Border Order
By LibDave
31 Aug 2022 7:51 pm in No Holds Barred Political Forum
1 Sep 2022 6:45 pm
My apologies. It is a failure to communicate on my part. Let me state for the record I unequivocably place the blame on Biden... among others. The border is a huge mess and a catastrophe. I was merely clarifying the problem isn't due to competition for work. Immigrants who cross illegally intent on working actually benefits the US economy. Those who illegally employ them should be thrown in jail and fined severely. We are a nation of laws. That was my point of contention.Zeets2 » 01 Sep 2022, 5:57 pm » wrote: ↑ And that's all well and good. I agree with most of your comments, but what is unavoidable is your refusal to put the blame squarely where it lies, on Biden's shoulders. It wouldn't matter a whit what an American-hating scumbag like Soros tells them if Biden wasn't intent on breaking the law himself and making sure his AG is also on board with his own illegal support. THAT is where the problem lies, nowhere else!
The disastrous consequences of the border incursion is precisely because these people are not coming here to contribute for the most part. Many if not the vast majority are coming here for the promise of free food, money and services. Like the Bolivians I ran upon in the Walmart. Read my earlier post. Biden's\Harris' border policy is complete insanity. They and all their ilk (including their supporters) should be brought up on charges of dereliction of duty.
The drug trafficking is another serious issue.
I also advocated installing not just a wall, but border surveillance and pain beam systems. Hardly a liberal position. lol.
Lib is for Libertarian. Very much not liberal.
1 Sep 2022 7:10 pm
Here is a repost I submitted earlier to clarify.
My solution would be to first get complete physical control of the border. Not just a border wall, but elevated security cameras and C^3 (i.e. Command Control and Communication). Installation of Pain Beam Systems to deter any attempts to circumvent the border security. This is something we were looking into in the not too distant past (look up pain beam). Remain in Mexico policy. Seismic detectors to prevent tunneling. Reduction in the level of LEGAL immigration to the extent the Dept of State can exhibit the ability to monitor and track each and every legal visa holder's whereabouts (by whatever means the DOS can devise) in the event they attempt to overstay their visas. For instance start off with only 1000 immigrants and see if the State Dept can track every one of them and deport any who attempt to overstay their visa. If they are successful increase it to 10,000 until you determine the State Dept incapable of securing infiltrators.
My solution would be to first get complete physical control of the border. Not just a border wall, but elevated security cameras and C^3 (i.e. Command Control and Communication). Installation of Pain Beam Systems to deter any attempts to circumvent the border security. This is something we were looking into in the not too distant past (look up pain beam). Remain in Mexico policy. Seismic detectors to prevent tunneling. Reduction in the level of LEGAL immigration to the extent the Dept of State can exhibit the ability to monitor and track each and every legal visa holder's whereabouts (by whatever means the DOS can devise) in the event they attempt to overstay their visas. For instance start off with only 1000 immigrants and see if the State Dept can track every one of them and deport any who attempt to overstay their visa. If they are successful increase it to 10,000 until you determine the State Dept incapable of securing infiltrators.
1 Sep 2022 7:54 pm
FAIL TRY AGAIN ...STOP DANCING YOU CORNERED RAT...LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 6:28 pm » wrote: ↑ You want a link? How about this from your own mouth.
"Increased competition with untrained, unsafe, Non Union Scabs"
I dont often ask for links..but I will make an exception here just for youLibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
Put up or shut up you phony baloney piece of crap.
1 Sep 2022 11:50 pm
You want a link proving unions seek to prevent competition with non-union labor to gain an unfair advantage in labor negotiations with their employers?GHETTOBLASTER » 01 Sep 2022, 7:54 pm » wrote: ↑ FAIL TRY AGAIN ...STOP DANCING YOU CORNERED RAT...
I dont often ask for links..but I will make an exception here just for you
Put up or shut up you phony baloney piece of crap.
First, I don't take to demands for links, nor do I find them particularly meaningful when others attempt to google links in a vein attempt to bolster their ill-conceived arguments. The logic of one's position should stand on its own merit and in our contemporary times it is all too easy to find at least one posted link which agrees with even the most radical illogical conclusion. After all, in such a connected world it is rare to find one who is "uniquely stupid". In fact, the internet is often the original source of these misconceptions.
Then immediately following you post this...
