alot of this information is most of the time passed down from parents to their kids

11/16/2006 2:53:38 PM

Quote :

"I think that Roth IRA and 401K are just important to learn as a lot of that stuff"

The use of current tax-savings vehicles would be included as "choosing investments"

11/16/2006 2:55:38 PM

pardon

11/16/2006 2:56:59 PM

Quote :

"alot of this information is most of the time passed down from parents to their kids"

not to the kids that truly need it

11/16/2006 2:57:40 PM

^ most parents dont have enough education on this subject

11/16/2006 2:58:52 PM

^nope

we, as a population, are WOEFULLY underinformed on this matter, and it shows.


I would probably start with the time value of money, particularly opportunity costs and compound interest. Everything else that I can think of is secondary and follows naturally from understanding this concept.


and yes, i have long been a proponent of having this subject as required material in highschool.

11/16/2006 5:18:16 PM

Quote :

"Then explain lottery tickets and poor people with new cars."

Playing the lottery is fun and new cars are fast. What is hard to understand?

11/16/2006 6:05:55 PM

it's hard to understand the people who play the lottery in earnest hopes that it will deliver them from the lower middle class, when they could actually do it on their own with much greater certainty than the snowball's chance odds of a lottery ticket.


and i'm probably the biggest car nut in the Soap Box, but you buy the new car when everything else is financially in order...not when you have to sell your financial soul to a creditor, or not save and invest properly, or carry enough health insurance, or save for your kid's college, or pay for you OWN college, or if you are renting accomodations long term instead of buying.

11/16/2006 6:11:38 PM

schools dont teach real knowledge to begin with how are they going to stuff financial literacy in the mix?

11/16/2006 6:19:15 PM

^then why are you in college?

Quote :

"Playing the lottery is fun and new cars are fast. What is hard to understand?"

They're bad investments. I'm pointing out how most people don't have a good grasp of finance and accounting, especially the poor.

11/16/2006 10:19:03 PM

^ Thanks for the "lesson" earlier in the thread, Kris. I happen to hold a bachelor's in business administration.

Quote :

"finance is different from economics, there's not a lot of politics in accounting But yes, I think that there shouldn't be any high school history classes and they should all be replaced with simple personal accounting and investing class, and a few higher level ones. Knowing how to deal with money would be much more helpful to anyone that age than 5 different classes about the revolutionary war - civil war."

What you obviously don't realize is that any course can be politicized. I meant that the type of course suggested by the thread title might be more likely to be politicized. Such bias might begin with an anti-debt position by the teacher--without presenting the value of positive return on debt. Then, the teacher could blame the credit card companies for consumer debt--without mentioning that no one is forced to obtain credit cards. At that point, the course is only a hop, skip, and a jump from bashing US fiscal policy, which is primarily directed by the president, and capitalism itself. Do you see?

By the way, if you want personal "financial literacy," accounting courses are NOT the way to achieve it. Learning the particulars of balance sheets, income statements, and statements of cash flows will be of little help at the personal level. Courses on money and banking, which are economics, and advertising and consumer behavior, which are business/marketing would be more beneficial.

11/17/2006 12:53:03 AM

PS: Many of the economics professors that I know and have heard of do NOT advocate personal budgets. Rather, they recommend a pay-yourself-first approach of around fifteen percent. As long as you properly invest the approximately fifteen percent of every paycheck, which can include payments toward owning your own home, they don't really care what you do with the other roughly eighty-five percent.

11/17/2006 1:09:08 AM

Quote :

"I happen to hold a bachelor's in business administration."

Then I find it disappointing that with that degree you would think that a finance course could be "twisted it into an anticapitalism course".

Quote :

"What you obviously don't realize is that any course can be politicized."

SUre, but then you could just as well say that they shouldn't teach math because it could be turned into 9/11 conspiracy theories course. Surely you see how silly that is.

Quote :

"Such bias might begin with an anti-debt position by the teacher"

No one with a reasonable amount of knowledge in accounting is going to advocate anti-debt. That's just plain silly. A major part of accounting is when to invest.

Quote :

"Learning the particulars of balance sheets, income statements, and statements of cash flows will be of little help at the personal level."

