that >>>>>was the case what is the problem with the minimum wage? >>>> >>>>There are people who do work for minimum wage, but they don't >>>>"live" on it. Think kids. >>> >>>I did say I didn't think any one could live on the minimum wage. It is odd >>>you back this up with suggesting people should be paid less - which is even >>>less than you can live on in your example. >> >>Good grief, would you *READ*! Bye! > > > Yes. I see you are a greedy person with no soul. > I see you're a modern day Bolshevik.
From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 12:48 Don Bowey wrote: > "krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > The very idea of a "living wage" is socialist. > > Do you really want to improve your personal condition by cheating people out > of a fair share of their country? Quite possibly so I'd say. Graham
From: Eeyore on 14 Nov 2006 12:53
unsettled wrote: > Don Bowey wrote: > >"krw" <krw(a)att.bizzzz> wrote: > > > > It must be time to organize workers who are receiving less than decent > > wages. > > Oh goody, yet another Bolshevik movement. > > > Do you really want to improve your personal condition by cheating people out > > of a fair share of their country? > > They should work for what they're worth rather than > what you think they're worth. What's the *worth* of a human soul ? Graham |