Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Greedy, selfish NYC transit workers threaten strike

Collapse
X
Collapse
 
  • Page of 14
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
Previous 1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 template Next
  • #136
    Originally posted by DanS
    "I don't understand why the nannystate should forbid them to strike. Why isn't it just an employer/employees issue ?"

    Hershell: Because it's the nannystate that's employing them.
    Irrelevant, as the state is acting in a private capacity here. Also, I thought the employer is the city or a city-owned corporation, and the ban would come from the state or federal level ?

    As for fares: We pay 36 € for the monthly bus ticket, nowhere near covering costs. A subway system is a good deal more expensive... anyone got the finances of NY public transport in a link ? I doubt fares cover more than 30-50 %.
    “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

    Comment

    • #137
      A global hegemon doesn't exist and never has.


      DD, you are wrong. A hegemon is the state that has set the rules of the system. A global hegemon sets the rules of world diplomacy and action. Great Britain in the 1700s and the US now are global hegemons. The US has set the rules the world now operates. The UN is a US backed organization. Human rights is a US forced value.
      “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
      - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

      Comment

      • #138
        Originally posted by Boris Godunov


        Adjust for cost of living in NYC, which makes a dramatic difference. And it is not more than most teachers in NYC make.
        Why is the cost of living so high in NYC?

        If other government workers get close to transit workers' pay, that's probably a good chunk of the reason.
        No, I did not steal that from somebody on Something Awful.

        Comment

        • #139
          Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
          Human rights is a US forced value.


          Oh boy, hysteric laughter and a cold make a bad combo... ouch...
          “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

          Comment

          • #140
            You laugh, but the main reason for the pushing of human rights by the UN, was the force of the US in demanding that change.

            The US was, in fact, one of the main parties pushing for the Geneva Conventions.
            “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
            - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

            Comment

            • #141
              What exactly do you mean by "pushing by the UN" ?

              The US pushed human rights when it was convenient as a propaganda tool against the USSR, while it tried to minimise any practical impact. On which countries exactly did the US force human rights ? germany and japan ?
              “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

              Comment

              • #142
                i wish i had a union as strong as that...cmon teamsters, get me more money.
                "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
                'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

                Comment

                • #143
                  The US pushed human rights when it was convenient as a propaganda tool against the USSR, while it tried to minimise any practical impact. On which countries exactly did the US force human rights ? germany and japan ?


                  The US was very into human rights and believed very heavily into it. It was NOT a propaganda tool against the USSR. Presidents Truman and Eisenhower, especially believed it to be extremely important. They led the calls for human rights to a big part of the international system. Ever since Wilson, the US wished for human rights to be the centerpeice of the world system.

                  You hear about human rights all the time today. Someone is violating human rights, etc. Human rights as a dictate of policy for the UN was something the US wanted very much so. After WW2, when the US became the hegemon and was able to set its rules in place, it decided to focus on human rights.
                  “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                  - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                  Comment

                  • #144
                    I have no idea what you are smoking to believe that. Subtract the human rights rhetoric, what remains ?
                    “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                    Comment

                    • #145
                      I have no idea what you are smoking NOT to believe that.

                      The international system that we live in was forged after WW2, with the strongest Western country, the US, leading the charge. Seeing as one of the main things emphasized was human rights in the new United Nations, it is obvious that the US, the leader of the system, pushed that view through.

                      Human rights wasn't at the center of international law before WW2.

                      And btw, most of the Judges at Nuremburg were American, the first test for human rights being the underlying force in international relations.

                      And no matter what rhetoric you've been fed, the US has actually been very big on human rights since WW2. The constant pushing by the US for the last 50 years have lead to an expansion of human rights. Or do you think the US disapproves of the PRC because we don't like how their flag looks?
                      “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                      - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                      Comment

                      • #146
                        but imran, there are several cases where the US has violated human rights...although not domestically and at the level that other countries are guilty of, but internationally and through capitalistic tyranny.
                        "I hope I get to punch you in the face one day" - MRT144, Imran Siddiqui
                        'I'm fairly certain that a ban on me punching you in the face is not a "right" worth respecting." - loinburger

                        Comment

                        • #147
                          Imran:

                          "Seeing as one of the main things emphasized was human rights in the new United Nations"

                          The UN charter focusses primarily on collective security. The US played a role in the actual human rights documents, but that's about it. Tell me, when again did the US ratify the CCPR ?

                          "Human rights wasn't at the center of international law before WW2."

                          That was a slow development that's far from finished. But again tell me, which one is the only effective international system for the protection of human rights ?

                          "And btw, most of the Judges at Nuremburg were American"

                          I used to think it was proportional for the allies, but I can't be arsed to dig that one up.

                          "The constant pushing by the US for the last 50 years have lead to an expansion of human rights."

                          That's a joke, right ?

                          "Or do you think the US disapproves of the PRC because we don't like how their flag looks?"

                          Do you really think the issues are about human rights and not strategic rivalry ? Please.
                          “Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)

                          Comment

                          • #148
                            Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
                            DD, you are wrong. A hegemon is the state that has set the rules of the system.
                            A hegemon by definition is the only great power in the system. Merely being the most powerful state in the system doesn't cut it.

                            Great Britain in the 1700s
                            Was not a hegemon because of the existance of other great European powers.
                            I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                            For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                            Comment

                            • #149
                              "A hegemon is the state that has set the rules of the system."

                              Even by your own definition, the US doesn't set the rules of the system alone. Everybody wants us on board, but is unwilling to give up some things to have us on board.

                              DD is spot on.

                              A good exercise is to look at the economy of the US as a portion of the total global pie and assume that national power = economic power. You can see that the US only has 25% of the power, augmented by our allied power of 25% in many/most situations.
                              I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891

                              Comment

                              • #150
                                Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
                                Presidents Truman and Eisenhower, especially believed it to be extremely important.
                                Oh, so that is why Truman dropped two A-bombs on Japan, murdering 150,000+ civilians...
                                Tutto nel mondo è burla

                                Comment

                                Previous 1 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 template Next
                                Working...
                                X