You also learn how to compare cost to benefits to find when to invest, when to replace equipment, relevant information for decision making, etc. All of these are very helpful in personal finances.

Quote :

"Many of the economics professors that I know and have heard of do NOT advocate personal budgets."

Economics has little to do with budgets, much less personal finance.

11/17/2006 1:20:34 AM

Man, please stop posting that everything sounds "silly." It makes you sound silly.

I am not trying to give you a hard time, and I really don't want to pick apart your reply, but I will if you insist. You don't know what you're talking about--just stick to "Stuntin'."

11/17/2006 1:33:24 AM

Quote :

"They're bad investments. I'm pointing out how most people don't have a good grasp of finance and accounting, especially the poor. "

thanks. that's what i was saying, expressed more succinctly.

Quote :

"What you obviously don't realize is that any course can be politicized"

that doesn't stop us from teaching civics, history, science, etc.

Quote :

"PS: Many of the economics professors that I know and have heard of do NOT advocate personal budgets. Rather, they recommend a pay-yourself-first approach of around fifteen percent. As long as you properly invest the approximately fifteen percent of every paycheck, which can include payments toward owning your own home, they don't really care what you do with the other roughly eighty-five percent. "

that's exactly my approach, except I set aside more than 15%. I don't budget the rest at all, at least not formally. I have all of my bills except for rent and my share of utilities (wasn't planning on being in this location long enough to warrant buying a house, and prices were inflated due to Hurricane Ivan) automatically deducted, so in a sense, they're budgeted, but I don't really even know how much they add up to. I don't really even know how much I typically spend on other stuff like gas and food...I try to be reasonably frugal, but I don't really worry about it. I just watch to make sure my account is generally accumulating money. I don't have to sweat the details, b/c I pull all of the saving and investing I need (and then some) off the top. The rest is essentially disposable income.

11/17/2006 7:31:06 AM

Kris, about no one advocating anti-debt policies:
Dave Ramsey does it, and he's a nationally followed financial "expert"

Not that it should prevent us from teaching the course, I'm just saying some people out there do advocate that.

Also, a course like this would be open to a lot of political attitude (again, not that we shouldn't teach it, simply be aware of it), because of topics like AMT and other taxes. For instance, its very simple to say in the same breath that you're talking about the 15% capital gains tax rate something along the lines that is a tax break for the rich who can afford to invest in taxable accounts.

The fact that you'd have to talk about social security is a whole 'nother can of worms, too. I mean, you could have people like me who would secretly want (but certainly not openly attempt) to convince the kids that social security is one of the dumbest government programs ever devised. Then there will be others who try to tell the kids that the rich get preferential treatment because only part of their income is taxed by social security.

History, Civis, ELPS, and Finance all have a position different from math and science in that they are very easily politicized. You just have to be aware of it.

11/17/2006 7:52:07 AM

And for the last time: I'm simply saying that the type of course at issue should not necessarily be taught at the high school level. I'll guarantee you it would become the anti-credit card course--and in many cases, the anti-capitalism course. Save it for entry-level university students and as a course available at community colleges.

11/17/2006 11:22:19 AM

You know not everyone goes to college and/or community college right?

And what makes classes at that level uncorruptable?

11/17/2006 11:26:19 AM

^ Not a thing. Individuals can likely deal with any politicization better outside the high school environment. Hey, it's all hypothetical--it's not like I have any evidence to support my opinion, at this point.

11/17/2006 11:37:14 AM

I would like to know how this class could turn into an anti-capitalism course.

are the teachers going to tell the students that owning things is bad and we should resort back to serfdom? i would like to know.

also anti-credit card does not equal anti capitalism even by a freakin long shot.

11/17/2006 11:39:05 AM

^ Please read my posts again, Dentaldang.

11/17/2006 12:42:30 PM

actually I don't see where you've actually explained how that would happen. Your explanations so far have been:

Quote :

"No, because many of the academics would find a way to twist it into an anticapitalism course."

Quote :

"At that point, the course is only a hop, skip, and a jump from bashing US fiscal policy, which is primarily directed by the president, and capitalism itself."

