Articles
   
       
Pics/Video
       
Wake 101
   
       
       
Shop
Search
 
 
 
 
 
Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
WakeWorld Home
Email Password
Go Back   WakeWorld > Non-Wakeboarding Discussion

Share 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       11-03-2015, 10:56 AM Reply   
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/03/bu...-law.html?_r=0

Scary stuff.
Old     (psudy)      Join Date: Dec 2003       11-03-2015, 11:37 AM Reply   
Arbitration clauses are common. Most credit card agreements have them. First I have heard of religious ones. Thats why its important to read what you sign.
Old     (shawndoggy)      Join Date: Nov 2009       11-04-2015, 9:59 AM Reply   
The interesting issue will be when a Bible Belt judge is faced with enforcing an actual sharia law arbitration clause. If Christian arbitration is enforceable, why not sharia?
Old     (dococ)      Join Date: Mar 2002       11-06-2015, 11:47 PM Reply   
https://www.yahoo.com/parenting/reli...221423445.html

uh oh...
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-07-2015, 1:17 PM Reply   
"Our findings contradict the common sense and popular assumption that children from religious households are more altruistic and kind toward others,”

That was never a common sense assumption on my part. Even Christians polled thought that Jesus would not approve of modern Christianity. The common sense assumption is that they think it's always other Christians.
Old     (pesos)      Join Date: Oct 2001       11-07-2015, 2:15 PM Reply   
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/01/bu...f-justice.html
Old     (Cabledog)      Join Date: Dec 2013       11-09-2015, 10:57 AM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by dococ View Post
As soon as I saw this story was from Yahoo I quit reading. Yahoo is not a credible news source.
Old     (dococ)      Join Date: Mar 2002       11-10-2015, 4:27 AM Reply   
^
You can certainly make that argument if you wish, but in this instance, Yahoo is simply summarizing a study from the University of Chicago that was published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. The University of Chicago is a credible research institution, and peer-reviewed journals such as this define the highest level of credibility regarding scientific news.
Old     (DenverRider)      Join Date: Feb 2013       11-10-2015, 6:20 AM Reply   
I grew up with real life experience that showed that religious kids study to be true. 6 years in Catholic grade school as the poor nerd. Never met a more cruel bunch of kids for the rest of my life. Made it out into public school for 7th grade and made friends for the first time. Religious people appear to hate the poor. Then they justify their hate by patting themselves on the back for donating their old clothes instead of throwing them in the trash.
Old     (wakesk8er2)      Join Date: Mar 2002       11-10-2015, 7:46 PM Reply   
Quote:
Originally Posted by DenverRider View Post
I grew up with real life experience that showed that religious kids study to be true. 6 years in Catholic grade school as the poor nerd. Never met a more cruel bunch of kids for the rest of my life. Made it out into public school for 7th grade and made friends for the first time. Religious people appear to hate the poor. Then they justify their hate by patting themselves on the back for donating their old clothes instead of throwing them in the trash.
IMO, many catholic and private schools are dumping grounds for kids whose parents can't do their job at home, so they try and pay a school to do it. Some of the craziest kids I knew/knew of when I was younger all attended local catholic schools. I doubt you are alone in your experience.

If you want to talk about hating "the poor", let's talk about the keeping "the poor" in a state of dependence and entitlement. I agree that the church does not do the job that it should, hence the unfortunate government intervention that we see, but I don't agree that the church hates "the poor".
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-11-2015, 8:42 AM Reply   
"If you want to talk about hating "the poor", let's talk about the keeping "the poor" in a state of dependence and entitlement."

If you want to talk about hating the poor, let's talk about making them compete for jobs with impoverished foriegn labor in countries with low standards across the board including healthcare, retirement, worker safety, and the environment.
Old     (wakesk8er2)      Join Date: Mar 2002       11-11-2015, 10:12 AM Reply   
I totally agree John.

I guess the question is, why are those jobs going overseas and how can we get them back to the US?

Even if those jobs were to come back to the US, do "the poor" really want those jobs?
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-11-2015, 10:34 AM Reply   
"why are those jobs going overseas"

Impoverished foriegn labor in countries with low standards across the board including healthcare, retirement, worker safety, and the environment.

"and how can we get them back to the US?"

