Worlds richest woman makes case for 2 dollar a day pay.

[Revoltingest]

A problem is that specious things are being attributed to her as 'fact'.
I see this demonization as ramping up the hatred. No matter how many examples
in the parade of horribles are trotted out, it's still wrong to foment personal hatred.

 

[Wirey]

A problem is that specious things are being attributed to her as 'fact'.
I see this demonization as ramping up the hatred. No matter how many examples
in the parade of horribles are trotted out, it's still wrong to foment personal hatred.

No it's not. Now, shut your pie hole or you're next!

It's hard not to hate soemone that whacked out. Call it the herd survival instinct.

 

[Alceste]

It is going beyond knowledge for her to say they "want to work". She should have said 'they want to eat'. But she is stating a fact when saying "they are willing to work for two dollars a day". Is it true? Are they working for two dollars a day? If they are then, they are willing to do so.

Their choice is to work for two dollars a day or starve to death, to accept two dollars a day or be shot. I don't think their will even enters into it.

A problem is that specious things are being attributed to her as 'fact'.
I see this demonization as ramping up the hatred. No matter how many examples
in the parade of horribles are trotted out, it's still wrong to foment personal hatred.

Example, please, of one specious thing that has been attributed to her as fact.

 

[dust1n]

"embrace multiculturalism and welcome short term foreign workers to our shores
To benefit from the export of our minerals and ores
The world's poor need our resources: do not leave them to their fate
Our nation needs special economic zones and wiser government, before it is too late"

I agree with the above verses of Gina Rinehart's poem.

Is she saying the world's poor will benefit from Australia's exports? I don't really follow the reasoning. Where the poor going to afford iron ore at 150 dollars a pound over 155 dollars a pound? What are the poor going to do with raw materials? Don't most poor regions in the world generally exist on abundances of raw materials, some which can't be found elsewhere? Wouldn't it help the poor the most if they actually benefitted from their own resources instead of multinationals coming in to pay them two dollars a day? If they didn't, wouldn't the market for things be strenghtened by the fact there would be more wealthier consumers looking to purchase...

Sadly-worded rhethoric hurt dusty brain.

 

[dust1n]

Example, please, of one specious thing that has been attributed to her as fact.

I'd be curious as well. It's hard to understand what is being got at here without some reference to the things that are being criticized.

 

[dust1n]

People do tend to attack those of different opinions, don't they?
We'd do well to try sticking to the issues.

I understand you're point and I agree that it isn't exactly right nor helpful to be critizing the lady for looks etc., but it's a bit hard to feel sympathy when she essentially critized millions of people for being envious, and smoking and drinking too much to be successful. Perhaps she would do well to sticking to the issues...

 

[Revoltingest]

Example, please, of one specious thing that has been attributed to her as fact.

The title to the thread.

 

[dust1n]

The title to the thread.

The title of the article is somewhat contrived, I'd agree. But nothing in the article echoes the same information. It's unlikely that the writer wrote the headline at all; an editor most likely did. It was dishonest, but at least the writer precedes in not making anything up. He states that the implicit meaning of Rinehart's comments in the video I posted a couple of pages ago indicates that her company should be able to hire workers for however much they want. I think her comments more implicity state that she should be able to hire Australian workers for whatever she deems appropriate. This follows from her previous attempts at calling for the lowering of minimum wages.

 

[Revoltingest]

The title of the article is somewhat contrived, I'd agree. But nothing in the article echoes the same information. It's unlikely that the writer wrote the headline at all; an editor most likely did. It was dishonest, but at least the writer precedes in not making anything up. He states that the implicit meaning of Rinehart's comments in the video I posted a couple of pages ago indicates that her company should be able to hire workers for however much they want. I think her comments more implicity state that she should be able to hire Australian workers for whatever she deems appropriate. This follows from her previous attempts at calling for the lowering of minimum wages.

To hire workers for whatever the employer wants is nothing out of the ordinary. Employees want to be hired for whatever they want.
We figure out what works for both when we hire. I don't see it as the real controversy, but rather to pluck a single aspect of capitalism
& marketeconomy, & treat it in an extreme fashion. But let's not forget that we've seen some pretty abusive language towards her, eg,
death, appearance. It's this total picture which I find offensive.