Quote :

"I'll guarantee you it would become the anti-credit card course--and in many cases, the anti-capitalism course."

Your most in depth explanation is "a hop, skip, and a jump"

11/17/2006 12:52:13 PM

without reading the thread, i say yes.

11/17/2006 1:16:56 PM

"As you see children, the corporations use advertising to twist the minds of the citizenry into being consumers, forever under the thumb of the credit card companies. In an ideal world we as a community would get together and stop them from doing this, rescuing those less "understanding" than ourselves. Regretfully, the evil corporations fear losing control over consumers and use their money to corrupt the community, protecting their ill gotten profits. It is for these reasons we should all be careful that we avoid the corporate trap and try to work in harmony with nature, not debt."

11/17/2006 1:31:18 PM

Quote :

"Dave Ramsey does it"

He teaches people how to get out of high interest credit card debt, I don' think he'd ever suggest not taking out a loan to buy a house or anything of that sort.

Quote :

"I'm just saying some people out there do advocate that."

No one that has a reasonable amount of knowledge in finance is going to completely argue agianst debt.

Quote :

"Please read my posts again, Dentaldang."

Your posts are moronic, you're trying to make skateboard ramp into a slippery slope by saying "this class could teach a skewed viewpoint, therefore it most certainly will".

11/17/2006 1:57:39 PM

I heard somewhere that stupid people run the Bull market...

11/17/2006 2:11:01 PM

Quote :

""As you see children, the corporations use advertising to twist the minds of the citizenry into being consumers, forever under the thumb of the credit card companies. In an ideal world we as a community would get together and stop them from doing this, rescuing those less "understanding" than ourselves. Regretfully, the evil corporations fear losing control over consumers and use their money to corrupt the community, protecting their ill gotten profits. It is for these reasons we should all be careful that we avoid the corporate trap and try to work in harmony with nature, not debt.""

so teaching people to aware of the corporate influence in society and on the population is a bad thing? We arnt people to the corporations, we're numbers and that is the most destructive force attacking individuality today. But if you want to feed the beast than go for it.

11/17/2006 4:44:59 PM

^^^ So, you've traded "silly" for "moronic," huh? Words can be fun, but yours have nothing to do with reality.

I simply suggested that young people do not always have the experience to realize they are being indoctrinated--one way or the other. Since the hypothetical course in question is, well, hypothetical, I have no data to support my position concerning how it would be taught--and I have stipulated as much in this thread. But are you're really asking for evidence that most courses are politically biased? Are you serious? Evidence abounds.

Concerning debt, it is neither good nor bad. Debt is a tool, a means to achieve an end. If one receives a positive return on a given debt, then the debt is desirable. If one receives a negative return on same, then the debt is undesirable.

Concerning your suggestion about accounting courses, you have yet to demonstrate how these courses, which are primarily concerned with preparation of financial statements for businesses, would benefit individuals. My suggestion of money and banking courses and marketing and consumer behavior courses would likely prove much more useful. In the money and banking courses, the students could get specific content from the macroeconomics level to the microeconomics level, which goes all the way to down to the household. In marketing and consumer behavior courses, students could learn how companies market to them--sometimes aggressively--and what drives the choices that consumers make.

Sorry, I think my approach is comprehensive and more appropriate. But again, IT'S ALL HYPOTHETICAL!

11/17/2006 5:43:42 PM

Do you have any kind of actual evidence of a high school-level class being biased against capitalism?

11/17/2006 5:54:36 PM

11/17/2006 6:05:19 PM

uh...ok?

Quote :

"I simply suggested that young people do not always have the experience to realize they are being indoctrinated--one way or the other. Since the hypothetical course in question is, well, hypothetical, I have no data to support my position concerning how it would be taught--and I have stipulated as much in this thread. But are you're really asking for evidence that most courses are politically biased? Are you serious? Evidence abounds."

So where is this evidence? I'm an advocate of self-reliance and financial responsibility being a personal issue first and foremost, and I like this idea. I'm interested in your evidence.

V me?

[Edited on November 17, 2006 at 6:18 PM. Reason : .]

11/17/2006 6:11:43 PM

wait i thought you were the one complaining about the schools?

