Summations Only

Good luck.I am still waiting for explanations on some other parroting he did on another thread. Forever seems to make a habit of saying things that he doesn't understand. Well at least he seems to be incapable of explaining them.

So who is advocating collectivization?You really need to stay away from Glenn Beck.

Mmm, no.You really need to understand what words mean if you want to use them. Again, learn what words mean. This is not true
Adam Smith, the ideological father of capitalism, understood there was a huge advantage for employers and the need for some sort of ability by the workers to organize.

quote:

---

It is not, however, difficult to foresee which of the two parties must, upon all ordinary occasions, have the advantage in the dispute, and force the other into a compliance with their terms. The masters, being fewer in number, can combine much more easily; and the law, besides, authorizes, or at least does not prohibit their combinations, while it prohibits those of the workmen. We have no acts of parliament against combining to lower the price of work; but many against combining to raise it. In all such disputes the masters can hold out much longer. A landlord, a farmer, a master manufacturer, a merchant, though they did not employ a single workman, could generally live a year or two upon the stocks which they have already acquired. Many workmen could not subsist a week, few could subsist a month, and scarce any a year without employment. In the long run the workman may be as necessary to his master as his master is to him; but the necessity is not so immediate.

---

Any idea how a Union works? Not a tax in any sense of the word. If this were true. ANything the owner makes is a "a Tax on the larger society,..and add-on in the price of the goods."You really need a class on basic economics. If wages are suppressed and there is no collective bargaining then wealth will be concentrated in the hands of the few. Then no one can buy the products or services.We call that a death spiral.Please, please, back your assertions with some facts or at least support by someone moderately reputable.

Words have definitions. You really should use the accepted definitions. I have no idea what these means or what you are trying to say here. Want to try again and attempt a coherent sentence? So teachers shouldn't get a retirement? What is your point here? How would you know what % of my taxes goes toward schools? It is actually a little under 50%. I have no problem with what I pay in property taxes. I get good value for the taxes I pay.

Also, why any discussion with Faith is a waste of time. Rational discussion is impossible with her and Forever.Faiths comments on another thread about the Catholic church and the inquisition should disqualify her as being a person one can have a rational conversation with.

Please provide the codebook to determine when to read it in the many different ways.Maybe then we can all get on the same page; literally and figuratively.

Here is an example that did not require a god. Terra PetraSorry off topic, but I think a very interesting subject.