 

[Alceste]

The title to the thread.

I think everybody has agreed from the first few pages that the headline is not an accurate statement. She is, nevertheless, arguing that Australia should become more like Africa to compete. The implication in that statement are that there's absolutely nothing wrong with the horrific mining situation in Africa, as far as she can see. For who would argue so passionately in favour of moving in what they feel is the wrong direction? And that is outrageous.

 

[Revoltingest]

I think everybody has agreed from the first few pages that the headline is not an accurate statement. She is, nevertheless, arguing that Australia should become more like Africa to compete. The implication in that statement are that there's absolutely nothing wrong with the horrific mining situation in Africa, as far as she can see.

Is that her implication or your inference?
(My money is on the latter)

It strikes me that you rely too heavily on the parade of horribles argument.

 

[Alceste]

To hire workers for whatever the employer wants is nothing out of the ordinary. Employees want to be hired for whatever they want.
We figure out what works for both when we hire. I don't see it as the real controversy, but rather to pluck a single aspect of capitalism
& marketeconomy, & treat it in an extreme fashion. But let's not forget that we've seen some pretty abusive language towards her, eg,
death, appearance. It's this total picture which I find offensive.

Her description of African miners as "willing" to work for starvation wages was also abusive, and far more deadly.

 

[Revoltingest]

Her description of African miners as "willing" to work for starvation wages was also abusive, and far more deadly.

If that is accurate, then that would be worth decrying.
Did she say that, or from what did you infer it?

 

[Alceste]

Is that her implication or your inference?
(My money is on the latter)

It strikes me that you rely too heavily on the parade of horribles argument.

If you can find one single instance of her publicly acknowledging that the working conditions for miners in Africa are horrific, the pay outrageously low, and child labour endemic, or that something should be done about that, I will eat my words.

Until then, all we have to go by is the statement that they "want to work, and are willing to work for two dollars a day".

 

[dust1n]

To hire workers for whatever the employer wants is nothing out of the ordinary. Employees want to be hired for whatever they want.
We figure out what works for both when we hire. I don't see it as the real controversy, but rather to pluck a single aspect of capitalism
& marketeconomy, & treat it in an extreme fashion. But let's not forget that we've seen some pretty abusive language towards her, eg,
death, appearance. It's this total picture which I find offensive.

Fair enough, but it seems to me to be a somewhat expected response when the person first instigated insults by insulting tons of people with her comments. I'm sure many found it offensive that she was suggesting their alcoholism and over-the-top drug usage and their laziness etc.

 

[Old Scratch]

As into this woman's heart I look, a short Earthly future I see. (A bitter & small thing it is.....with lots'o plaque.)
Perhaps for a few more years of miserable human existence her soul for sale is?
In any event, a home Here in My mines she shall have!
Boowahahahahah hahahhhahahah hahahahahha hahahahahahhaha ha, etc

 

[Sunstone]

What sane human would not want to work long hours for two dollars a day under life threatening conditions in order to make the world's richest woman richer? I find it incredible more people can't see her point of view.

 

[Wirey]

As into this woman's heart I look, a short Earthly future I see. (A bitter & small thing it is.....with lots'o plaque.)
Perhaps for a few more years of miserable human existence her soul for sale is?
In any event, a home Here in My mines she shall have!
Boowahahahahah hahahhhahahah hahahahahha hahahahahahhaha ha, etc

Give her a pick with a splintery handle for me, willya?

 

[Old Scratch]

Give her a pick with a splintery handle for me, willya?

Share the same one you shall!
Boowahahahah...<cough> <cough>...hahahahhah hahahahah!
(Smog bad Here today is.)

 

[Alceste]

As into this woman's heart I look, a short Earthly future I see. (A bitter & small thing it is.....with lots'o plaque.)
Perhaps for a few more years of miserable human existence her soul for sale is?
In any event, a home Here in My mines she shall have!
Boowahahahahah hahahhhahahah hahahahahha hahahahahahhaha ha, etc

I finally agree with you. You might want to check your ledger, I think she's already bought and paid for.