I have two roku tvs. The day I see this is the day they get disconnected.

Most of the criticism has always been towards the writing. And that’s the only problem you can’t fix by throwing money at talented people.

So, if children aren’t used as slave laborers, everything becomes more expensive.

Isn’t that just what things cost? I mean, I could get free produce if I stole it from the local produce market. There are plenty of morally gray areas where reasonable people can have legitimate disagreements, but we can all get behind making child slaves illegal.

But you’ll say it’s a slippery slope. First the child slaves, then maybe all the slaves? What about the sex slaves? Are we just supposed to stop letting rich people have sex with unwilling humans? Where doe it end? If everyone has rights and freedom and access to food, shelter, medical care, and education, how will a tiny fraction of the population amass mountains of wealth and power? How will they manage to orgasm without squeezing the life from a poor immugrant who has been forcibly hooked on drugs?

No, I don’t think boycotting cheap goods will create human rights in China and India. People will need to fight for human rights, and we, the privileged few who can afford to vote with our dollars, should demand fair trade foreign policies from our elected officials. We should vote for people who are for human rights everywhere. We should support policies that promote equality everywhere. And if that means we can’t buy cheap jeans at Walmart, we should be prepared to accept that as an inconvenience.

On average. You demonstrated it is possible somewhere in Pennsylvania. That’s not even close to the same thing.

I don’t think anyone here is defending Google in all of their policies. We’re all just laughing at the impotent dictator who thinks he can make a quick $50 million and win the hearts of bigots at the same time.

So did his predecessors.

The problem is that seeking growth at all costs allows the accumulation of economic and political power. The people in charge do not distinguish between personal success and a better world, and therefore see no difference between economic growth and a better world.

Lots of good answers here, but one I haven’t seen is that some people have different value systems. They would be the ones that say “yes, human rights would be nice, but at what cost?”

Typically, as everyone here has pointed out, they value their own well being and comfort. “We can’t end child slave labor because then a KitKat would cost $20.” They might cite economic priorities, national or personal security, religious beliefs, or civic pride (see: China).

What we have today are traitors pitching the flag.

That’s what we always had. The people fighting the Cold War weren’t patriots, they were business people making business decisions at the expense of human lives.

Narrator: Finland had many problems with Putin before.

Fuck that guy.

Also definitely 41 because math.

Learn from past mistakes. Learn from the mistakes of others. Learn to recognize the warnings you missed before.

To paraphrase Nelson Mandela, you don’t lose. You win or you learn.

From the article, it sounds like this guy disagreed with the local government’s plan to give the village head a 50% raise and rate his performance as satisfactory. Instead, Batryn though everyone in the room should die a horrible death.

Right, that doesn’t disprove the study, though.

Yes, you started and ended by saying you have technically proven the study wrong. In the middle, you pulled some sample numbers from various sources and agreed with the general premise that the cost of living is too damn high. But then you went back to claiming to have technically disproven the study. Which you didn’t, not in any sense.

Nah, just bored.

You did not prove the study wrong. The study looked at average rents across the state. Finding a cheap apartment in Lewisburg is not the same as finding something in Lower Merion.

In my Inaugural I laid down the simple proposition that nobody is going to starve in this country. It seems to me to be equally plain that no business which depends for existence on paying less than living wages to its workers has any right to continue in this country. By “business” I mean the whole of commerce as well as the whole of industry; by workers I mean all workers, the white collar class as well as the men in overalls; and by living wages I mean more than a bare subsistence level-I mean the wages of decent living.

Throughout industry, the change from starvation wages and starvation employment to living wages and sustained employment can, in large part, be made by an industrial covenant to which all employers shall subscribe. It is greatly to their interest to do this because decent living, widely spread among our 125, 000,000 people, eventually means the opening up to industry of the richest market which the world has known. It is the only way to utilize the so-called excess capacity of our industrial plants. This is the principle that makes this one of the most important laws that ever has come from Congress because, before the passage of this Act, no such industrial covenant was possible.

Franklin Roosevelt, on the creation of a minimum wage.

Yarrr