Damn This Recession!

The rise of the unemployees

Only in a leisure-hating country like this one could unemployment become as stressful and exhausting as a full-time job. 

When she was laid off from her position as a financial analyst in July 2008, Westminster, Colorado’s Kelly Wiedemer expected the path back to her well-worn career track would be quick and easy. And as a gadfly for non-workers who have exhausted unemployment benefits, Wiedemer believes she is speaking for many who felt the same way when the recession began. 

“I don’t think anybody realized you had to recreate yourself out of the box,” Wiedemer says, noting that she has a BS in Finance and a dozen years of experience in the financial services industry. “If I had it to do over I wouldn’t climb the ladder in corporate America... Whenever I was unemployed in the past it was never for more than a couple weeks.” 

As a champion of the long-term unemployed, Wiedemer has had considerably more success over the last three years. Though she choked up twice during a phone interview yesterday, Wiedemer says her public policy work boosts the confidence and self-esteem that she lost to “the market.” 

This work includes reporting on unemployed issues for Examiner.com and organizing a petition against the job site Monster.com that has more than 88,000 signatures. Wiedemer recently got a sympathetic profile from Catherine C. Rampell in The New York Times

While you hear a lot about the powerlessness of the unemployed, movements like the one Wiedemer has organized against Monster.com are gaining traction. The petition calls on Monster to reject advertisements that prohibit currently unemployed job seekers from applying. New Jersey politicians are not waiting for this type of moral suasion to work and recently outlawed job ads that bar unemployed applicants. Similar bills—which have deep implications for free expression, anti-discrimination law, and freedom of contract—are pending in other states as well as in the U.S. Congress

It’s hard to feel sympathy for an employer who won’t even take a résumé from an unemployed person. But it’s harder to imagine how inveighing against a job search site will help jobless applicants or hurt those discriminating employers. (It’s also not clear how shaming or hurting employers is an effective job search strategy.) 

New Jersey’s decision to make unemployment a protected status for anti-discrimination claims is unlikely to achieve progressive goals of Economic Fairness or Social Justice. It seems intuitive that when you don’t work for a long period of time, your skills and work habits atrophy. Is justice served if an applicant gets turned down for work, but only after a laborious process? 

“I realize that you can’t legislate behavior,” says Wiedemer. “If people are going to eliminate the unemployed from the applicant pool, they’re going to do that. But by not doing anything to try and stop that, you’re condoning it.” Wiedemer believes Republican control of the House will doom the national bill, but she says that if passed it would “at least have some kind of deterrent effect.” 

What concerns me most, however, is that Wiedemer, who seems very nice on the phone, is pursuing political activism while allowing her financial status and fitness for employment to deteriorate. Having built her personal brand as a high-profile unemployed person (she was also in the news recently for having been jailed when she failed to pay some damages from an auto accident; she says the arrest resulted from a traffic stop for expired license plates), Wiedemer now makes good fodder for institutional journalists who need hard-luck stories. But is “unemployee” a career path?

As the popularity of defining, speaking for and trying to rejigger the economy to provide more support for the “99ers” (people who reach the end of extended unemployment benefits after 99 weeks) continues to grow, you might think jobless advocacy is a career path. I’m not so sure. Back in the lean and hungry 1980s, the comedian Martin Short played “Billy McKay,” a layabout scion who punctuated his lengthy idleness with curses against the damn recession, on SCTV’s parody soap opera “The Days of the Week.” Billy McKay laments his situation at around the five-minute mark in this video: "I've been all over town looking for a job. Think I can find one? Damn this recession!" 

But why should that process of adjusting to a lower full-time salary take a “couple years” rather than a few weeks? When I was also laid off from a job with an inflated salary in 2008, the fact that I would not be replacing that salary quickly became clear just from the room temperature at a few job interviews. 

Wiedemer takes a more expansive view of what a non-worker should expect, and seemed genuinely surprised at the idea that in a down market you’re better off lowering your asking price. 

“In terms of the American Dream, which I had, I took that for granted,” she said. “Now they want to take that away.” I asked Wiedemer to whom the pronoun they was referring. Her response: “If nobody will interview me or give me a job because I’m still unemployed, if they won’t even grant me an interview for a job, then I’m being denied the opportunity to rebuild.” 

This shade of Billy McKay is to be avoided always and everywhere. It’s not just motivational speech to say that you need to create your own opportunities rather than waiting for opportunities to be provided or denied by others. It’s not just job-guru-speak to say that most private sector employers are looking to hire self-starters. Wiedemer seemed to grasp this last point: “The whole entrepreneurial thing has become more of a focal point, sadly, in the last couple years.” 

So I’m happy for Wiedemer’s sake that she is supplementing her advocacy work with a temp job that starts next week and has given some consideration to a plan to get into the thrift store business (though that plan was dashed, she said, when the Small Business Administration failed to provide a loan). We differ on the best way to help the long-term unemployed, and whether you should even be in the business of trying to help a group that contains millions of otherwise unrelated people. But it’s common sense that ending your own unemployment is the first step toward addressing the unemployment problem. 

Tim Cavanaugh is a senior editor at Reason magazine.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    It is unclear to me from reading the article what the problem is. Is it that the long term unemployed can't find a job at all or is it that they just can't find one for a salary they like? If it is the former, then yeah, there is a real problem. If it is the latter, they need to suck it up and take a different job and start a new career.

  • mr simple||

    I think it's a mix of the two with a helping of unhelpful, heavy-handed, government solutions.

  • Tman||

    ^^^This.