11/17/2006 6:15:00 PM

11/17/2006 6:18:45 PM

Hey look, I can post pictures and avoid real discussion, too.

11/17/2006 6:31:04 PM

11/17/2006 6:32:55 PM

So where is the evidence that high school classes are biased against capitalism?

11/17/2006 6:33:59 PM

Quote :

"so teaching people to aware of the corporate influence in society and on the population is a bad thing? We arnt people to the corporations, we're numbers and that is the most destructive force attacking individuality today."

Well, I merely ask that you recognize the possibility that you just don't like their kind. Note how you refer to them as the fictional teacher, "We arnt people to the corporations." You see, a corporation is merely a collection of individuals that have chosen to cooperate in the profitable service of their customers. A corporation is a non-entity, we made it up, just like a country was made up: you can't drown it, you can't shoot it, you can't talk to it.

And this is what is dangerous: you and others like you are trying to portray other people as something other than human beings, which is exactly what you are accusing them of doing to you (turning you into numbers). Well, you're turning them into faceless monoliths out to destroy innocence; when in reality they are just like you, they go to church, go shopping, have families, hopes, dreams, and a wish to do good in the world.

[Edited on November 17, 2006 at 7:06 PM. Reason : .,.]

11/17/2006 7:02:41 PM

Since the thread seems to have taken some wrong terms, I'll admit I haven't read it all, so pardon me if any of this is redundant:

I've always been a proponent of this. I'd like to think that I'm a reasonably intelligent person, but I had no idea how to write a check until I got to college and had to start doing it, and there's a lot of other basic stuff I don't know because I haven't run into it yet -- 401(k), IRA, all of these things are complete fucking mysteries to me.

I noticed where Kris suggested getting rid of history classes altogether. I'm not sure that I see that as being useful. I could see cutting back on requirements for history and possibly higher math. Not get rid of the courses -- just not require them. I know that the higher maths are really useful to a lot of you guys, but I don't think you can honestly say to me that you think most people use anything beyond basic algebra after high school (except maybe to take another higher math that's later required in college, which has done me oh-so-much good in my majors).

But axe a couple of history and math requirements, then replace those, among other things, with a couple of basic finance courses, and maybe expand what is currently a one-course civics program to another year/semester, with a bigger focus on government's direct relationship with you. Most students won't benefit too much by knowing how bills become laws and how the Supreme Court works, but plenty of them would benefit from a better expansion of their constitutional rights.

11/17/2006 9:06:53 PM

RP STUDENTS PROTEST 'LIBERAL BIAS,' PUSH CONSERVATIVE AGENDA
Published on November 25, 2003

BYLINE: TIM TESCONI
THE PRESS DEMOCRAT PAGE: A1

Rancho Cotate High School students who believe they are being ``brainwashed by the liberal bias'' in their classrooms are banding together to bring a conservative agenda of God, guns and country to the Rohnert Park campus.

The Conservative Club at Rancho Cotate, which may be the only one at a high school on the liberal North Coast, reflects a nationwide view by political conservatives who long have considered public schools as liberal bastions.

``We're being brainwashed by the liberal bias of teachers. It's everywhere,'' said Keith Butler, 15, a freshman who is one of the 50 members of the Conservative Club.

Student members said they formed the club in September to challenge what they perceive as a liberal viewpoint espoused by many teachers. The club has invited controversial speakers, including a member of the National Rifle Association, to campus to promote conservative ideology.

Rancho Cotate administrators dismiss the club's claim of widespread liberal bias in classrooms, but support the students' quest for varied viewpoints.

``All of our classroom teachers have a duty and responsibility to present both sides of issues,'' said Michael Watenpaugh, superintendent of the Cotati-Rohnert Park Unified School District. He said that until the club was formed there had been no complaints about a liberal bias.

``One of the rules of education is to present both sides equally and in a fair and responsible manner,'' Principal Mitchell Carter said.

Bias in the classroom is a debate more often associated with college campuses. Conservative groups have monitored campaign donations of college faculty, noting contributions to Democratic candidates far outnumber donations to Republican candidates, and have used that data to support assertions of a liberal agenda in college classrooms.

