Your Daily Dose of Happy Facts

[Elder Iptuous]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

All I know is that I was trying to build up to a point about the economic underpinnings of slavery, and now we're talking about what constitutes "real slavery" or "worse slavery".

My point is smashed totally flat.  I'm not saying "FUCK YOUUUUUUU", I'm just saying there is no point in my continuing, because I can't fucking remember what I was going to say.

oh. ok. well, lemme know what my line is next time, because i thought we were talking about V3X's idea (which i think there's gotta be some gold in there somewhere, btw)
sorry to ruin your buildup. 

[Junkenstein]

It's a myth, or perhaps a dirty lie, that it would mean a lower standard of living for everyone. It would mostly mean less CRAP.

We really don't need 3000 square foot houses filled with loads of COMPLETE AND UTTER SHIT in order to have a high standard of living.

There's a shit-ton more marketing money/military interest towards that shit though, which essentially locks the status quo. "Haves" beget "Havers" and "have nots" get fucked unto the 7th generation.

Part of living in any "first world" county is accepting that everything you touch eat and drink was made possible by others far, far away. And fuck them, because they're far, far away. Have some AID.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

All I know is that I was trying to build up to a point about the economic underpinnings of slavery, and now we're talking about what constitutes "real slavery" or "worse slavery".

My point is smashed totally flat.  I'm not saying "FUCK YOUUUUUUU", I'm just saying there is no point in my continuing, because I can't fucking remember what I was going to say.

oh. ok. well, lemme know what my line is next time, because i thought we were talking about V3X's idea (which i think there's gotta be some gold in there somewhere, btw)
sorry to ruin your buildup. 

No worries.  Nobody read the fucking thing in the first place, apparently.  Satire sells.  What I had to say doesn't.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

It's a myth, or perhaps a dirty lie, that it would mean a lower standard of living for everyone. It would mostly mean less CRAP.

We really don't need 3000 square foot houses filled with loads of COMPLETE AND UTTER SHIT in order to have a high standard of living.

This Exactly.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

As individuals, we can buy Fair Trade, and try for stuff "Made in the USA" or made by some local artisans, but even if 23% of Americans did that, the 77% left would still be more than enough to support profitable slavery. Even then, when it comes to things like electronics, the consumer has no way of verifying that all of the components and raw materials were obtained without slavery (likely, at least some slaves were involved in the production of most electronics). So even using the Internet is supporting slavery in some form...

The only way that any of this changes is at the International Politics level. When we see sanctions on countries allowing forced labor that are equal to the sanctions on refining nuclear material... then MAYBE something will change.

[Reginald Ret]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

I may be wayyyy off here but what i see happening is a misunderstanding of an seemingly unimportant detail.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those pretty twentysomethings in the apple store.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those actually producing apple products in true slavery conditions.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

I may be wayyyy off here but what i see happening is a misunderstanding of an seemingly unimportant detail.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those pretty twentysomethings in the apple store.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those actually producing apple products in true slavery conditions.

I think he was trying to differentiate between chattel slavery and employees with 0 rights and terrible working conditions. In an environment where there are very few job options, I don't see a functional difference.

Chattel slavery - If you try to quit, we'll kill/beat you.
FOXCONN - Sure you can quit, but there are no other jobs and you'll soon die of starvation.

[The Good Reverend Roger]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

I may be wayyyy off here but what i see happening is a misunderstanding of an seemingly unimportant detail.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those pretty twentysomethings in the apple store.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those actually producing apple products in true slavery conditions.

I think he was trying to differentiate between chattel slavery and employees with 0 rights and terrible working conditions. In an environment where there are very few job options, I don't see a functional difference.

Chattel slavery - If you try to quit, we'll kill/beat you.
FOXCONN - Sure you can quit, but there are no other jobs and you'll soon die of starvation.

I see no difference at all, to be honest, let alone a functional one.

[Junkenstein]

It's kind of like pulling the lever on the trapdoor or letting them jump with the noose necklace.

The result is the same but in one case you can say that it wasn't your fault, technically.

[Elder Iptuous]

i'm not disagreeing with you... 

Then please explain to me what the last 3-4 posts we each made WERE?  I mean, you could start with "Apple employees have it pretty good" in response to my using them as an example, only to later state that they didn't.

Because from where I'm sitting, it LOOKS like:  "Roger makes a post.  Post must be undermined, because of internet penis.  Roger is now driven from thread out of sheer annoyance.  Internet penis validated."

Roger exiting stage left, pursued by a bear.

sure.  V3X was talking about purchasing slaves to set them free, and i was saying that they aren't legally owned. it's just de facto slavery because they aren't able to escape.
you then said "yeah, but they're de facto slaves! look at apple employees"
my response was meant to say, "yes. they are de facto slaves.  but i was talking about the people that are physically unable to escape without threat of violence on them.  the apple employees aren't in that boat."

i'm not arguing that they are being fairly treated, however. just that they don't have a gun to their head.

perhaps i'm being a schmuck and bolstering my ePenis.  i dunno.
i'll leave you alone now, if you want.

I may be wayyyy off here but what i see happening is a misunderstanding of an seemingly unimportant detail.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those pretty twentysomethings in the apple store.
Some people when they talk about apple employees are talking about those actually producing apple products in true slavery conditions.

I think he was trying to differentiate between chattel slavery and employees with 0 rights and terrible working conditions. In an environment where there are very few job options, I don't see a functional difference.

Chattel slavery - If you try to quit, we'll kill/beat you.
FOXCONN - Sure you can quit, but there are no other jobs and you'll soon die of starvation.

yeah. that was pretty much it.  and, like i said, the reason i drew the distinction was in the context of V3X's suggestion that an activist group could go  buy them into freedom, while spinning it as buying them into further slavery without any pretense that it is anything other than what it was.  i just pointed out that they couldn't just be bought in that manner since they weren't legally owned, despite being, essentially, chattel slaves.  the idea would have to be tweaked to get the sought effect.  bringing apple employees into it seemed entirely off point, because they are, in fact, not forced to stay there.  there is no threat of violence.  they are not unpaid.
What i was not saying is that their situation is good, or even less bad.  i was simply saying that it's irrelevant to the hypothetical under consideration.

but apparently this crapped everything up, and i ruined something Roger was building up to because i was ...involved in an epenis contest? and now he's left the thread, and i feel terrible.

[Trivial]

Makes me sad

[Elder Iptuous]

jesus.  that's incredible.

[Cardinal Pizza Deliverance.]

I was making a sandwich at work tonight and I looked at the bag of lettuce - product of Mexico. O.o

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

I was making a sandwich at work tonight and I looked at the bag of lettuce - product of Mexico. O.o

A lot of our winter produce comes from Mexico and Chile.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Makes me sad

That is really, really sad. And the thing is, how would our lives suffer if we didn't buy the piece of shit plastic gewgaws that is made by the people in labor camps? Or if we paid twenty times as much for work made by workers paid a decent living wage for their region? Not at all, really.