    I can understand that you lost a six figure job and your lifestyle needs to get back that type of income if you want to keep your big house and nice cars, but you can't tell me that you "can't find a job". Half the restaurants in Nashville are hiring right now. Yeah, you would be lucky to pull in $45K/year with that, and the hours are kinda lame, but a job is a job.

    I don't understand this about certain segments of the unemployed. Yes, you used to make big bucks because of your fancy degree, but so fucking what?

  • Old man||

    And how many of those restaurants will hire the 45-50 year old man who was working the assembly line or as a construction laborer? Manufacturing has been sent off shore. Low skill construction has been destroyed by the glut of labor imported from the 3rd world. A man used to be able to make decent money working in the tobacco fields, but those jobs don't pay any longer due to the mentioned labor glut. But hey, those restaurants are still hiring.

  • Tman||

    And how many of those restaurants will hire the 45-50 year old man who was working the assembly line or as a construction laborer?

    Pretty much all of them, especially if he was reliable and has some reasonable customer/client skills. Waiting tables doesn't require a degree, you just need to be able to hustle.

    Manufacturing has been sent off shore. Low skill construction has been destroyed by the glut of labor imported from the 3rd world.

    This is true. And these jobs are NEVER coming back, and there's nothing you nor I nor President Not My Fault can do about it. You can bitch all you want, but it won't change anything. Washing dishes may not be the most glamorous job, but it's a paycheck. It's not anyones "fault" that this happened either. It was inevitable. Just like bank teller jobs with ATM's, technology has always been replacing low skilled labor, and when you add in the fact that Hanes can make t-shirts in Singapore for 1/10th of the cost it would in Delaware, you have a recipe for said glut. But don't act as if this is "unfair" or something that can be fixed.

    It isn't and it won't.

  • steve||

    "manufacturing has been sent off shore"? I always love the sound of this. As if some all powerful, cold-hearted bastard decided to pick those jobs up and plop them down somewhere else... just to be mean to the American Working Man.

  • ||

    i'm sure gibson is now giving pretty serious thought to moving offshore

  • Old man||

    In April, McDonald's held a nation wide job fair. They had 1 million people apply for 62,000 positions. But hey, the restaurants are hiring.

  • Tman||

    McDonalds is now the only restaurant? Cool story bro.

  • ||

    true story

  • Shut the fuck up||

    April was four months ago.

  • ||

    Damn true! If you need to work to survive, then you WILL bust your ass at damn near any job you can grab for the moment.

  • jtuf||

    When I was unemployed a few years ago, I applied for cashier positions. The employers turned me down. If they see an application with a college degree on it, they put it in the dumpster. That's why it's better to postpone college until you're in your 40's. A college degree loses it's value after a couple of decades. It's not worth giving up able body years to get a degree only to find yourself unemployable when you are approaching old age.

  • rsi||

    The last company I worked for a four year degree within the last four years.

  • Ventifact||

    OK, I can't tell if jtuf's comment is meant as a joke or not. (Probably is?) But I would argue that, if not quite true, it contains a lot of truth.

    Everyone acknowledges that the age-demographic structure of the workforce is dysfunctional. People spend a long time getting educated and spend a long time living in retirement. Those middle years of work are too scarce, especially if the retirement generation didn't produce enough members of the working generation. Mid-life or late-life education would enable a huge portion of the population to remain productive longer. (And this isn't just a cynical way to wring money out of the working class. Go find a retired person. Odds are he's bored.) And, as jtuf says, shifting education toward later life leaves more early life available for work that requires a strong back.

    One thing that makes this change seem unrealistic is that we don't currently have many individuals who over the course of their life shift from manual work to mental work.

  • Johnny Cosmos||

    I spent many years in restaurants. Most of the owners didn't even make $45K. That figure is thrown out like it's a low number, but it's much higher than many jobs pay in general, and service/hospitality jobs start out near the bottom- more like $15,000. The only people who stand to start out at "only 45K" in most places are those who are moving from one management position to another. There are cooks jobs that require passing multiple interviews including cooking tests that start at around $8/hr in many places. I guess some servers make decent money, especially if they work doubles. But even that is something a lot of people can't hack. The only time I made decent money working in restaurants was working 7 days a week 55-60 hours and getting overtime, and/or working 2 jobs. A lot of places aren't going to offer the unlimited hours though. I have a relative who has been a chef for 35 years and has never come close to making 45 grand except when he took a second job doing prep when he was off his main job. Maybe I need to move to Nashville.

    I agree with your premise. yeah, some 6 figure people need to take some pay cuts, but a lot of the jobs available pay less than 20 grand, if that. Then you have a lot of low-level jobs that demand 100% open availability 24/7 ( so you can't get a second job or plan anything in your personal life) but only let workers work 30 hours max at minimum wage. For that kind of pay/lifestyle it probably makes sense not working. It costs too much to go to jobs like that.

  • Tman||

    For that kind of pay/lifestyle it probably makes sense not working.

    It makes sense to not work when someone else is paying your income. But after 2 years you can't honestly say that it's "better" to live on the dole than to suck it up and go wait some tables.

  • Old Salt||

    Whatever happened to the old saying "work is work"? I was always raised with the idea that it was more noble to have a job digging ditches than it was to be a unemployed college graduate!

  • Shut the fuck up||

    "A man used to be able to make decent money working in the tobacco fields, but those jobs don't pay any longer due to the mentioned labor glut."

    "Whatever happened to the old saying "work is work"?"

    Make up your fucking mind asshole.

  • Mary in LA||

    "Old Man" =/= "Old Salt". Two different commenters.

  • Zuo||

    45K??? AHAHAHA. Try more like 25k. If you're lucky.