Educators and conservative groups knew of no data, however, that suggests there is a liberal or conservative slant in local or state classrooms. The debate in high schools is most often between parents and administrators trying to determine how to teach sex education, religion and alternative lifestyles.

At Rancho Cotate, the Conservative Club stirred controversy by inviting Phil Graf, a local NRA member, to speak on the topic ``We Need More Guns in Schools,'' a provocative presentation suggesting that if teachers were armed with guns, there would be fewer tragedies like the killings at Columbine High School in Colorado.

Last Friday, Orlean Koehle, a Santa Rosa teacher and mother of six who is president of the Eagle Forum of California, a conservative lobbying group, was the club's guest lecturer, speaking on club members' favorite topic: the liberal bias in public schools.

``I'm thrilled to find it here ... but it's very unusual,'' Koehle said of the club, adding it probably is the only one of its kind in Sonoma County and, indeed, in all of California.

Conservative supporters will help finance a club newsletter called ``The Conservative Agenda,'' which will publish its first issue in two weeks and be distributed campuswide. Graf said he's so impressed by the club he is raising funds to support the newsletter. He said the NRA isn't directly financing the effort but is likely to take out an ad explaining its position on guns and safety.

Tim Bueler, a 16-year-old junior whose heroes include right-wing talk show hosts Michael Savage and Bill O'Reilly, is the founder, president and driving force of the club. Passionate and articulate, he said he's using his First Amendment rights to promote a conservative Christian viewpoint that he said is generally unpopular with most students, teachers and administrators.

``We obviously believe the liberals are trying to destroy everything in America that our forefathers fought and died for,'' Bueler said. His inspiration to uphold American ideals comes from his late grandfather, Mark Bueler, a Pearl Harbor survivor and lifelong patriot, he said.

``I was just tired of the one-sided arguments of liberal teachers who mold the curriculum to their point of view,'' Bueler said. ``Basically, the Conservative Club was formed to show the other side of the spectrum and another point of view.''

When pressed for examples, Bueler said one of his teachers calls President Bush and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger ``idiots'' in class. He said several teachers bash Republicans and conservatives as greedy capitalists, racists and sexists.

Bueler's club's motto is at the core of conservative ideology: ``Protecting our borders, language and culture.'' Bueler said because of its motto, the club has been called racist and sexist by some students.

He said it's neither, enjoying the membership of female students and Latinos and other minorities.

But it did draw 13 student protesters during Graf's appearance, a speech that drew 120 students, more than double the usual Friday turnout.

Watenpaugh said the district fully supports students' right to form a group like the Conservative Club as long as it follows guidelines set forth by the student body. He said the club meets those guidelines by meeting during times when classes aren't being held and having a faculty adviser.

English teacher Bernadette Tucker, club adviser, said she became involved because she believes students should exercise their First Amendment rights.

``Just because something is not popular it doesn't mean you can't say it,'' Tucker said.

Club member Ryan Riekena, 16, said the Conservative Club already has had an impact by making teachers more aware of their responsibility to present diverse viewpoints.

``There's been a change,'' Riekena said. ``One of my teachers is already saying we have to look at both sides on every issue.''




[Edited on November 17, 2006 at 11:07 PM. Reason : Link]

11/17/2006 11:04:04 PM

Quote :

"Well, I merely ask that you recognize the possibility that you just don't like their kind. Note how you refer to them as the fictional teacher, "We arnt people to the corporations." You see, a corporation is merely a collection of individuals that have chosen to cooperate in the profitable service of their customers. A corporation is a non-entity, we made it up, just like a country was made up: you can't drown it, you can't shoot it, you can't talk to it. And this is what is dangerous: you and others like you are trying to portray other people as something other than human beings, which is exactly what you are accusing them of doing to you (turning you into numbers). Well, you're turning them into faceless monoliths out to destroy innocence; when in reality they are just like you, they go to church, go shopping, have families, hopes, dreams, and a wish to do good in the world."