" Notice that whenever a City or State Prevailing Wage Compliance Officer makes his rounds through the non union job sites...he is there to make sure that all the Non Union Workers are being paid THE PREVAILING UNION SCALE."
without the slightest clue on your part your reference is a perfect example of how unions use any means necessary to prevent businesses from obtaining alternative pricing for the labor they hire. By requiring employers to pay Non Union Workers the same Union wages you have essentially prevented competition. No need to prove that with a link. Post your own links or just get a clue and use logic to see you proved the point with your own post. Unions are responsible for enacting these state and local ordinances precisely because it is another means of preventing competition against their labor.
2 Sep 2022 12:06 am
Then I followed up with another FIRST-HAND real world experience I had years ago when I was working at a unionized UAW facility as an example of the other contention in my posts... the fact unions use the threat of violence, and if that doesn't work actual violence, to achieve their advantage. And I refuse to pull up any of the hundreds if not thousands upon thousands of other documented examples of violence manifested at picket lines. The whole purpose of picket lines is to threaten "SCABS" (as you call them) from supplying the company with labor to obtain an unethical bargaining position. Or do you deny this fact too?
2 Sep 2022 12:24 am
LOOK ..YOU MADE THIS RIDICULOUS STATEMENT..LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 11:50 pm » wrote: ↑ You want a link proving unions seek to prevent competition with non-union labor to gain an unfair advantage in labor negotiations with their employers?
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
NOW EITHER BACK IT UP WITH PROOF...OR JUST ADMIT THAT IT WAS A RIDICULOUS "*** PULL" ON YOUR PART.
IT IS YOUR HONOR AND REPUTATION THAT IS AT STAKE ....NOBODY ELSES.
2 Sep 2022 12:48 am
https://fee.org/articles/competition-un ... antitrust/
Monopoly Aims of Unions
The purpose of the large trade unions of the United States, as their leaders put it, is to bring the benefits of collective bargaining to all workers, or at least to as many as they can. It is probably more accurate, possibly less question-begging, and certainly more realistic to say that the purpose of each of the national and international unions is to secure a monopoly of the working force in the industries or fractions of industries in which they claim "jurisdiction"—the auto workers in the auto industry, the teamsters in the trucking industry, the carpenters in the appropriate branch of the construction industry, and so on.
Perforce, then, the objective of the large unions is to eliminate competition. There is no other meaning to the deliberate pursuit of a monopoly of any given type of goods or services.
The labor monopoly is sought as a means of gaining what economists call a monopoly price—i.e., something more than the competitive or the "free-market" price for labor.
Elimination of Competition
A pervasive preoccupation, to repeat, whether in organizing or in collective bargaining, is with eliminating competition. The competition which unions seek to eliminate is the competition implicit in alternative methods of doing the work over which the unions claim or seek jurisdiction.
With the problem so defined, only one answer seems accurate: Violent union conduct, when considered from the point of view of present antitrust conceptions, is not only anticompetitive conduct but in fact the most predatory monopolistic conduct visible in the country today. One must not assume that the only way competition and its benefits can be frustrated is through the peaceful and consensual modes of conduct characteristic of modern business
Monopoly Aims of Unions
The purpose of the large trade unions of the United States, as their leaders put it, is to bring the benefits of collective bargaining to all workers, or at least to as many as they can. It is probably more accurate, possibly less question-begging, and certainly more realistic to say that the purpose of each of the national and international unions is to secure a monopoly of the working force in the industries or fractions of industries in which they claim "jurisdiction"—the auto workers in the auto industry, the teamsters in the trucking industry, the carpenters in the appropriate branch of the construction industry, and so on.
Perforce, then, the objective of the large unions is to eliminate competition. There is no other meaning to the deliberate pursuit of a monopoly of any given type of goods or services.
The labor monopoly is sought as a means of gaining what economists call a monopoly price—i.e., something more than the competitive or the "free-market" price for labor.
Elimination of Competition
A pervasive preoccupation, to repeat, whether in organizing or in collective bargaining, is with eliminating competition. The competition which unions seek to eliminate is the competition implicit in alternative methods of doing the work over which the unions claim or seek jurisdiction.