  • DDavis||

    "Half the restaurants in Nashville are hiring right now. "

    Everyone "is hiring", but no one gets hired. Under/over qualified, too young, too old, ...

    A C++ developer where I used to work was living in a storage locker until I found out and let him stay with me before I moved out of state.

    Everyone is hiring, and everyone is looking for reasons not to hire. If you've got one of those reasons on your resume, you're screwed.

  • ||

    Thanks, John, for putting it into terms I couldn't. I am looking for work but can't find anything near my most recent salary, and with kids to consider, it's better to stay home than take $10/hr just to pay exorbitant daycare costs (we're not talking Montessori schools either). I wonder what to do sometimes.

  • ||

    it's better to stay home than take $10/hr just to pay exorbitant daycare costs (we're not talking Montessori schools either). I wonder what to do sometimes.

    Sounds like daycare is paying...

  • ||

    Not enough, unless I open my own franchise. Might be worth it. My sister is a daycare provider, and has her own child attend the center at which she works. She still comes home with less than half of her net every month, even with the employee discount.

    We get by because we don't need or want much. We hunt for meat, grow food in the garden, bake our own bread, and use hand-me-downs when the kids get too big for their current wardrobe. That is small stuff; the bigger picture looms: education, potential weddings, and not leaving my kids with tons of expenses to pay when we die. I think we're doing it all the best way, with a surety fund, IRAs, term life insurance, and a cash reserve in the bank. I can't shake the anxiety, though. I MUST work but my work must also be worthwhile in terms of providing for me and mine.

    I'm not desperate yet. Desperation will drive me to do anything for my kids, but at what point will they suffer my absence? I suppose public education was designed, to some degree, to alleviate people of this consideration, but after working in the pub-ed system, I don't really trust it.

  • ||

    Squirrel and Venison are gonna get real popular soon.

  • jtuf||

    I suppose public education was designed, to some degree, to alleviate people of this consideration, but after working in the pub-ed system, I don't really trust it.

    I stopped believing in intelligent design years ago. Any system will evolve to serve the needs of the decision makers. That's the teachers and the administration in schools. You have my sympathy. In some ways, it's even worse near the cities. Folks can't even afford to have kids here in the first place (The Bergen Record).

  • ||

    I'm in NJ. We moved to Warren Co. so we could afford housing. Parts of this state are so expensive, you need a part-time job just to pay your property taxes. I can't wait to see the havoc that attrition is going to wreak on some of those very expensive indoctrination institutions that some towns built for their youth.

  • ||

    education and weddings are upcomming big expenses but you hunt for your dinner? education and wedding expense should be zero. what gives?

  • mr simple||

    You're so heartless, Tim. This is clearly just a case of the rich getting richer by not hiring the poor. Maybe they should institute quotas for hiring unemployed people.

  • ||

    I don't really get how you can be unemployed for 3 years. Independently wealthy? Mooching off family members? Absent such luxuries, Ms. Wiedemer, most of us need to work.

    Also, if talking on the phone makes you cry maybe you're not ready for the labor market.

  • ||

    The NYT piece answered my question:

    In the meantime, people like Ms. Wiedemer — who has been out of work for three years — are exhausting their benefits and piecing together what support they can from food stamps and family members.

    If it was work or starve, she'd have been working no later than about 2.5 years ago.

  • Realist||

    This^^^^YES!

  • White Indian||

    That's precisely why the City-Statist elite grab all the productive land, hold it with their made-up privation property rights with violence, and make the rest of the people work for them or starve to death.

    Ain't City-Statism (civilization) grand?

  • fish||

    According to you every poster excepting yourself is an avowed and enthusiastic City-Stater. So where's my productive land and serf workforce? I'm serious...if it's out there I want to see if my guys have been slacking off. Because I won't put up with that shit.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    He's a faker, fish... he uses a computer, presumably rents a place to live (I can't imagine he owns his own home, but who can tell?)... the thing is just a piece of shit pretending to care about something.

  • Fluffy||

    The people in southeastern Turkey and Iraq who invented agriculture were perfectly in the right to declare the land they were working theirs.

    If agriculture is so bad, why did wave after wave of pastoralist fuckwads keep invading the agricultural areas - even back when they still had 95% of the world's land surface to indulge their worthless hunter-gatherer inclinations?

  • Genocide is OK to Libertarians||

    Again, you haven't read a bit of anthropology or archeology to know exactly how agriculture historically spread. The Sword and the Plowshare are united in invading and occupying land, while killing anybody who doesn't submit.

  • Fluffy||

    Not in Ancient Sumer and Akkad it didn't.

    The border territories remained pastoralist for millennia.

    And produced wave after wave of invaders and infiltrators.

  • ||

    Savage pastoralists - lusting for our firewater and plasma tvs.

  • jtuf||

    Savage pastoralists - lusting for our firewater and plasma tvs.

    Speaking of London ...

  • Libertarian Cop Beatings||

    You don't know shit about pastoralists.

    Pastoralism rose only after civilization, as an "edge" society. There are no pastoralists, save for one exception, that do not have extensive contact with civilization.

    Pastoralism isn't paleolithic foraging - with which you are trying to falsely conflate.

    You're gonna have to read some more.

  • fish||

    The Sword and the Plowshare are united in invading and occupying land, while killing anybody who doesn't submit.

    And this applies to libertarians how?

  • White Indian||

    Agriculture creates government. ~Richard Manning, Against the Grain, p. 73

    Go fish.

  • sevo||

    "For 290,000 years, we managed to meet that need as hunter-gatherers, a state in which Manning believes we were at our most human: at our smartest, strongest, most sensually alive."
    http://www.amazon.com/Against-.....0865476225
    And here he used a *printing press* to pitch his primitive utopia!
    How surprising!
    Help yourself; I'd rather read the missing kids blurbs on the milk carton.

