Play online chess!

Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6
From	Message
tat3225 17-Jan-13, 17:51	Chaz What corporations are you referring to? There are a lot of them in the US. You seem a little bitter considering that, based on what you've said, this corporate culture you're criticizing has funded your life and probably pays for your gameknot membership. Unless you have a money tree in your backyard. Companies are nothing without their employees. Wal mart pays people crap because they have guaranteed income due to welfare and food stamps. Whole foods treats their employees very well because the appearance of the store and customer service are very important. Plus, the founder and CEO of whole foods is a generally decent person (and is a huge republican- just throwing that out there). Google is nothing without creative software engineers and the same goes for Facebook. It doesn't matter who the CEO of Amazon.com is or Apple or Microsoft. The CEO of Northrop Grumman or Lockheed Martin doesn't hire the engineers that are the backbone of the entire business. Who cares about corporate executives when it comes to companies like those or Raytheon or General Dynamics. It's the people in the US who are smart and creative who matter. They deserve to be paid well and they deserve to be paid more than other people. China has aerospace companies. If you don't pay aeronautical engineers enough here, they'll just go design things for the Chinese military. My point is, that fairness doesn't matter. It's a philosophical concept that is interesting to discuss but when it comes to society, meh......everyone has a different idea about what is fair and what is not. In terms of corporations being balanced with the government, I'm not sure I know what you mean. Seems like the corporations are more important. Only because creative and industrious people will always find something to do and will go where they can do things. So we can sit around and talk about what's wrong with "corporations" all day long. But it doesn't change reality or how corporations all over the world are run. It seems like America is being discussed as though we are separate from everything else. We're not. Preoccupation with "fairness" in the US is paralyzing, kind of annoying and is- like an annoying person- driving people elsewhere.
jerry64 17-Jan-13, 18:04	chaz I havnt either supported or contradicted corporations. I own a corporation and I treat my employees very well. Maybe I'm not a billion dollar mega-conglomerate, but I can't say that all corporations are bad. Just the ones that march to the beat of government quoatas in terms of hiring certain percentages of gays, minorities, gov declared disadvanteged, etc.. Those are the scary ones. It means they don't run the company, the government tells them to jump, and theyre forced to say "how high".
anomalocaris 17-Jan-13, 18:04	Tat Don't worry about chaz its just his leftist ideology he cant help it. He claims to be center but never misses an opportunity to keep the battle lines drawn. I have grown to distrust him over time. His words ring true in many cases but even he cant stick to moderation and coming to some sort of agreement. I wonder what corporation built the plane in his picture? Perhaps it was built by the Amish , if so I apologize.
jerry64 17-Jan-13, 18:05	chaz just a question, a simple yes or no. I don't already know the answer, but I'm going to ask a direct question out of pure curiosity. Were you laid off as a union member of a major corporation by chance?
tat3225 17-Jan-13, 18:06	Also, Chaz, your idea of corruption here in the US is actually more corrupt than the things you're criticizing. A quest for fairness just breeds corruption because A, humans aren't fair and B, someone has to enforce the fairness. Which means there is a huge power imbalance that is inherently unfair. I can tell that you enjoy being in the passive aggressive enforcer position advocating fairness while being the one in charge. I say this because you are preoccupied with meeting in the middle with you as the mediator telling people to meet in the middle. "Never trust a man who says he doesn't like money. It is the lepers bell of an approaching looter."
softaire 17-Jan-13, 18:09	Tat Chaz, z, dm, tugger and others have said many times that Capitalism is "bad", it exploits the worker, it steals from the poor and it is a "bad" system. I have asked them what works better for society. I have not yet gotten a reasonable reply that makes any sense. I have asked them what would they do and still have not gotten a decent reply. It's always "corporations are bad, they are untrustworthy, and they steal their wealth from the worker". Chaz especially dislikes corporations which is strange because he purports to be a former CEO of a "major" corporation. You can ask him yourself if he exploited his employees and if he gained riches for his corporation off the backs of his workers. I did but that too was never answered.