With the problem so defined, only one answer seems accurate: Violent union conduct, when considered from the point of view of present antitrust conceptions, is not only anticompetitive conduct but in fact the most predatory monopolistic conduct visible in the country today. One must not assume that the only way competition and its benefits can be frustrated is through the peaceful and consensual modes of conduct characteristic of modern business
2 Sep 2022 1:00 am
I can give countless examples of union tactics to achieve antitrust advantages in bargaining. I'll leave that task to you and won't take the bait further. I can also give countless examples of similar experiences I have seen and had first-hand beyond that which I gave in regards to the young pregnant mother of three gleefully sacrificed by the union in an effort to extort concessions during negotiations. One such example is the FACT that in these union shops other more skilled workers are prevented from doing certain tasks. Work has to be compartmentalized into union and non-union. This is quite disruptive to efficiency as I can personally attest. Why is this necessary? Because the union workers make more than their professional non-union counterparts and therefore actions must be taken by the union to prevent the employer from being able to hire more professional but less expensive non-union labor and have them perform tasks the union claims as "their jurisdiction".
Now I have extended you the courtesy of providing your requested link. From this point forward, do your own research. I'm not here to do your work here too. It's bad enough you union folks don't pull your share of the load occupationally. We shouldn't have to do your research here too. This is a forum for the discussion of ideas. Not a research group. If you are of the opinion such mindless google searches for equally illogical opinions are of value to you then by all means google search away to filter out all dissenting opinions. You won't absorb anything I linked anyway. Besides, your confirmation bias would instantly prevent your acceptance of any position which differs from your preconceived imaginary world.
Now I have extended you the courtesy of providing your requested link. From this point forward, do your own research. I'm not here to do your work here too. It's bad enough you union folks don't pull your share of the load occupationally. We shouldn't have to do your research here too. This is a forum for the discussion of ideas. Not a research group. If you are of the opinion such mindless google searches for equally illogical opinions are of value to you then by all means google search away to filter out all dissenting opinions. You won't absorb anything I linked anyway. Besides, your confirmation bias would instantly prevent your acceptance of any position which differs from your preconceived imaginary world.
2 Sep 2022 1:18 am
FAIL....TRY AGAINLibDave » 02 Sep 2022, 12:48 am » wrote: ↑ https://fee.org/articles/competition-un ... antitrust/
Monopoly Aims of Unions
STILL WAITING TO SEE PROOF THAT THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUE .....
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
2 Sep 2022 1:23 am
I just did numerous times. Here it is again. Try to keep up.GHETTOBLASTER » 02 Sep 2022, 1:18 am » wrote: ↑ FAIL....TRY AGAIN
STILL WAITING TO SEE PROOF THAT THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUE .....
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
https://fee.org/articles/competition-un ... antitrust/
Or are you just continuously reposting the same request already answered to avoid the obvious fact you have run out of useful input, lost the debate and seek to shut down any further discussion, being devoid of any intelligent rebuttal. You have been found wanting. I'll move on to more substantive discussion otherwise.
2 Sep 2022 1:26 am
GHETTOBLASTER » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑LibDave » 02 Sep 2022, 1:23 am » wrote: ↑ I just did numerous times. Here it is again. Try to keep up.
https://fee.org/articles/competition-un ... antitrust/
6 minutes ago
FAIL....TRY AGAIN
STILL WAITING TO SEE PROOF THAT THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUE .....
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
2 Sep 2022 1:29 am
Fail. You lose. You're spent. No rebuttal. Enjoy.GHETTOBLASTER » 02 Sep 2022, 1:26 am » wrote: ↑ GHETTOBLASTER » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
6 minutes ago
FAIL....TRY AGAIN
STILL WAITING TO SEE PROOF THAT THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUE .....
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
2 Sep 2022 1:36 am
GHETTOBLASTER » 9 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
9 minutes ago
GHETTOBLASTER » 6 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
6 minutes ago
FAIL....TRY AGAIN
STILL WAITING TO SEE PROOF THAT THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUE .....
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
2 Sep 2022 1:44 am
YOUR "OPINION PIECE" DOES NOT PROVE THIS RIDICULOUS CLAIM OF YOURS IS TRUELibDave » 02 Sep 2022, 1:00 am » wrote: ↑ I can give countless examples of union tactics to achieve antitrust advantages in bargaining. I'll leave that task to you and won't take the bait further. I can also give countless examples
LibDave » 11 minutes ago » wrote: ↑
11 minutes ago
Union contracts are not normally based on free market forces free from coercion.