  • Does sevo pay taxes? ||

    Sometimes we do things in this prison-like agricultural City-State we'd rather not, because there is little choice but to conform or face violence and death from the State, just like the First Families did on the Trail of Tears. Call it hypocrisy if you like, but it is no more hypocritical than you paying taxes.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Call it hypocrisy if you like, but it is no more hypocritical than you paying taxes.

    So you're starting your Shackbrah lifestyle first thing tomorrow, yes?

    Plenty of BLM land available out there you know.

  • Copernicus||

    "most sensually alive."

    Like Clan of the Cave Bear.
    Mmmmm.. Darryl Hanah

  • jtuf||

    From the 1972 edition of the Oxford History of the American People Volume 1 page 174:


    In the summer of 1689 parties of Indians, led by French officers, began a series of raids on New England frontier settlements, and all forts and settlements on the coasts of Maine and New Hampshire were captured by the French and Indians before autumn. La petite guerre, as the French called it, looked pretty big to the frontiersmen.

    Some Native Americans allied with the English, some stayed neutral, some raided the English. There were also plenty of English men raiding Spanish ships at the time. Basically, members of hunter gather societies and agricultural societies might have raided anyone who had more wealth than them. Our current system formalizes this through taxes, which cuts down on the crime.

  • jtuf||

    Um White Indian, have you heard of the Highlands Preservation Area? Let me explain it to you:

    That's precisely why the City-Statist elite grab all the productive land, hold it with their made-up privation property rights environmentalism with violence, and make the rest of the people work for them or starve to death.

    Ain't City-Statism (civilization) grand?

  • ||

    when i used to play Civilization, my city states would invade and conquer other city states

  • Spencer||

    "Also, if talking on the phone makes you cry maybe you're not ready for the labor market."

    You have obviously never worked with some of the people I've worked with...

  • White Laplander||

  • fish||

    Mooching off family members?

    That's how I plan to do it.

  • ||

    "The whole entrepreneurial thing has become more of a focal point, sadly, in the last couple of years."

    Why should we be surprised?

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    She should take the civil service exam.

  • fish||

    Billy McKay looks like he was so upset that he went and had a bad gender reassignment surgery.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    (It’s also not clear how shaming or hurting employers is an effective job search strategy.)

    Listen to the progressives on here talk, and it's clear they are honestly baffled as to why a business would choose not to hire people just for the sake of hiring them, even though the regulatory deck is stacked against the small businesses that drive employment.

    That attitude is what happens when the childish idea that the universe owes you a living becomes ingrained as a political philosophy.

  • CE||

    Or the fact that Obama and Co. are waiting with all sorts of new mandates as small businesses cross the 100-employee threshold, or the 50-employee threshold, or the 10-employee threshold, or whatever.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    “I realize that you can’t legislate behavior,” says Wiedemer. “If people are going to eliminate the unemployed from the applicant pool, they’re going to do that. But by not doing anything to try and stop that, you’re condoning it.”

    "WE CAN'T LEGISLATE BEHAVIOR BUT THAT SHOULDN'T STOP US FROM TRYING TO DO SO ANYWAY!!" :lib-rage:

  • Tony||

    If only you putrid deviants allowed Obama to do his job, the Republicans wouldn't have brought us this mess through lax regulations and low taxes.

  • fish||

    Pathetically weak spoof. Jeez know your subject!

    Tired of dealing with GD amateurs!

  • Realist||

    Yes it is a bad spoof, but you're being a little harsh.

  • fish||

    You can never be too harsh when it comes to bad spoof.

  • GSL||

    It must be hard to avoid seeing the contradiction in statements like "If I had it to do over I wouldn’t climb the ladder in corporate America" with statements like "If nobody will interview me or give me a job because I’m still unemployed, if they won’t even grant me an interview for a job, then I’m being denied the opportunity to rebuild."

    This is a great time for people to turn their backs on the corporate ladder and figure out how to create their own jobs.

  • Apogee||

    This is a great time for people to turn their backs on the corporate ladder and figure out how to create their own jobs.

    Correct. And the more people do this, the more they'll be inclined to fight regulatory capture, which usually benefits the larger corporations able to afford the necessary lobbying.

  • Robert||

    My sister asks why I can't come up with a Web site that makes money.

  • Pope Jimbo||

    Tell her that you can, but it will require you to install a web cam in her bathroom.

  • ||

    no he can't, because I already own that website

  • Apogee||

    Her advocacy seems odd. If she's correct that people are being neglected due to their currently unemployed status and not their ability, then the solution isn't to protest Monster.com.

    The solution is to start a competing website that offers only those currently unemployed looking for work.

    One would expect at least some potential employers to favor a site that contains people willing to bargain because they're not currently employed - sort of like hunting for a short sale when house shopping - It's usually a better deal.

    It's either a great untapped market or a case for entitlements, but it can't be both.

  • ||

    Let's create this start-up company...

  • jtuf||

    + 100 to Apogee

  • ||

    One would expect at least some potential employers to favor a site that contains people willing to bargain because they're not currently employed

    And therin lies the rub. If they were willing to bargain, they wouldn't be unemployed for two and three years.

  • -||

    a petition against the job site Monster.com that has more than 88,000 signatures

    She needs only 30 million more before it's still pointless and ineffectual.

  • Realist||

    Unemployement will probably never be below 6.5% again.

  • sevo||

    "Unemployement will probably never be below 6.5% again."

