The Libertarian Case for Slavery

[Seth]

I don't see nostrils, nor blowholes. I see gills.

Wage slaves.

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy complaining of a time and social conditions that no longer exist. Union mine workers now earn

From CostMine’s 2009 Survey Results U.S. Coal Mine Salaries, Wages and Benefits here are some of the wages (US average in $/hour). The first number is for surface mines; the second is for underground mines.

* Electrician = 26.62/24.73
* Mechanic = 28.00/24.12
* Welder = 25.88/23.89
* Helper = 23.84/22.79
* Shovel/Dragline Operator = 25.87/-
* Laborer = 20.43/22.44
* Roof Bolter = -/24.67

Wages at large mines are higher than at small mines. Some examples:

* Electrician = 27.02/24.06
* Welder = 26.11/23.64
* Laborer = 21.23/18.52

Wages also vary across the country. Some examples of the variation of the hourly wage for an electrician across the country–go northwest, young miner:

* Eastern = 24.29
* Central = 25.84
* Southwestern = 26.08
* Northwestern = 28.09

Add to these wages the cost of benefits. As a percentage of wages, the average cost of benefits is as follows for U.S. coal mines (all US/Union/Non-Union):

* Mandatory = 17.15/15.69/37.55
* Voluntary = 34.84/37.55/24.52

Then there are incentive plans. I quote from the Survey:

This year 65% of union mines reported incentive plans, up from 57% last year, while 81% of non-union mine offered these plans compared to 71% last year. By contrast, our 2009 metal mine survey revealed that 83% of U.S. metal mines offer some sort of incentive bonus plan.

[Seth]

Of course the worst lie Scheibster's told is the title of the thread as it relates to the paper he cited, which has nothing to with a "case for slavery" but rather is a discussion of the concept of self-ownership and the right of the individual to dispose of his labor as he sees fit, not as the government sees fit.

It's clear that he didn't even read the paper, particularly since he's never once bothered to argue his case beyond the deliberately dishonest bit of quote-mining he did in the OP. Everything since has been personal attacks and evasions.

Clearly he has no rational or logical case to make based on the work he cited and is now trying desperately to evade the moral culpability for the mendacity and lies he's been caught in.

I'd actually be interested in some intelligent colloquy on the philosophical points raised by the author of the cited paper, but it's clear this is beyond Schneibster's ability.

Anyone else want to actually have a discussion on the merits of an individual's right to capitalize his lifetime of labor by selling it to someone, which, unlike the deceptive and juvenile thread title, is the actual point being made by the author of the paper?

[Schneibster]

I don't see nostrils, nor blowholes. I see gills.

Wage slaves.

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy

McDonald's cooks and cashiers.

[Seth]

I don't see nostrils, nor blowholes. I see gills.

Wage slaves.

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy

McDonald's cooks and cashiers.

Nobody requires them to work there or live in a "company house" or shop at a "company store" on pain of being fired or having their pay docked. Nobody chains them to the grill or cash register. No one claims ownership of their body against their will.

You're just full of bullshit examples, aren't you? Sorry, but you can't point to even one single example of a "wage slave" in the US. Not one. Because they don't exists. It's a bullshit Marxist propaganda term that is meaningless and only an idiot would even try to use it with anyone other than a proletarian drone with an IQ in the single digits.

[Schneibster]

I don't see nostrils, nor blowholes. I see gills.

Wage slaves.

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy

McDonald's cooks and cashiers.

Nobody requires them to work there

Nobody offers them anything else. Advocating someone sitting and starving is inviting to be stood up against a wall and shot when the revolution comes.

They cut Marie Antionette's head off for saying, "Let them eat cake."

Good luck with that.

[Seth]

I don't see nostrils, nor blowholes. I see gills.

Wage slaves.

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy

McDonald's cooks and cashiers.

Nobody requires them to work there

Nobody offers them anything else.

Balderdash. First, nobody's obligated to offer them anything. Second, they have the opportunity to find some work for themselves. Third, there are billions of jobs in the world that need to be done and billions of people willing to pay someone to do that work.

Advocating someone sitting and starving is inviting to be stood up against a wall and shot when the revolution comes.

If they want to sit and starve, that's their business. If they want a job, they can go get one. In neither case are they slaves to anything other than their own needs. They can go out in the wilderness and forage for nuts and berries if they like. Calling having a job "wage slavery" is just Marxist propaganda of the most idiotic sort.

They cut Marie Antionette's head off for saying, "Let them eat cake."

Good luck with that.

Marie didn't have an M4. Poor tactical planning on her part.

[Schneibster]

Another lame Wayback Machine fallacy

McDonald's cooks and cashiers.

Nobody requires them to work there

Nobody offers them anything else.

Balderdash.

Show what else they're offered. That's not starvation.

[Seth]

Show what else they're offered. That's not starvation.

As usual, you elide the very answer you seek: Nobody's obligated to offer anyone anything. If you don't want to starve, then forage for food or find a job. If you can't work, then ask politely for someone to help you out. The world doesn't owe you a living, or anything else.

[Schneibster]

Show what else they're offered. That's not starvation.

As usual, you elide the very answer you seek:

So you're selfish enough that you don't care if people starve.

My point exactly.

[Seth]

Show what else they're offered. That's not starvation.

As usual, you elide the very answer you seek:

So you're selfish enough that you don't care if people starve.

My point exactly.

Liar.