Sweet, open the borders then. It's not the government's job to take care of that (we had government long before we had 21st century style closed borders, so it's definitely not a requirement of government). More people = more money coming in.
Since the 1980s the Republican party had adopted a position of starve the beast, of screwing up these very numbers so that people can make exactly the argument you have.
What happens when half of government acts is bad faith purely to poison the well, one half of government and an entire political party make it so that the numbers don't work (and via the fiscal policy they intentionally inflict/structure/design) purely so that they can promote their policy position of 'the numbers don't work'?
How many unfunded tax cuts have we had recently? Those aren't acts of nature. The numbers you speak of not matching aren't acts of nature. They are intentionally designed to 'starve the beast' in the 1980s Republican way, and in newer ways the party has come up with since. All so the exact argument you gave can be made.
You waiving away poor business behavior (the behavior being discussed being wage theft) because 'good behavior is hard':
> if being a trustworthy employer is so easy why aren't you and many other people doing it
You saying companies are practically forced to steal because government/regulation:
>the issues you point out are not due to employers, but due to government regulations or lack thereof, and the issues of the way the economy and financial systems are setup to incentivize, which the government is also responsible of regulating and enforcing. Without proper regulation and enforcement to even the playing field, the only ones who manage to stay in business will be the unethical ones
You completely ignoring that the tyrannical statement came from the post I responded to I and simply redirected their ridiculous premise from workers to business to highlight their ridiculousness:
>It's easy to just say employers are tyrannical when
I have 3 product ideas that I do nothing with because I'd have to sell on Amazon and if they were successful the upper case alphabet shops would eat my lunch I can't compete with their production. So the options to the world are a little bit smaller because I can't afford the patent process. Spreading that industry wide seems like it would make society poorer, not richer.
Patents make us richer, in the short term with new ideas/products that people can only afford to invest in/bring to market because of patent protections, and in the long term with public access to those things as the patents expire. We have hundreds of years of seeing this model be successful, the same with copyright.
I have written POS applications (VB to SQL Server), managed large parts of the PCI stuff. Wrote medical applications (VB, Crystal Reports, SQL Server). Managed small dev teams. Acted as the implementation team with those products when new. Provided third level support/final person to call support. Did report writing/SQL optimization as data sets grew. Provided IT support from old RS6000s through to Windows Server/SQL Server. Later moved to IT management and ran a small (me+3) corporate team. Managed things like ERP/MPR upgrades/process improvements, custom factory floor dash boards, etc. Good a big picture stuff, troubleshooting.
Then I blew up my life and am now un-employable with a unsavory criminal history. My software skills are out of date (maybe my SQL skills are still useful) but would be willing to work fairly cheap for any role. My home is paid for and my costs are low. I would love to move out of physical labor and use my mind again, and find someone willing to give me a second chance. But my history will be off putting to most.
I noticed that PR campaign on reddit to. Hope they planted the right trees (not like Eucalyptus in California, American pines in Sweden that weren't ideal). Meanwhile European and US tree cover is expanding naturally, we just don't really hype it. For example:
I've found most of the people who don't trust don't want to trust, not they actually don't trust, because they know nothing about the bodies that establish this, the standards they hold, specific issues that cause their loss of trust. Zero real background.
What actual bodies that establish credibility/verification do you currently not trust? What examples of their failures prompted you to stop trusting them or even be interested in the topic of if they were trustworthy gatekeeps? Most of the time that answer ends up having personal politics as the root, not actual trust issues that actually occurred and got the doubters attention. Normally if they have any examples they are politically sourced/politically generated laundry lists, not authentically generated concern or personal knowledge/care of the topic past wielding as a political weapon.
Please give examples of these agencies. What you list seems more like how business captures control via 'knowing more than government officials' then how technocrats do. At least that's what conservative politicians tell us as they defer all oversight/domain knowledge to private industry and private industry 'best' practices. Are you also saying that government should stop that practice and that is is also a trap of some kind? Or is it just a trap when it's for the betterment of society?
I want a bill that prevents employees from using their phones at all for work cases. I've seen people who can barely afford their smart phone having to use it for work and then dropping it/breaking it where replacing it is a weeks salary.
Companies should be required to provide the tools needed, and that should include phone if a phone app is required to be used as part of the job. I'd say a replacement guarantee could work, but these sorts of places will fire someone if they requested such a guaranty be fulfilled so the only way is total ban.
Police had to at least play 'parallel reconstruction' and pretend they weren't using Stingrays though. And we all knew it and nodded along, and the lines moved, and the rules blurred a little more, and now we are at the next phase of the erasure of civil liberties.
But GMs security of their tracking information is 100% perfect and no foreign adversary will gain access? BS. Either we need to ban it completely for all manufacturers, or we don't actually care.
Zoning is a promise from the government 'invest in a house (which is most people's largest investment in life) here and we guaranty we will work on our side to make sure it is fit for purpose (a good place to live/you won't lose money).'.
These private property owners you are concerned about normally bought the land with these difficulties you are worried about priced in to the land's value. Why should to government hand them free money in the form of not enforcing what has been priced into the land value?
And contrary to boomers loved in childhood mythos of the wild west where the criminal could get a second chance, become the sheriff, etc. modern America gives no second chances. Huge sections of poorly paid labor would not be staffed if not for people having zero options. Many businesses get the majority of their cheap labor by exploiting ex-cons/people on probation and knowing someone on probation can't say 'no' because a complaint of their attitude from their boss to their PO has actual impacts on their life/freedoms.
Communities passed and paid bonds to have water hookusp. Built infrastructure. They should have a say in who gets access and why. There are plenty of places datacenters could build without hassle, but they want access to readymade infra, and that comes with a reasonable tradeoff.
If a woman is being harassed, especially an old one, yes, I have always stepped in. That used to be a part of me I thought was conservative. But it doesn't appear to actually be a trait they hold.
I'm not litigating my mothers treatment here. I am expressing the damage done.