    Well, around '81 or so, a bank loan agent assured me that interest rates will never be in single digits again.
    I found money elsewhere, still have the house, and wonder if he still has a job.

  • Realist||

    What does that mean??? Because a bank loan agent assured you about something...that I am wrong???
    I said probably....do you consider that assurance???
    Warning!!! Do not use my prediction to determine whether to buy a house.

  • sevo||

    Warning!!:
    Do not post stupid predictions!

  • ||



    Unemployement will probably never be below 6.5% again.
    ~ Realist

    Why, exactly, Realist, that never again, is the rate of unemployment going to fall below 6.5%?

  • Franklin D. Roosevelt||

    My fellow Americans, the only thing we have to fear is a crippling, decade-long depression, one in which thousands will die by starvation, riots, or even their own hand. This is the sort of depression that destroys the faith of a people in their nation. The sort of depression that does not make one stronger from the great challenge it brings, but, rather, weaker. Weaker from the hunger. Weaker from the idleness. Weaker from the sight of one's friends and neighbors unemployed, financially ruined, and driven to an early grave. Weaker from the emotional, physical, and spiritual devastation that will surround us, day after day.

    I stand before you today with a message born not of hope, but of despair. Yes, misery awaits us all and there is nothing we can do to avert this grim fate. This economic depression is far too great for any of you to overcome, and there is nothing left for America to do but suffer. All is lost. The situation is hopeless.

    Be afraid. For you have very good reason. Banks are closing. Unemployment is at an all-time high and climbing every day. Stocks once worth hundreds of dollars are now worth pennies. Millions of you have lost your life savings in financial institutions you thought were secure but are not.

    And, lest you think otherwise, let me assure you right now that this misery will not end any time soon. No, you would be well advised to get used to this unhappy state in which you currently exist, for it will be a very long time, perhaps more than ten years, before your lot in life will finally get better. Most likely, you or someone in your family will die before that time. How will you endure this for so long, you ask? For many of you, the answer to that question is simple: you will not. You will die like a sick street rat in the gutter, penniless and trembling, your clothes torn and your face covered with the filth of the street.

    Yes, we as a nation are doomed.

  • Why Work?||

    "Whatever else early America was," according to recent scholarship, "it was a world of work." (Innes 1988) Indian America was anything but, as that Roanoke colonist was not the only one to notice. No wonder that he and the others apparently went native, abandoning the earliest English settlement, leaving only a message carved on a tree that they were gone "To Croatan." These first defectors from civilized toil to barbarous ease were not to be the last. Throughout the colonial period, hundreds of Euro-American agriculturalists joined the Indians or, captured in war, refused to return when peace came. Women and children were inordinately likely to take to the Indian life-style, readily casting off their restrictive roles in white society, but adult males also sought acceptance among the heathen. Without a doubt work was a major motivation for the choices they made. At Jamestown, John Smith enforced a regimen of labor discipline so harsh as to approach concentration camp conditions. In 1613, some of the English were "apointed to be hanged Some burned Some to be broken upon wheles, others to be staked and some to be shott to death." Their crime? An historian recounts that all "had run away to live with the Indians and had been recaptured." (Morgan 1975)

    Primitive Affluence
    Bob Black
    http://www.primitivism.com/primitive-affluence.htm

  • BigT||

    Sounds like they were getting away from an oppressive government.

    Your link indicates that if you are willing to live a subsistence level existence you don't have to work very hard in primitive societies. So what? Here you don't have to work at all, due to the numerous charities and welfare programs. And hunt/gather lifestyle cannot support as many people per unit area as ag/wage styles can. Crowding is relieved by famine, pestilence and war.

  • Robert||

    Yes, they were getting away. You've got to realize how these colonies were organized. It's not as if you just had a bunch of people sharing a ride across the Atlantic. These were commercial ventures, and when they reached shore they were just as much subject to the captain's will as if they'd still been at sea.

  • ||

    Noble savage fallacy.

    I agree that John Smith was being a dick, and that white colonists should have been allowed to join the natives if they wanted, but living as a native was never paradise.

  • Does sevo pay taxes? ||

    Actually, you're making the noble savage fallacy (not quite the way you're thinking though.)

    I suppose you've never read Marshall Sahlin's "The Original Affluent Society."

    You've got a completely false understanding of native americans. Time to start learning the truth.

    The Original Affluent Society
    Marshall Sahlins
    Professor of Anthropology Emeritus, University of Chicago
    http://www.primitivism.com/original-affluent.htm

  • ||

    lol, the Galbraithian way... Of course, I can just want less! Like, I can just be okay with my children dying at a young age! And I can just be okay with the real possibility of starving to death or being taken over by a neighboring tribe! Yes! It's so simple!

    Technically, this viewpoint would make any society seem great. Just look on the bright side!

  • ||

    Would you take Benjamin Franklin's word over Marshall Sahlin's?

    When an Indian Child has been brought up among us, taught our language and habituated to our Customs, yet if he goes to see his relations and make one Indian Ramble with them, there is no perswading him ever to return, and that this is not natural [to them] merely as Indians, but as men, is plain from this, that when white persons of either sex have been taken prisoners young by the Indians, and lived a while among them, tho' ransomed by their Friends, and treated with all imaginable tenderness to prevail with them to stay among the English, yet in a Short time they become disgusted with our manner of life, and the care and pains that are necessary to support it, and take the first good Opportunity of escaping again into the Woods, from whence there is no reclaiming them.
    http://www.beliefnet.com/resou.....son_1.html

  • sevo||

    "I suppose you've never read Marshall Sahlin's "The Original Affluent Society.""

