LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Now, should i be surprised at this response, given that a friend of mine told me this was the case, or should I believe the Righteous rantings of Redlight, who assures us that "no coercion" ever took place....people were "free" to chooseOriginally Posted by ukengineer
........
"Coercion" (or "violent force") is an act by a human or humans against the will or without the permission of another human being with respect to that which is his own (his own person or property). It means for someone to take, use, meddle with or otherwise do something to the body or property of another human being without the permission or against the will of that other human being. This includes fraud and embezzlement and other indirect uses of force as well as direct physical violence.
"If someone does something to the body or property of someone else without their permission or against their will, that is what we mean by coercion, coercive force, or violence in this context. There are two kinds of coercion: initiatory coercion (the use of coercive force against someone who has not committed a coercive act against anyone) and retaliatory coercion (the use of coercive force in retaliation against someone who has initiated the use of coercion against someone). It is the initiation of the use of coercion that all libertarians oppose on principle since it is the violation of the self-ownership or property rights of innocent human beings (those who have not initiated the use of violence against anyone). Most libertarians favor the proper and righteous use of coercive force, according to rules of due process, against criminals, those who have been convicted of violating the rights of someone by initiatory coercion."
Definately sounds like enlightened views of the staff at RM doesn't it?!! I'm glad you were amused, and are you also amused at the fate of anyone else who disagrees with your views?? and who dare question your authority of "being right"?.
It's interesting to note that Redlight did not respond to the "factual" information I provided him in relation to Government funding, but instead chose to switch to "profitability" of the RM, obviously discounting the fact that they "owed" the Government £1.75 Billion in loans, most of which would swallow up the meagre £355m in interest payments!!, but of course, that's not the "Worker's" problem is it, it's all down to the Company, and with £355m profit, the Unions want their slice!!!
Now read Government = Investment = Taxpayers' money=RM=inefficiencies and refusals to adapt to changing Global marketplaces.....and we have a recipe for what....of course....a repeat of the Coalminer's\Carworker's strikes of the late Eighties\early Nineties.
Unions, just like their Religious counterparts, always fail to see the writing on the wall.....they are both Pentium I's.........and it takes all night to do what a C2D can do 20 times a night every night.....wise up, or move on, for if you were in the "wild" you would be Tiger meat every night of the week!!
Reply With Quote
