Buy tramadol online save wholesale price yep. Tramadol….

…can continue to espouse a moribund theory about child labor. Those kids lives are being wasted; they should be in school getting an education;…

Children work when the alternative isn't an education but starvation. If these kids didn't have sweatshops to work in, they would be sold into slavery or prostitution or just starve to death. It's all well and good for people like you to indulge outrage and moral indignation with a full belly from the comfort of your computer, but if your choice is work, slavery, prostitution or death, you'd choose work. And the point is, these people CHOOSE to work. Nobody is forcing them.

…you lazy poor slobs with addled Hayekian fascist brains.

I guess it's too much to expect you to understand that the real fascist is the one who would forcefully impose his singular vision on everyone else without regard to the cost. In other words, Trumpit, the real fascist is you.

It is obvious I was confused.

I don't mind someone trying to "whup up on me" as long as it can accurately be related to something I have said. And, if I deserve a whuppin', I like to know why so I can fix it or learn from it.

Thanks. have a profitable day.

He was talking about the post after yours. Sometimes, I think, it is hard to tell which post the name belongs to- above or below.

I gotta admit that I am confused by your post.

As for this post by Don, I believe that the only comment I have made was:
"Good post, Don.
Thank you.
Posted by: vidyohs | Jun 4, 2008 11:27:08 AM"
that one.

If though you are referring to my post in response to the thread of:

"Suggestions for Lowering Energy Prices
Don Boudreaux
The Cato Institute's Jerry Taylor speaks much good sense, in today's New York Post, about energy prices"

then I am even more confused.

1. I specifically said I agree with Mr. Taylor. 2. I specifically indicated I didn't believe that they would happen and that I wouldn't hold my breath. 3. That is not a criticism of Mr. Taylor or Dr. Boudreaux. 4. I went on to clearly state in my simple straightforward way that I placed all blame and criticism on the Congresassholes. 5. I gave my reasons for doing so. 6. It should be obvious that I never intended to suggest alternatives to Mr. Taylor's ideas except to say that to make them come to fruition certain things would have to come to pass – such as extinction of the polar bears, or extinction of Congresass. 7. My only suggestion was for you to grease it up because your future is one of being screwed.

Okay, now my reply to Jeff was one challenging his impressions of the difference between the quality of life between Europe and the USA.

And, to state that, now please get this Economist, that restriction of resources by our Congresassholes is as much of a market manipulation as if the market was manipulated by oil cartels. It is an artificial manipulation and a harmful one as well.

Notice that I did not say in this post or the previous post that I thought the goverment was acting in collusion with cartels to manipulate prices.

All in all, it's like you didn't even read my posts, which is okay by me; but, if you're going to criticize me at least make it on something I said, not something you imagine I said.

As an addendum to an earlier post (vidyohs) rich in ad homs and poor in criticism
a) Your lack of a proposed superior alternative
and b) Your lack of an understanding of what fascism is in this context; economically-speaking translating to mean state collusion with market entities (eg cartels), which it is not
c) Moots your criticism

Terrific article! Thanks!

As an addendum to an earlier post (vidyohs) rich in ad homs and poor in criticism
a) Your lack of a proposed superior alternative
and b) Your lack of an understanding of what fascism is in this context; economically-speaking translating to mean state collusion with market entities (eg cartels), which it is not
c) Moots your criticism

Terrific article! Thanks!

Fancy which leftist wrote that?

Thank you.

Did he happen to mention *how* he believed sweatshops drove down wages? I don't understand how a greater demand for work would cause prices to fall.

The only other argument I've ever heard for "driving wages down" is Walmart, which is alleged to drive wages down by eliminating competition in the goods market and, consequently, eliminating better-paying jobs at the competitors. Even if you buy that argument vis-a-vis Walmart, it just doesn't seem to apply here.

Now you know the true face of the "compassionate left".

I had a debate with a colleague at work a couple months ago about this. His argument was that sweatshop wages drive down the wages of non-sweatshop wages in the country, and that even at sweatshop wages the workers were going to die from malnourishment anyway (a dubious assertion at best, but I played along anyway). Therefore, he said that because they were going to die anyway they shouldn't be allowed to drive down the wages of others. I asked him if he's saying we should force the sweatshop workers to sacrifice themselves and die of malnourishment sooner (relative to when they would have died with the sweatshop job), so the others can have higher wages, and he said yes. I couldn't believe it. I don't think his argument is typical (I hope it isn't), but to me that's worse than any "soulless capitalists".