    No. Comic books don't interest me.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Women and children were inordinately likely to take to the Indian life-style, readily casting off their restrictive roles in white society

    LOL at this goonfiction.

  • rattlegoat||

    "Women and children were inordinately likely to take to the Indian life-style, readily casting of there restictive roles in white society"
    Well, there is no assimilation like forced assimilation. Red Rocks Rockin, does this guy ever specify which group, tribe, or nation of Indians he is talking about? I agree that he is spouting absolute bullshit, but it would be nice to know which ones he is talking about. If we did, it would be easier to point out the bullshit...on that note, shout out to my tribe "TURTLE CLAN!"

  • ||

    TMNT?

  • jtuf||

    These first defectors from civilized toil to barbarous ease were not to be the last. Throughout the colonial period, hundreds of Euro-American agriculturalists joined the Indians

    That was the French strategy.

  • Almanian||

    I'm just shaking my head - just the latest example of "went from laid off to stupid at some point". I'm just tired of it - it's not that you "can't find work", you can't find work that you WANT to do.

    You get hungry enough, you'll "find" work.

  • Almanian||

    Also, we need Herc back. Towelie White Injun is the worst character troll EVER.

  • White Indian||

    I give you reason to check your premises, and you don't have the integrity to do it. You just blank out.

  • White, Betty||

    Also appropriate in this thread.

    That by posting Wikipedia links I bolster my argument. For instance I posted a link that was supposed to be associated with the imminent destruction of the AGRICULTURAL CITY STATE but really linked to the history of the Hello Kitty phenomena in Japan in the 80's

  • Jersey Patriot||

    The state subsidizes bigness, though regulatory policy and transportation subsidies. It attacks informal and small businesses. It subsidizes the creation of debt, creating a need for constant monetary income. It taxes property, which makes small tenancy unaffordable. It bails out the rich constantly.

    In every way, the state subsidizes "having a job" as a necessary part of life. Now that model runs against the limits of (subsidized) debts and resources, and the libertarian response is...get a job, hippy?

  • GSL||

    Which is why the higher-ed bubble is so insidious. Who can spend their 20s starting a business, traveling, volunteering, whatever you think will make you happy, when they have $100K in student loans to pay off? Lame cubicle job is pretty much your only option there.

  • Jersey Patriot||

    With next to no money and a few weeks of work, almost anyone can make $500 - $1000 a month on the Internet. Anywhere. Can you live well in Prague or Budapest or Buenos Aires on $1000 a month? You bet your ass you can.

    So why would a bright 20-something sit in a cubicle and be screamed at by some fat, balding drunk whose wife wouldn't touch his dick if was covered in gold? Oh right, $800/month for 240 months in non-dischargeable loans, with the gentle hand of DOE SWAT teams ready to pounce if heaven forbid, the economy is shitty. You gotta keep those payments going, or it quickly goes to $1000...to $1500...

    It may be a total coincidence that student loan slavery exploded at the same time as the "work anywhere" possibilities of the Internet did, but it's awfully fucking convenient, isn't it? Sort of like civil rights and the drug war...

  • GSL||

    With next to no money and a few weeks of work, almost anyone can make $500 - $1000 a month on the Internet.

    Well, states like California are doing their best to make this harder.

    In all seriousness, though, you're absolutely right. It's a lot easier to live cheaply outside the US, and many countries are a lot more free-market and welcoming to private enterprise than we are these days.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    It may be a total coincidence that student loan slavery exploded at the same time as the "work anywhere" possibilities of the Internet did

    Tuition costs have been increasing at four times the rate of inflation the last 30 years. The internet may have had a tangential role in this, but it's a lot more likely it began due to the 30+ year credit-creation binge and the government backstopping all those loans.

  • Shut the fuck up||

    "It may be a total coincidence that student loan slavery exploded at the same time as the "work anywhere" possibilities of the Internet did"

    That is not what happened, your time frame is way off.

  • jtuf||

    + 10 to GSL

  • Libertarian Cop Beatings||

    Better not be homeless, the libertarians propertarians really hate those "bums."

    Cops must be unleashed, and allowed to administer instant punishment...unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? Hopefully, they will disappear... ~Murray Rothbard, dean of the Austrian School of economics, the founder of libertarianism propertarian fetishism

    And definitely scrub that filthy melanin off your skin!

    In short; racialist science is properly not an act of aggression or a cover for oppression of one group over another, but, on the contrary, an operation in defense of private property against assaults by aggressors., ~Murray Rothbard, dean of the Austrian School of economics, the founder of libertarianism propertarian fetishism

  • ||

    Murray Rothbard is considered an anarcho-capitalist. And there's a little something called taking quotes out of context there, buddy.....

  • Libertarian Cop Beatings||

    Nothing is taken out of context. Buddy.

    But I figure you're as stupid as a Fundamentalist, well, you are a Fundamentalist, and they like falsely accusing people of taking things out of context too.

    So here's you sign, Fundie Frank.

    Context!!!!!!
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o

  • Mr. FIFY||

    *yawn*

  • Shut the fuck up||

    "I... like falsely accusing people of taking things out of context too."

    We know you do.

    Suck my context.

  • fish||

    You should really use all of the quote even if it moderates the impact you hope for.

    "5. Take Back the Streets: Get Rid of the Bums. Again: unleash the cops to clear the streets of bums and vagrants. Where will they go? Who cares? Hopefully, they will disappear, that is, move from the ranks of the petted and cosseted bum class to the ranks of the productive members of society.

    "And definitely scrub that filthy melanin off your skin!

    Reference to this in "A RIGHT-WING POPULIST PROGRAM?

  • Libertarian Cop Beatings||

    You should really use...