I am not turning them into "faceless monoliths" but merely looking at them in the same way you look at the government. Something in which should be kept in check and watched with a close eye. The only problem I personally have is the way to do this is with a strong government which can cause the same problems as the corporations could have caused. Im tired I will talk about this later

^ and thats scary

11/17/2006 11:38:19 PM

a) What's scary about students speaking out against perceived injustice

and b) there are other effective methods of keeping corporations in check

11/17/2006 11:51:01 PM

Liberal Bias Invades High School, Too
by Kelly Bowers
Posted Jul 10, 2006

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=15953

[Edited on November 18, 2006 at 12:10 AM. Reason : Link]

11/18/2006 12:08:56 AM

no

its pretty much the darwinism of social class

theres gotta be SOMEONE out there that is poor and uneducated and doing that shit job i'm too smart 4

11/18/2006 12:29:15 AM

The doesn't HAVE to be, because a lot of shit jobs get eliminated through inventions and new techniques that enhance productivity. You don't think that if we were all educated and refused to do manual labor without $Texas, that someone would invent a way to do it for cheaper using machines?

That is the beauty of the market.

11/18/2006 12:31:39 AM

So an opinion piece and a piece on a high school conservative club (who stole their platform from Micheal Savage, come on now) complaining about proves that there is an anti-capitalist slant institutionalized in the public high schools.

i used to be in math education, and most of the textbooks i looked through had quite a few parts that dealt with using calculus models to maximize profit. sounds pretty capitalist to me, and that evidence is just as substansive as some angry Savage Nation worshippers.

WEAK SAUCE

We need a personal finance class in high schools to help students learn how to be financially responsible and prepare them to enter any number of jobs with the knowledge necessary to best handle the fruits of their labors.

Quote :

"What's scary about students speaking out against perceived injustice"

I direct you back to the Savage comments. Their motton is stolen from Savage's own organization, which is pretty much just an anti-immigrant agitation group. That's what is scary.

[Edited on November 18, 2006 at 3:17 AM. Reason : .]

11/18/2006 3:10:13 AM

Quote :

"I am not turning them into "faceless monoliths" but merely looking at them in the same way you look at the government. Something in which should be kept in check and watched with a close eye."

Not at all, when I think of the government I think of the police officer that pulled me over and interrogated me for taking pictures on a ferry. I think of the police officer that pulled me out of a crowd to confiscate my camera (he settled for erasing the memory card) because, evidently, I was somewhere I wasn't allowed to take pictures (a man with a camera apparently get in a lot of trouble nowadays).

I don't dislike government because I view it as inhuman, I dislike it because I know it is human. And just like all humans they get carried away when granted power over others, powers no human working for a corporation can claim to possess. Insert the usual corporation vs government comparisons here (How many people does Bill Gates have rotting in jail? How man people did Ford execute last year? How much private property was confiscated by Google in the last quarter?) I understand the need for a society to have individuals empowered to kill, arrest, and confiscate the life, liberty, and property of their fellow citizens. It just sounds silly when you equate these individuals with a car salesmen.

[Edited on November 18, 2006 at 7:38 AM. Reason : .,.]

11/18/2006 7:29:52 AM

^ well I guess the problem we're having isn't a huge difference in beliefs just a slightly different way of looking at the same picture. I completely agree with your statements on police force and the over use of power. The "war on terror" scares me for this exact reason with the increase in authority given to the police and military. This is one of the major problems I have with the current Republican mindset and conservatives in general. They fear what they dont understand and use force to control or remove it. This is not the "government" I want. Your camera story is a perfect example of the paranoia of authority figures and how it harms the population.

Now another major issue is between Corporations and Government. The government is held accountable for its actions (to a degree) with voting. Much like the republicans being removed from the majority in the past election. Corporations which harm the environment, exploit its workers, and care only for profits can not be held accountable in the same way. Now "government" can be a successful means for the people of a country to enact restrictions upon corporations from harming its workers, exploiting children, ect. However this is a very fine line between the people controlling the government and the government controlling the people. Same can be said for workers controlling the Unions or the Unions controlling the workers. Thats another debate entirely.

now I know someone is going to say we can stop buying the products of a certain corporations and the workers can strike against it. First of all when the only means of purchasing goods is from Wal-Mart, K-Mart, Target, Harris Teeter, Walgreens ect you are not fighting by simpling moving to another chain store and the majority of Americans don't live in a place where they can buy cheap goods from mom and pop stores on a regular basis. Second, Striking and unrest among workers is a mute point since the majority of factories already have moved over seas and are now not contributing to society of the US at all other than to gain maximum profits from its citizens and providing large amounts of money to a select few.

