Unions should quit their employers
Become incorporated
Become independent contractors
14 January 2013
13 January 2013
What is a right
THE right of nature, which writers commonly call jus naturale, is the liberty each man hath to use his own power as he will himself for the preservation of his own nature; that is to say, of his own life; and consequently, of doing anything which, in his own judgement and reason, he shall conceive to be the aptest means thereunto.
By liberty is understood, according to the proper signification of the word, the absence of external impediments; which impediments may oft take away part of a man's power to do what he would, but cannot hinder him from using the power left him according as his judgement and reason shall dictate to him.
Thomas Hobbes
Leviathan
By liberty is understood, according to the proper signification of the word, the absence of external impediments; which impediments may oft take away part of a man's power to do what he would, but cannot hinder him from using the power left him according as his judgement and reason shall dictate to him.
Thomas Hobbes
Leviathan
11 January 2013
Property Rights and Personhood
A person who believes that it is OK to use deadly force against a person who is stealing or damaging their property...
who is against abortion...
Hypocrite?
I don't think life really has anything to do with it
There is a big difference between life (what is considered a living entity) and personhood (what has rights that should be protected)
Scientifically, sperm, eggs, growing broccoli, deer, and various other things are alive. None of those have protected rights.
The real issue is over a legal term (personhood) that can change with the circumstances
There are people who want to give all animals personhood status
Some Animals are protected when their species is endangered and we deem their life important enough to protect. And when their numbers grow, we lift those protections.
We've always decided what life is sacrosanct and what is not.
Life is not defined by survivability in a certain condition. Just because an embryo cannot survive in a different environment does not negate its life. The question is whether a fertilized egg is somehow more important than a living sperm or egg.
Whatever criteria we use to define personhood will always be arbitrary to me.
An odd analogy is the idea that you have the right to use deadly force against Someone who is taking or destroying your property.
We've already decided that property is more important than life
It may seem like an asshole thing to mention, but most abortions are about a woman not being able to care for a child. It's usually a money (property) issue.
I'm pro choice only because I think legislation against abortion is futile. I think it is a decision that should be made by the mother with no pressure from outside sources.
That being said, I don't want anyone to have an abortion
I think all life is sacrosanct and i would rather look at access to education and access to birth control that would prevent a person from having to make that decision
who is against abortion...
Hypocrite?
I don't think life really has anything to do with it
There is a big difference between life (what is considered a living entity) and personhood (what has rights that should be protected)
Scientifically, sperm, eggs, growing broccoli, deer, and various other things are alive. None of those have protected rights.
The real issue is over a legal term (personhood) that can change with the circumstances
There are people who want to give all animals personhood status
Some Animals are protected when their species is endangered and we deem their life important enough to protect. And when their numbers grow, we lift those protections.
We've always decided what life is sacrosanct and what is not.
Life is not defined by survivability in a certain condition. Just because an embryo cannot survive in a different environment does not negate its life. The question is whether a fertilized egg is somehow more important than a living sperm or egg.
Whatever criteria we use to define personhood will always be arbitrary to me.
An odd analogy is the idea that you have the right to use deadly force against Someone who is taking or destroying your property.
We've already decided that property is more important than life
It may seem like an asshole thing to mention, but most abortions are about a woman not being able to care for a child. It's usually a money (property) issue.
I'm pro choice only because I think legislation against abortion is futile. I think it is a decision that should be made by the mother with no pressure from outside sources.
That being said, I don't want anyone to have an abortion
I think all life is sacrosanct and i would rather look at access to education and access to birth control that would prevent a person from having to make that decision
Maximum return
If you are an investor, you expect to see a maximum return on your investment. That is accepted as capitalism
If you are a worker and expect maximum return on your investment, you are seen as a hinderance to capitalism
The middle and lower class put in human capital.
Companies would not be able to start, run, or grow without labor.
They also have 401Ks and other retirement funds that put capital into the growth of companies.
If I put in my time and talents to a company, I do want to see a good return on my investment.
A good return on an investment is an entirely different thing than our current need for maximum return on investment.
A maximum return that takes away from worker's wages, benefits, and pensions in order to increase profits and returns.
A maximum return that fires workers in America and outsources jobs or uses forced labor in other countries
I don't want a return on an investment at the cost of the livelihoods of the majority of Americans
If you are a worker and expect maximum return on your investment, you are seen as a hinderance to capitalism
The middle and lower class put in human capital.
Companies would not be able to start, run, or grow without labor.
They also have 401Ks and other retirement funds that put capital into the growth of companies.
If I put in my time and talents to a company, I do want to see a good return on my investment.
A good return on an investment is an entirely different thing than our current need for maximum return on investment.
A maximum return that takes away from worker's wages, benefits, and pensions in order to increase profits and returns.
A maximum return that fires workers in America and outsources jobs or uses forced labor in other countries
I don't want a return on an investment at the cost of the livelihoods of the majority of Americans
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)