    You should really use "propertarian" instead of the masquerade public-relations term "libertarian" if you're going to be so damn predictable.

  • BigT||

    Hey, Whitey Injun, is your body your property?

    If yes, you are heading down that slippery slope to becoming a propertarian.

    If no, then you are a slave.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    If he owns ANY property, he's a fucking hypocrite.

  • Libertarian Cop Beatings||

    Own refers to mere property. People are not mere property, and should not be dehumanized, degraded, or labeled with terms fit only for property.

    Refer to your body and other humans' bodies by using other words, not referring to property, such as:

    Love.
    Nurture.
    Care.

    The Jesus character didn't speak, "Thou shalt own thy neighbor as thyself" for a good reason.

  • Libertarian SNUFF FILMS||

    What happens when people are degraded into property is horrible.

    Slavery itself. That is the end logic of the libertarians dehumanizing people into property.

    Because property can be used. Sadistically beaten even.

    If voluntary slavery is legal, we can consummate this financial arrangement, to our mutual gain. If not, not, to the great loss of both of us. Slave-master Rafe would never shell out the cold cash if, after he paid, I could haul him into court on assault and battery charges when he whipped me.

    Voluntary Slave Contracts
    by Walter Block
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/block/block134.html

    And property can be disposed of too. Right?

    Why shouldn't Walter Block's Libertarian Master make a Libertarian Snuff Film?

  • BigT||

    The fillings in your teeth?
    The air in your lungs?
    Your glasses?
    Watch?
    Clothing?

    Playing semantic games is a losing strategy.
    Where does 'your body' end?

  • Libertarian Snuff Films, Inc.||

    Proposed cript for Libertarian Snuff Films, Inc.

    LIBERTARIAN MASTER: Do you own your body?
    MOM: [holding sick child] Yes.
    
MASTER: And what can you do with property you own?

    MOM: Sell it?
    MASTER: Correct. Do you voluntarily sell yourself to me so I'll pay for your child's health care?
    MOM: Yes, I'm desperate.
    MASTER: Answer yes or no, and then sign here.
    MOM: Yes. [signs contract]
    MASTER: Did you once own your body, bitch?

    SLAVE MOM: Yes, Master.
    
MASTER: Now I own you. What can an owner do with any property?
    
SLAVE MOM: Dispose of it?
    
MASTER: That's right, bitch. [BANG!] [fap fap fap fap fap fap fap]

  • Libertarian Snuff Films, Inc.||

    BigT, yours is the semantics game.

    You just got PWNED.

  • BigT||

    Heap big pale Injun avoids issue, answers with non sequiturs.

    How could I be owned if I weren't property? Even your lame rejoinders expose your hypocrisy.

  • ||

    In response to libertarian hating troll:

    WHat utter bullshit. First of all, nobody simply sells themselves by signing a contract that says, "You are now my slave, sign here!" Anybody who sold themselves would want a full contract that specifically laid out the rights and responsibilities of each party. There would also be competition between "masters," who would actually write their contracts specifically for the purpose of attracting applicants. Property rights are not always absolute. Property can be short term and conditional, and it usually is.

    Your lack of logic or understanding is astounding.

  • Wage Slavery, Inc.||

    So working for wages is really Wage Slavery?

    Gonna backpedal hard now? LOL

  • jtuf||

    Wow, Libertarian Snuff Flims, Inc. That scene would have never occurred to me. I can't imagine someone enjoying murder enough to take on the $200,000 cost of raising a child just so he can kill someone. I guess it's human nature for one to assume that others like whatever one likes. Come to think of it, this explains liberal politics. Obama signs the healthcare bill, and then he gets to bomb Libya without anyone complaining.

  • Rich People are Fucked Up||

    And human life is cheap to them in this system where people are the "ultimate resource," as Julian Simon puts it. Never heard of Jeffrey Epstein? (He's just a start.)

  • ||

    Sounds like a pretty compelling screenplay... Lemme get some popcorn.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    People are not mere property

    They are as soon as someone stronger comes along and says they are.

  • another Libertarian Neo-Conism||

    How many times, and in how many different ways, am I going to see "Might Makes Right" tonight?

    It's like free republic around here. LOL

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Wasn't talking about owning people, you fucking prick.

    But you knew that.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    How many times, and in how many different ways, am I going to see "Might Makes Right" tonight?

    That's a good question--where exactly have you seen it?

  • ||

    He was also making suggestions for policies that right wing populists can push. He was not necessarily arguing that that was what he believed. Rothbard had ridiculed earlier policies that rounded up vagrants and sent them to prison or workhouses.

    This troll is such a jackass. Clearly knows nothing about Rothbard.

  • Embarassing Rothbard Quotes ||

    Clearly this jackass knows how to quote Rothbard.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    You got the quoting part down; the understanding part has clearly slipped your grasp

  • ||

    +1000

  • RockLibertyWarrior||

    Uh yeah ignore everything else he wrote "libertarian cop beating" because he was overwhelmingly anti police, yes asshole you are taking it out of context, its called "hyperbole" idiot troll. Of course to libtards its "offensive" go drool on your keyboard somewhere else.

  • vector1369||

    No bitching, here. Let me drop some facts in your lap.

    I was a small business owner before the recession hit. I paid unemployment taxes for everyone on my payroll, including myself. When I had to shutter the business, my employees went on unemployment. Some of them are "99-ers" who rode the unemployment train all the way to the last stop.

    What about me? No such luck. Business owners do not qualify for umemployment even though I was the one paying the bill for everyone.