So I know you believe freedom comes from a "free market" but we do not live in a laissez faire capitalist society. At what point do you feel we are at the pinnacle of economic "freedom" or just plain freedom for that matter. And at what point does our own drive for this freedom and freedom of wealth completely enslave us. Bill Gates doesn't have to throw us in jail to completely control us but thank God we put restrictions on corporations just like we do with government to prevent that from happening.

11/18/2006 11:13:31 AM

Quote :

"Bill Gates doesn't have to throw us in jail to completely control us"

Surely this is an old discussion, but I will respond anyways. Your statement is quite insufficient, akin to "the booze made me do it" and "I don't know what I was thinking." The people in charge of Wal-Mart do not control you at all, your own desires control you. All they do is make sure that out of the various options in life, and you do have them, your wish to better yourself enables them to profit. This is exactly what the workers at wal-mart are doing, individuals trying to maximize their own profit given their skills and the desires of other individuals.

Quote :

"at what point does our own drive for this freedom and freedom of wealth completely enslave us"

You speak of "harming its workers, exploiting children" as if the companies went out with such abuse as a directing goal. But companies have no power to make workers take dangerous jobs, they can only ask nicely and offer competitive pay. But by restricting what jobs workers can do you are not only limiting the rights of managers but the rights of workers. You may think it is stupid to risk your life for an extra ten grand a year, but some workers feel putting their children through college or affording medical treatement for a loved one is worth the extra risk, who are we to say their priorities are wrong?

As stated before, your problem is fundamental: you fail to see the individuals taking part, all you see are the results of the choices made and you presume to tell other members of society what they should desire and how they should plan their lives. Well, in keeping with a long American tradition: mind your own business.

Quote :

"mute point since the majority of factories already have moved over seas and are now not contributing to society of the US at all"

As stated in an earlier thread, Industrial production in the United States has almost doubled since 1990.
http://www4.ncsu.edu/~gsparson/data/industrialoutput.gif

11/18/2006 12:16:41 PM

im going to refrain for typing another essay.

first off I think we have a fundamentally different view of corporations and the responsibility of individual. If we as individuals are responsible for what we do then the corporations should also be responsible for what they do. If we have to take personal responsibility then so do they since "they" are human as you say. If they dump a ton of toxic crap into the ocean they should pay for their crime just as an individual would. I know companies are punished for polluting and fucking large numbers of people over such as Enron but who punishes them...not the people and their employees thats for damn sure On the same note the US government does not control me regardless of their laws and police force. I can simply move to another country just as the consumer or worker can shop at another store or work for another company. Just as companies have no power to "make" their workers take dangerous jobs no one makes you live in a country with an oppressive police force or a strict hold over the economy. Obviously you can just move to a new country.

i dont really know what else to say, you believe that the people mold the corporation and I believe that the corporation molds the people. Do you honestly believe the man risking his life to make an extra buck for his kids wants to do that? He doesn't want to he has to. So when he gets crushed who will take care of his kids? Who will pay for their education and support once their mother can't provide for them and they turn to crime and end up in jail? ME AND YOU AND EVERYONE ELSE.

you fundamental problem is you see the individual taking part and fail to see why he is taking part and what would happen if he refused to take part. last, the philosophy of "minding ones business" is not held by corporations. They want to be in your business and for you to spend your money on their shit so their CEO can buy another boat.

11/18/2006 12:58:16 PM

Quote :

"Do you honestly believe the man risking his life to make an extra buck for his kids wants to do that? He doesn't want to he has to."

It isn't that he wants to or has to. He has assessed the risk and opportunity cost and decided that risking his life is worth the extra money.

Who will take care of his kids? Well, hopefully he purchased life insurance to do this for him. If he hasn't, then they will have to sacrifice their standard of living to make up for it. That's why there are markets in insurance, so that you don't have to bear the financial risk of catastrophe.

11/18/2006 1:03:07 PM