LIB DAVE..until you can show proof that Union contracts ARE NORMALLY NEGOTIATED WITH ILLEGAL TERMS, BLACK MAIL AND THREATS OF HARM..STOP WASTING MY TIME WITH OPINION PIECES THAT DON"T COME CLOSE TO PROVING THAT YOUR RIDICULOUS CLAIM IS TRUE.
THIS IS HOW THE UNION CONTRACT IS NORMALLY EXECUTED..WITH MUTUAL AGREEMENT OF THE TERMS.
Collective bargaining agreements: what’s in a union contract (unitworkers.com)
2 Sep 2022 1:44 am
I pray we actually manage to survive his time in office. I am firmly convinced as evidenced by 2000 mules the Biden team and others compromised the election process. I've worked the polls and the crap which transpired during the 2020 was just way out of line.
2 Sep 2022 5:55 am
LibDave » 31 Aug 2022, 7:51 pm » wrote: ↑
What actually transpires is hundreds/thousands of different small Mexican gangs fight for control of areas along the border (perhaps 3 to 20 miles deep from the border).
...the hideous, stooooooooopid f@ck 'war on drugs' policies of your puppet trump/republicans ((((((GREATLY EXACERBATE))))) the problem, puppet trump/republican cacksucker [and monetary ignoramus]
[this republican-puppet-sucking fool never gets at the root$ of the problem$...word..]
2 Sep 2022 6:02 am
...now now...can't you two puppet trump/republican cacksuckers [and monetary ignoramuses] get along? ..remember puppet reagan's 12th commandment, dumb@sses!...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1sONfxPCTU0
2 Sep 2022 6:13 am
LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑ Unions ARE communism. And no, unions were in no way responsible for the rise in prosperity of the middle class or ANY class. As a whole unions are and have been a detriment to an otherwise prosperous free market economy.
...anyone with any kind of government-issued occupational license enjoys the same protection$/advantage$ as 'unions'/members...and f@ck your 'otherwise free market economy', republicrat... half of every transaction in your 'free market economy'
is 'dollars'...and there is nothing free, fair, etc., about how those 'dollars' are issued, republicrat fool... 
2 Sep 2022 6:52 am
LibDave » 01 Sep 2022, 6:45 pm » wrote: ↑ My apologies. It is a failure to communicate on my part. Let me state for the record I unequivocably place the blame on Biden... among others. The border is a huge mess and a catastrophe. I was merely clarifying the problem isn't due to competition for work. Immigrants who cross illegally intent on working actually benefits the US economy. Those who illegally employ them should be thrown in jail and fined severely. We are a nation of laws. That was my point of contention.
The disastrous consequences of the border incursion is precisely because these people are not coming here to contribute for the most part. Many if not the vast majority are coming here for the promise of free food, money and services. Like the Bolivians I ran upon in the Walmart. Read my earlier post. Biden's\Harris' border policy is complete insanity. They and all their ilk (including their supporters) should be brought up on charges of dereliction of duty.
The drug trafficking is another serious issue.
I also advocated installing not just a wall, but border surveillance and pain beam systems. Hardly a liberal position. lol.
Lib is for Libertarian. Very much not liberal.
Thanks for the clarifications!
2 Sep 2022 6:56 am
Bump for @LibDavePastafarian » 01 Sep 2022, 12:25 pm » wrote: ↑ I don’t disagree tgat they are influenced by communism. But the mob corrupted them.
Unions weee wholly responsible for a booming middle class and time with family.
The free market had been corrupted by capitalism pre and post union. The time the free market flourished was afterbTeddy Roosevelt broke up capitalist monopolies ruining American’s futures and when unions were at their height.
Reagan destroyed the middle class.
Who is online
In total there are 6210 users online :: 15 registered, 19 bots, and 6176 guests
Registered users: Vegas, Johnny You, *Roshambo, Blackvegetable, Zeets2, ROG62, ConservativeWave, MR-7, Beekeeper, jerra b, PhiloBeddo, Cannonpointer, Deezer Shoove, Huey, Fuelman
Bots: SiteLockSpider, DuckDuckBot, Kinza, facebookexternalhit, ADmantX, proximic, Not, Baiduspider, LCC, app.hypefactors.com, Googlebot, CriteoBot, Pinterest, linkfluence.com, Applebot, Mediapartners-Google, bingbot, curl/7, YandexBot