tvashtarkatena

What do they do the rest of the time?

The drunken frat boys have filed suit, claiming that they never would have acted that way if they, uh, hadn't been drunk. Good luck with that, boys.

One benefit that is seldom mentioned in 'free market' debates such as this one is the decreased social costs of bringing workers above the poverty line. This is much harder to quantify, but it is nonetheless significant. Our social services require a substantial public and private overhead. Take the criminal justice system. It's no secret that lower income neighborhoods have more crime. This requires substantial public investment in police, courts, prisons, etc..., in addition to private investments in security systems, personnel, and other preventative measures, in addition to insurance. Raising the minimum wage would reduce the need for these expenditures, an effect which would offset or outweigh the direct cost to business of raising the minimum wage, in addition to increasing the less quantifiable well-being and quality of life for society as a whole. Regarding farm workers, farmers rarely hire them directly. The problems of corruption, regulatory non-compliance, and worker abuse are most frequently caused by labor contractors. A typical scam is to pay the minimum wage, but overcharge workers for transportation and housing and supplies at the 'company store'. These contractors do not have the kind of fixed assets to risk that farmers do. They are much more of a moving target for enforcement of labor and immigration laws.

Vote by mail. It's the most fool proof method.

If christian media watchdogs really wanted to bitch slap Cohen for his deathblow to morality, they wouldn't fuel ticket sales by feeding the publicity machine with reviews like this, which even goes so far as to suggest that true believers go see the movie to better prepare themselves to levy guilt upon other viewers who find it funny. Yet again, the joke's on them. Perhaps Pastor Ted could weigh in on the subject...

I think a machine for counting paper ballots is acceptable, but the voting machines have got to go. One of their biggest problems, aside from software glitches, insecurity, and power outages, is that there are never enough of them. In a paper system, if the booths are full, you can still fill out your ballot. No bottlenecks. It seems that fewer machines were allocated to democratic districts in Ohio in 04...a shitty but effective way to manipulate an election by limiting access to the process.

You're on, dude. Name your brand or I'll just stock a variety pack.

Good natured ribbing is also another facet of communication, one that is encouraged, not a little by yourself and certain others, on this forum. It shouldn't be taken too seriously. We can agree to disagree about JayB's tendency to latch on to tangents and produce tomes about them (albeit clear ones), but in the end, everyone draws their own conclusions. In any case, he's a big boy who seems perfectly willing and capable of defending himself. Criticism aside, I enjoy his writing, as I enjoy yours. As for the clarity or lack thereof in my posts, not to worry. Spray provides thorough and rapid notification. If I considered myself untouchable (don't confuse thick- skinned with holier-than-thou), I certainly wouldn't expose myself by offering up actual opinions on real issues for the slaughter.

The history I referred to, with certain exceptions during the Vietnam era, involved only the former. The latter can achieve political ends, too, but that is a whole different kettle of fish.

Pinches maricones! Ahora estamos rodeado!

You've just removed the incentive for low paid workers to win raises. Essentially you've pegged them at the minimum income level for what could be a long period, while any raises their employers granted would, at least initially, be meaningless. We haven't had a minimum wage increase in forever. Employers know they've gotten a good deal up to this point, and so should be fully prepared for the inevitable. If they're not, well, their lack of planning should not be the government's concern.

Too true, unfortunately. In past civil rights struggles and anti-war struggles, it was violence that finally captured the public's attention. In a classic example of action/reaction, J Edgar got his big career break throwing union organizers in prison. The ACLU was founded to spring them. It's interesting that last disinfranchised group, of Americans, at least, may not have to suffer violence to attain equal status, in this case regarding marriage. Who knows, maybe we actually have learned a thing or two along the way. Of course, as I write this disinfranchised non-Americans are rotting in Guantanamo.

But as we all know, Gregoire started it. Gregoire insisted on a recount, which was entirely her right, and a good idea, considering how incredibly close the vote count was. Any candidate, R or D, would have done the same. After the legally allowable two recounts had decided in favor of Gregoire, Rossi filed a lawsuit against the state which dragged on for many months before he finally withdrew from lack of money and support.

A third of the evangelical vote went to the Democrats.

without language, how would we think? I would argue that, for certain proseaholics, a bit more effort expended interpreting and a lot less effort wasted on constructing weighty monuments of self aggrandizement that too often fall wide of the mark would result in clearer thinking and a readership greater than one.

The one's I met canvassing weren't. They were more than happy to vote the bastards out.

I am pro Prost!

Thanks for the recommendation. Try downloading the "pomposity filter" and "Plain english language interpreter". They're real time savers.

That's the Democratic modus operandi: when you lose, bring in the lawyers. Rossi for governor!

I'll admit, I didn't have much to work with. They were, after all, your words.

You changed your post, I noticed. The 1st was a bit more...revealing, shall we say.

There are multiple rounds of counting. 1) 1st place choices are counted. 2) If your candidate loses and your 2nd choice candidate comes in 2nd in the first round of counting, your 2nd choice vote is added to the 2nd place tally. Ex: You vote this way: 1st choice: Nader 2nd choice: Gore Bush comes in 1st, Gore 2nd. Naders votes are added to Gore's total. Of course, if your 2nd choice is Bush, then your vote for Nader goes to Bush.

In all conceivable permutations, I say let the voters decide.

Jesus Christ was the only fatherless child.

Actually, it's being played by a machine. I simply took your post, turned the verbosity setting down by an order of magnitude, and fed it into my post-modern language generator.