Problems are problems because the solutions are not easy. The most blantantly obvious solution is tarrifing imports from countries that don't meet our standards acording to the cost of adhereing to those standards. Is that the best solution? I don't know. Are there lots of consequences of that, which would be painful? I'm sure there are. Can we compromise on a solution? Well I think that we are in the form of helping people with welfare, minimum wage, HC subsidies, etc... Is helping people with the aforementioned painful? Yes it is. Is it reasonable to expect to have to help the poor in return for exporting our economy so that we can have cheap stuff? IMO it is. Do I have any sympathy for people who demonize the poor while ignoring the damage they do to the economy by not considering the effects of getting stuff cheap? No.

"Even if those jobs were to come back to the US, do "the poor" really want those jobs?"

IMO the biggest disincentive to working is jobs that don't pay enough to make it worth holding a job. The bigger question is "what makes you think the the poor don't have jobs"? You can work full time and still get welfare. That's sometimes referred to as the taxpayer subsidizing corporations who want workers without paying them enough to live on. Do people really think that if everyone has a college degree that the college degree would be worth anymore than minimum wage? In a strict market economy (i.e. no govt rules regarding employment) you get paid based on how hard you are to replace, not how hard you work. Anyone that tells you they value hard work is either a liar, foolishly shallow, or actually thinks that poor people who work hard should be paid a living wage.
Old     (wakesk8er2)      Join Date: Mar 2002       11-11-2015, 11:44 AM Reply   
Agree with you on my first question ...the issue of getting jobs back here is not a one line answer. Multiple strategies could get us to the same solution.

As far as my second question, I never said anything about folks not having jobs. I guess my question, relating to what you said, is "how many people want to make themselves harder to replace?"

I've got two guys working for me right now that are good workers, honest, reliable, etc. They have both been offered positions to train, take on more responsibility, work a few more hours, make more money and neither cares to do so. It's very possible that both are eligible for government aid (I don't keep up with the requirements). I can bet they would both happily take a raise though. I don't have to tell you what that would do to our bottom line. If we've got two out of 25 people with that same mindset, I have to imagine there's a pile of others out there with the same mindset. Should someone with that mindset be receiving aid? And should I expect that job openings would be filled by folks with that mindset? I understand the need for well paying jobs, but you gotta start somewhere and you gotta build your value some way or another.



BTW, not arguing here. Just bouncing stuff off of you...
Old     (fly135)      Join Date: Jun 2004       11-11-2015, 12:21 PM Reply   
"I never said anything about folks not having jobs."

That was in reference to people not wanting to work even if there are jobs because they can get welfare.

"how many people want to make themselves harder to replace?"

If everyone does that then they are all easy to replace. Catch 22.

"They have both been offered positions to train, take on more responsibility, work a few more hours, make more money and neither cares to do so."

Potentially a perfectly valid position for them to take. If they aren't getting welfare then there is no reason to question that position. OTOH if you need them to step up and take more responsibility, then it's perfectly valid for you to choose to phase them out for someone else. Ultimately they will have to decide between job security and working harder, if that's even an issue in this case.

I sympathize with someone who chooses free time and quality of life over making more money. As long as you can make do with your income then I consider it to be a noble endeavor to elect a simpler lifestyle that promotes limited consumption, more time with family, and better health by reducing stress. I'm biased because I made that same decision. My wife contracted cancer and passed away in 2013. At that time I stayed home to work part time and take care of her until she passed with a reduction of salary to 60% of it's original level. After that my company's sales where not good so I agreed to continue to work at home with reduced responsibilities at the same pay. I still am to this day because not only is it a low stress lifestyle but I also have been able to ramp up the amount of time I spend at the cable park. I pull my weight, pay my bills, have HI, zero debt, and live a lifestyle that is fairly frugal because it fits my priorities.

I've never had to apply for any sort of welfare, not even unemployment. But I look at what's going on in our economy and think that the forces that create poverty and the resulting welfare are the natural consequences of a purely capitalist mindset that enjoys the benefits of cheap import policy without the responsibility of concerning itself with the effects of shipping money out of the domestic economy.

Reply
Share 

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 2:20 AM.

Home   Articles   Pics/Video   Gear   Wake 101   Events   Community   Forums   Classifieds   Contests   Shop   Search
Wake World Home

 

© 2019 eWake, Inc.    
Advertise    |    Contact    |    Terms of Use    |    Privacy Policy    |    Report Abuse    |    Conduct    |    About Us