How common is this?

[vladimir]

No, it's competition, choices, and informing themselves. Big Brother is never your best protection. Government is a watchdog that can't wait to turn on its master.

Big Brother usually refers to the imposition of government control, regulation, surveillance, etc., on the individual. An individual exercising his right to the protection of the law is its antithesis. Government doesn't even enter the picture, except as the administrator of the rule of law.

This sounds like a bumper sticker: "Government is a watchdog that can't wait to turn on its master." Bumper sticker slogans really don't have a place in thoughtful political discourse. It might look good in your signature line though. And I don't disagree with the sentiment.

On Milton Friedman:

According to Friedman, the goal of social policy is to permit as many individuals as possible to pursue their own interests as fully as possible. He says that he wants the smallest, least intrusive government compatible with the optimal freedom for each person to pursue his own projects and follow his own values as long as he does not interfere with any other person's like freedoms.

Friedman wants to abolish the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). He says that it is in the self-interest of pharmaceutical firms not to produce unsafe drugs and that tort law can handle any problems.

Certainly you could make a persuasive argument for tort law reform. I wouldn't disagree. As I said earlier, that is ancillary to this discussion. And certainly, as any libertarian would, I agree with the principle of individual responsibility. But the most responsible individual in the world may be unfairly and illegally wronged by a corporation, and there must be an avenue for redress. And there must be disincentives to the breach of contractual obligations, implied or otherwise.

 

[Thalassamania]

Back at ya. Apparently, you've only read leftist revisionist history.

That's an idiotic statement as anyone who read this board can tell you, but then all we need do is consider the source. I read everything and anything that I can get my hands on (you see, I'm too snobby to watch TV) ... books, newspapers, magazines, cereal boxes, milk cartons (I keep hoping to see your picture on one some day).

Nice accusation. Substantiate it.

I already did.

Again, cite the smearing.

It's there for all to see, you wrote it.

As for agitprop, look it up.

I know what "agitprop," is but that's communist, not socialist. I was asking what "socialist agitprop" is. Please do note the use of quotes, a convention in this case that keeps the two words together as a single term. I'm not familiar with "socialist agitprop," perhaps you are one of those reactionaries of limited perspicacity who is unable to differentiate between communism and socialism? Are Sam Yorty and Max Rafferty your personal heroes?

Get off your snobby horse. A professional is someone who engages in an activity for pay. PERIOD.

Hey ... I tip dive guides and such, and I tip well (snobs are, after all, never cheapskates), but I don't confuse a temporary position that is unlike to last longer than three years, that has a rather low entry barrier and that doesn't pay a living wage with a profession. If you find that too "snobby" for your taste, well ... I really will not loose any sleep over it, given your history of trouble dealing with word definition.

 

[bfw]

Nah, there's another meaning of the word "professional". That's what Thal was talking about. I'm not going to give you the entire etymology of the word, but it comes from the notion that certain occupations "profess" to a way of doing their work above and beyond what is contracted for - that there are obligations to your profession, not just to your employer..

And if you dine out enough, you will come to learn that there are waiters and waitresses who embody that distinction every bit as much as a doctor or lawyer, and you will seek them out wherever you dine. There are paper delivery kids, janitors, and even pizza delivery drivers who conduct themselves based on that concept.

I direct you to the movie, "For Love or Money," starring Michael J. Fox as a hotel conscierge, whose compensation is primarily from tips, and who epitomizes your high handed definition of a professional. It's a function of the individual, not the job.

 

[bfw]

milk cartons (I keep hoping to see your picture on one some day).

And you say *I'm* making personal attacks? Hmmmm

I already did.It's there for all to see, you wrote it.

Then you should have no problem quoting it and committing to a possibly faulty definition of name calling.

unable to differentiate between communism and socialism?

You've confused distinction with actual difference. The path doesn't alter the endpoint.

but I don't confuse a temporary position that is unlike to last longer than three years, that has a rather low entry barrier and that doesn't pay a living wage with a profession.

A profession is what a person of quality makes it, but, by all means, feel free to broadbrush people by what they do for a living, regardless of how they approach their job.

 

[Thalassamania]

And you say *I'm* making personal attacks? Hmmmm

OK, I'll settle for your avatar on a milk carton.

Then you should have no problem quoting it and committing to a possibly faulty definition of name calling. Hmmmm

No problem at all, can't see why you would either.

You've confused distinction with actual difference. The path doesn't alter the endpoint.
Hmmmm

You a complete lack of knowledge if you believe that, and you complain about broad brushes ... can't get any broader, or more boring.

A profession is what a person of quality makes it, but, by all means, feel free to broadbrush people by what they do for a living, regardless of how they approach their job.

That's very, very Politically Correct of you, I suppose that we should all be impressed and possibly even shocked.

I feel bad for the people, its agency and industry policy that does this to them. But then you're the one in favor of exploiting the downtrodden, no?

 

[Boxcar Overkill]

...who epitomizes your high handed definition of a professional. It's a function of the individual, not the job.

It's not my definition, (high handed or not), it's a commonly accepted definition of the term as it applies to a certain subset of occupations. It's clear from your previous post that you didn't understand that, so I wanted to clarify.

It's ok that you didn't know that. There's lots of stuff I don't know. It's only a problem if you get all defensive and want to get in a marathon length war trying to act like you did. It's much more admirable if you can muster the grace to say, "really? I didn't even think about that." For bonus points, add a smiley. Like this.