Should hardworking people be guaranteed work?

[Mecky]

Your game is 'refuse to debate anything like an adult', and only you're playing Mecky.

 

Me? I always give better than I get and there is never any going back. Besides, how can you answer someone's questions when they won't accept the answers regardless? Why bother? What comes around goes around. Anyway, the lacklustre questions have previous been answered in other threads on these boards. All he is doing is trying to grind out a troll, which he's not very good at and probably done to try and foster public opinion to his advantage.

Edited November 25, 2014 by Mecky

[Chris_Sleeps]

There is a nice essay by Bertrand Russell in which he talks about "work".

 

First of all: what is work? Work is of two kinds: first, altering the position of matter at or near the earth's surface relatively to other such matter; second, telling other people to do so. The first kind is unpleasant and ill paid; the second is pleasant and highly paid.

- In Praise of Idleness

[Link]

[Michael_W]

In the world of work bull**** rules !

[Obelix]

Are you going to answer mine? You see, I can play your game too, only much much better than you. Seeee yaaaaa!

 

I guess the report button didn't work and we are back to the second option then....

 

Mecky the only person playing games on here and refusing to debate is you, as others have pointed out. Just because I dont agree with your answers doesn't mean that you shouldnt give them, in the same way that I dont expect you to agree with my answers.

 

When faced with someone pouting like a spoiled petulant child, sticking fingers in ears, and refusing to engage, when faced with someone whose behaviour is deliberatily disruptive and who spoils healthy reasoned debates as you have been doing; the correct response is to call out such behaviour and require improvement. That is what I have been doing.

 

When you realise that the price of debating at the big boys table, when you realise that the price of having your voice heard and considered at those debates is that you behave like an adult - then and only then can you join the club. Only you can change your behaviour. It's your choice - between acting sensibly and debating with everyone else, and acting the child and everyone ignoring and ridiculing you.

 

Your choice Mecky. No-one elses.

 

---------- Post added 25-11-2014 at 12:06 ----------

 

The state shouldn't be in the business of employing people, except where strictly necessary.

 

OK that's an interesting one. Just what jobs are strictly necessary then... or perhaps I should start a new thread about it?

Edited November 25, 2014 by Obelix

[Cyclone]

Jobs that make the state run are strictly required. Most of what the civil service does, lots of ancillary things could be included that are currently outsourced to private industry. But ultimately running the state doesn't increase GDP.

Take road building for example. If roads could be built for free then we'd do that, and the money spent on road building could be spent elsewhere (or not collected as tax in the first place). The less the state costs to run, the more money stays in pockets and the better the economy does.

Of course roads aren't free, and they provide a measurable economic benefit anyway, so it's worth spending on them. But minimising the size of the state mechanism (whilst delivering everything required) should be one of the goals of government.