Mike11

When the goose step has that familiar rhythm.

MSK, I can't figure you out, at all. In the years I have been here you have displayed empathy, restraint, open mindedness and fairness yet at the same time identify yourself as an Objectivist . I keep waiting for you to join Infidel in calling for distinguishing marks and internment camps but it never happens. Instead I get the opposite. You're a credit to your people my friend.

In case its a bit unclear let's say you employ 2 clerks, both with the same job description and job performance. One is a married male, the other a single woman. They work side by side. He makes 26.50$ an hour, she makes 10.25$ an hour. Regardless of the size of the company and the number of people experiencing unequal pay, this situation out to be legal per Objectivism. My question is more about the ethics involved when an entire society practices sex based pay structures. If you know the single women are not going to easily find higher paying work while the men need the additional funds for their dependents what are the ethics involved in how much you would pay?

Why? Are you saying it is up to the employer and the employer only to compensate as he sees fit? Such is my understanding of Objectivism. Is there something I'm missing?

Given that I can not express this type of thought in polite company I thought I would ask it here. In the early 1900s in Canada women would often be paid half to two thirds of a male's pay for the same job. The logic for this difference being these women were almost always unmarried versus the men who would need the pay to support several dependents. Wow, that was bad grammar on my part but you get the idea. So this sort of difference was dealt with legally, the pay gap is now officially illegal in Canada. However, by Objectivist standards, it ought to be perfectly legal to pay a white male 200$ for 8 hours work and a Negress 20$ for the same 8 hours work. So looking at the problem in the early 1900s from an ethical, rather than political standpoint, how would you as an employer or as a worker deal with this situation?

No trailer with only a few weeks left? Is this getting a wide release or just hitting the festival circuit?

I love watching Jack on CPAC. He fills the drunken British tradition so well the other MP's can stay sober. We bring you now back to your regularly scheduled thread.

I'm with VH and also with Brant here. On the one hand according to strict Objectivist anti-collectivism national military actions and rhetoric are a problem. So I see VH's point. On the other hand I think Brant is saying that in the real world, such as was the case in WW2 and with the Barbary Pirates, we need to compromise our strict Objectivism with real world issues. At least that is what I take Brant to mean, forgive me if I am wrong.

Ya'll just playing with yourselves.

13) You see news stories about civilian casualties in Afghanistan or Indonesian child labor without getting an erection. 14) You do not need to carry the Rand-English dictionary to handle social interactions. 15) The phrases "Children with Down Syndrome" and "No Free Lunch" do not send you into a blinding rage and a rereading of Galt's Speech. 16) You have ever uttered sentences like "I need to take responsibility" or "I'm sorry". 17) Stories about serial killers do not make you feel tingly and warm inside.

I am pleased that Israel is not using this as an opportunity to expand its policy of disappearances, theft, repression and general Israel-ness. At least one good thing is happening here.

Finally, after 6 pages of bull shit this thread is beginning to go somewhere. Thanks to everyone who is not Bob, Krolker or Infidel.

It boggles my mind that we, after suffering a maximum of a few thousand casualties, would call the people we have tortured, humiliated, persecuted, and murdered by the hundreds of thousands the enemy.

#1 was actually pretty funny.

I know this guy isn't Ghandi but given that just last year the CEO's and brokers who crashed the American economy and damn near the world economy gave themselves billions in bonuses this guy is a working class hero.

When you realize that Chomsky is stating the obvious but that pointing this out would put you in the cross hairs of every other poster on the only political board you participate in something is wrong.

try hitting the control and plus buttons.

It reminds me a lot of arguing with Randists over on OO.net and Speicher's site. "We need public roads because..." "Nuhuh! Proper measurement omission and Roads qua Roads and What Would John Galt Do? And..." "Right, back in the real world..."

The caller was pretty clearly a garden variety Creationist. His limited but fancy vocabulary, attribution of amoral nihilism to Darwin, and general tomfoolery all back that up. Savage did a good job keeping him on topic. As for Savage, while nothing he said was necessarily antisemtic he attacked Kissenger and that "Old Yenta" Albright as "without loyalty to his country", the "internationalist", lacking a "moral center" and "obsessed with power". No shades of antisemitism there at all. Why is it the further to the Right you go, the more residual antisemitism you find? All the old attacks against the Jews are now directed at Hollywood, Academic and Media "Elites".

It goes without saying that women are manipulative beasts that screw men over at every turn. Indeed, everyone knows that feminism was nothing more than an evil conspiracy. To argue otherwise is stupid. ... There are some legit issues concerning men's rights but that article was often misogynist and generally out to lunch. I got the sense the author had some major personal issues.

It goes without saying that women are manipulative beasts that screw men over at every turn. Indeed, everyone knows that feminism was nothing more than an evil conspiracy. To argue otherwise is stupid. ... There are some legit issues concerning men's rights but that article was often misogynist and generally out to lunch. I got the sense the author had some major personal issues.

Jezis bye, ya didin tell us it was yer birthday eh? Well by golly Happy Birt-day from the Cape Bre'in Highlinderz!

If I want /b/ I will go to /b/. This is a troll thread. PDFTT

I really wish you would stop doing that. Every other post by you I see you've deleted.

I remember a kid's activity book that had this question. I didn't get the answer back then either