In article . net,
says...
jps wrote:

In article . net,
says...


Ah, but where's the emotional satisfaction in that?
Lying hate-blinded ideologues like 'jps' NEED devils
with names and faces to blame for what they falsely
consider to be injustice.


In my eyes a society is meant to look after all its peoples, even those
with mental illness.

You are morally blind, so we quite sensibly don't take
moral direction from you.

You do it at your own expense, if you wish. Leave the
rest of us out of your misplaced pity.

I wouldn't expect you to agree with my moral compass since yours seems
to be aligned with pigs who'll fry in hell, if there is one.

In article . net,
says...
jps wrote:

If anyone needs a kick in the shorts it's parents and the NEA.
LZ


The NEA isn't to blame.

The NEA most certainly *is* to blame. They are the
worst, most immoral special interest group in the country.

Poppycock. Please explain *why* they're to blame.

In article et,
says...

Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.

Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace. They gain their advantage by squeezing every penny out of
the vendors and the operation, including their own people -- the very
reason they're crushing the competition.

While anyone who runs or observes business can admire Walmart's success,
only those with a conscience would care to look at the real costs
involved. Clearly, you're not one of those folks.

Microsoft succeeds based on superior channel development and marketing
expertise. They compete not by squeezing margins and employees but by
bringing value to the consumer.

If Microsoft did squeeze its employees to the point of them not being
able to make a living wage, you better believe it'd result in an
engineer's union.

In article . net,
says...
Harry Dumbo Krause wrote:

We are our brothers' keepers.

We are not. You go ahead, if you wish, but leave me
out of it. I'll resist, with force.

I'd love to be there when you're punched in the nose by the real people
you had the great opportunity to screw.

Best of luck in that endeavor.

jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...
Harry Dumbo Krause wrote:

We are our brothers' keepers.

We are not. You go ahead, if you wish, but leave me
out of it. I'll resist, with force.

I'd love to be there when you're punched in the nose by the real people
you had the great opportunity to screw.

Best of luck in that endeavor.


Sadly, "jonball" is representative of most right-wingers, including
almost all of those who post here.

--
Email sent to is never read.

jps wrote:

In article et,
says...


Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.


Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace.

Wal-Mart doesn't screw anyone. They offer employment,
and people voluntarily take it.

In article . net,
says...
jps wrote:

In article et,
says...


Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.


Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace.

Wal-Mart doesn't screw anyone. They offer employment,
and people voluntarily take it.

Because, unless they want to live on welfare and food stamps, there are
few other choices.

Read this and learn something...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Dec13.html

You'll see a quote from your hallowed Employment Policy Institute about
the fact that jobs being created are "low quality."

jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...

jps wrote:


In article et,
says...



Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.


Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace.

Wal-Mart doesn't screw anyone. They offer employment,
and people voluntarily take it.


Because, unless they want to live on welfare and food stamps, there are
few other choices.

Read this and learn something...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Dec13.html

You'll see a quote from your hallowed Employment Policy Institute about
the fact that jobs being created are "low quality."

Is it better to have a low quality job, or no job at
all, asswipe?

Why don't these people do something to EARN their way
into higher quality jobs?

Labor is just another input into the production
process. There is no reason to treat it any
differently than iron ore or electricity or Post-it
notes. The price for it is set by supply and demand,
just as any other input resource.

Deal with it.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

jps wrote:
In article . net,
says...

jps wrote:


In article et,
says...



Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.


Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace.

Wal-Mart doesn't screw anyone. They offer employment,
and people voluntarily take it.


Because, unless they want to live on welfare and food stamps, there are
few other choices.

Read this and learn something...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Dec13.html

You'll see a quote from your hallowed Employment Policy Institute about
the fact that jobs being created are "low quality."

Is it better to have a low quality job, or no job at
all, asswipe?

Surely you'll find out if and when you finish college and stop living on
your daddy's money.



--
Email sent to is never read.

Harry Krause wrote:

Jonathan Ball wrote:


jps wrote:

In article . net,
says...


jps wrote:



In article et,
says...




Wal-Mart does not hold anyone's head under water.
Wal-Mart's manpower needs are very different from
Microsoft's. Each pays the appropriate wage to attract
the talent they need. Neither is unionized.


Walmart screws people in order to gain a competitive advantage in the
marketplace.

Wal-Mart doesn't screw anyone. They offer employment,
and people voluntarily take it.


Because, unless they want to live on welfare and food stamps, there are
few other choices.

Read this and learn something...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Dec13.html

You'll see a quote from your hallowed Employment Policy Institute about
the fact that jobs being created are "low quality."

Is it better to have a low quality job, or no job at
all, asswipe?


Surely you'll find out

I have always known.