chaz- 17-Jan-13, 18:16	tat ... ... you presume much. But, I not opposed to entrepreneurial business success or traditional corporations. I'm really talking about the mega corporations that wield more power than nearly most of the countries of the World and which are motivated more by obscene wealth than by dignity and humanity. And, admittedly, for any one corporation I might name, you would prob'ly respond with something good or innovative that the same corporation did or the jobs they provide. This is then prob'ly where our views diverge on what is or is not appropriate use of such wealth. I'm pitching the 'other side' here, as I can see where you're going; but, it isn't about one or the other, it's more about balance. Eisenhower (Republican) warned us all of the influences of the military-industrial complex for one good example. How certain oil companies are compromising the environment for profit-now motives could be another. But again, we would disagree on what these same companies contribute being of greater value than what they destroy. How much CEOs (and senior staff, board members, etc.) are compensated is another tricky area as some feel there are obscenities with the greed of some at the expense of others versus the competitive spirit for the most effective leadership. I'm pleased that you didn't dismiss my points out of hand (as so many from the Right often do), and I'm not trying to persuade you or change your mind. I'm honestly trying to get the Right to become more empathetic with the desperate need to embrace their opponents' views more intimately ... and seek better compromises and more useful negotiations on how to achieve the balances. And, I'll agree in advance the Left (especially with someone like Dm) does the equivocal presentation for Liberal causes against the Right. Finally, I'm not perhaps as concerned as you appear to be about competing in the World as I believe we do a pretty good job trying to do it right, and we're still the biggest market out there (what we want matters, how we achieve it matters, etc.). I'd rather have our behaviors copied (even our efforts at fairness) than despised ... and then to let our corporations and gov't work together to achieve the win against them from the higher ground ... than to die on this battleground of internal bickering.
chaz- 17-Jan-13, 18:19	tat ... ... sorry, I was writing my response and posted it before reading Softy's comment above mine ... not important except to understand that I wasn't considering anything he said within my response to you.
softaire 17-Jan-13, 18:37	chaz I'm sure she knows that you haven't considered my posts when you spout your own brand of leftism. You never have. It would be refreshing if, for once, you'd stop trying to present yourself as "middle" and looking for "balance". That is so far out of line with reality that I just laugh when I see you post it, time after time. You keep talking about having an "honest" discussion. If you can't admit that you are a Leftist, "then please, at least, stop presenting yourself as "balanced" or "middle". I could respect that.
chaz- 17-Jan-13, 18:45	Softy ... ... again for the umteenth time, you obviously have your own opinion about everyone else's opinion and you spout off a lot about mine. You do this more than once daily ... and I guess I should be pleased that I give you so much pleasure. It seems quite odd that you enjoy attacking the poster with so much vehemence and do not genuinely discuss the issues. But, that's your choice. It's also obvious that you don't quite understand the nuances of Left and Right.
dmaestro 17-Jan-13, 18:50	Then how is it that time and time again polls show Chaz's ideas as in the mid range of responses? He is a Colin Powell, big tent type RINO, not extreme left or right, caught up in the tea party takeover of the GOP.
jerry64 17-Jan-13, 19:26	dm Like i said, sometimes the majority is wrong. Theyve been wrong before, and to quote you "the majority is in control now", and ur on the wrong side of history. Its ok. Itll self correct.
jerry64 17-Jan-13, 19:31	all The second amendment in todays terms is ther to protect us from people like obama. Pure and simple
chaz- 17-Jan-13, 20:13	Jerry ... ... never mind.
dmaestro 17-Jan-13, 21:26	It won't protect against Obama. If interpreted absolutely it may lead to civil war.
Pages:  « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6

GameKnot: play chess online, online chess puzzles, Internet chess league, monthly chess tournaments, chess teams, chess clubs, free online chess games database and more.