    Think unemployment is tough? Try being unemployed with no safety net. Try looking for a job when the last 10 years on your resume are as an entrepreneur. Already had three employers rescind job offers when I could not provide "supervisor" references for my employment at my own company! I get by cutting lawns and doing handyman work while I continue to look for a company whose hiring department actually has a clue.

    Ms. Wiedemer is a spoiled crybaby. There's work to be done, if she weren't too snotty to do it.

  • Robert||

    So retroactively promote one of your former employees to supervisor and give hir as a reference. Have you stayed in touch?

  • goneGalt||

    I know you are trying to help. Such ideas cross my mind too.

    But isn't that fraud?

  • Robert||

    No, it's not fraud. Hiring somebody is not the type of transaction that can ever be fraudulent, because what you see is what you get. You get paid for the job you do, not for what you may have said about yourself. That's why lying on resumes is legal and prudent.

  • ||

    very prudent

  • ||

    or if you're married, make your wife a supervisor. She can use her maiden name.

    Heck, I quit my last job 9 years ago and started looking for a new one. I still listed my last place of employment as current, not even suggesting I was unemployed at the time. When I accepted my new job, I put in my *cough* two weeks notice.

  • goneGalt||

    An employer ought to be free to set any employment criteria they choose. And also free to be clueless and run themselves out of business.

    But it seems their cluelessness is harming Robert and Lord in that they are being enticed to provide false statements to prospective employers. (I am presuming that the job in question is one that they are qualified for and would bring value to the employer.)

    If the employer finds out, it is a "gotcha" that they can use against you. Malice or incompetence, I wonder?

  • Robert||

    Even if they do find out, you're better off than if you'd never gotten the job to begin with.

  • Libertarian = NeoCon Wannabee||

    From all the conservative "butch" talk that people spout in "Reason," I think Libertarians are just NeoCon Wannabees. They aren't quite high enough in the pecking order to suit themselves, so they piss and moan about "liberty" merely as a calculated strategy to grab as much stuff as the Neo-Cons they secretly admire already have grabbed.

    Higher, righter, tighter hands.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    *yawn*

  • ||

    In other words, "I don't like libertarianism, but can't effectively argue against it (unless I pull statements out of context and even ADD TO THEM), so therefore I will be an annoying troll and postulate why people are REALLY libertarians." Fuck off already.

  • Embarassing Rothbard Quotes ||

    Nothing is out of context. The quotes are accurate, and show the level that libertarians propertarians are willing to go to keep their grasp on something.

    But since religious fundamentalists make that false accusation of "out of context!" all the time, here's your sign.

    Context!!!!!!
    www.youtube.com/watch?v=PK7P7uZFf5o

  • ||

    You left out more than half the goddamn quote!

    Besides, read his past work:

    "Many 20th-century historians have lauded the mercantilists for their proto-Keynesian concern for "full employment," thus showing allegedly surprising modern tendencies. It should be stressed, however, that the mercantilist concern for full employment was scarcely humanitarian. On the contrary, their desire was to stamp out idleness, and to force the idle, the vagrant, and the "sturdy beggars" to work. In short, for the mercantilists, "full employment" frankly implied its logical corollary: forced labor. Thus, in 1545, the "sturdy beggars" of Paris were forced to work for long hours, and two years later, "to take away all opportunity for idleness from the healthy," all women able but unwilling to work were whipped and driven out of Paris, while all men in the same category were sent to the galleys as slave labor."

    "Woods, president of the National Conference of Social Work during 1917–18, had long denounced alcohol as "an abominable evil." A postmillennial pietist, he believed in "Christian statesmanship" that would, in a "propaganda of the deed," Christianize the social order in a corporate, communal route to the glorification of God. Like many pietists, Woods cared not for creeds or dogmas but only for advancing Christianity in a communal way; though an active Episcopalian, his "parish" was the community at large. In his settlement work, Woods had long favored the isolation or segregation of the "unfit," in particular "the tramp, the drunkard, the pauper, the imbecile," with the settlement house as the nucleus of this reform. Woods was particularly eager to isolate and punish the drunkard and the tramp. "Inveterate drunkards" were to receive increasing levels of "punishment," with ever-lengthier jail terms. The "tramp evil" was to be gotten rid of by rounding up and jailing vagrants, who would be placed in tramp workhouses and put to forced labor."

    Clearly Rothbard has a nuanced position on the subject that you just don't understand. Fucking moron.

  • Nuance Nazi||

    "I absolutely insist on protecting private property...we must encourage private initiative." ~Adolph Hitler

    source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany

    Clearly the Fascists has a nuanced position on the subject that you just don't understand. Mucking Foron.

  • sevo||

    ""I absolutely insist on protecting private property...we must encourage private initiative." ~Adolph Hitler
    source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Nazi_Germany"

    An attempt at humor, or just abysmal ignorance?
    Uh, step away from the comix section; try "Wages of Destruction" (Adan Tooze).
    Hitler supported private property (as if he had any concept of what that meant) as a temporary expediency.

  • Privation Property||

    Libertarians supported liberty (as if they had any concept of what that meant) as a temporary expediency.

    Their real fetish is privation and privilege.

    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege.

  • sevo||

    "Libertarians supported liberty (as if they had any concept of what that meant) as a temporary expediency."

    Other than your ignorance, do you have any cite for that claim?

  • ||

    See, you still don't even try to find out what is actually being said. Just more quotes completely taken out of context while pretending that they were said in a vacuum. Idiot.

  • Privation Property||

    said in a vacuum

    Ever pretend to know what etymology even means?

    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege.

    Private property is the rich depriving the peasants of land in the Roman days. Just like the elite of agricultural civilization always do to those that they can.

    Stick that in your vacuum of a skull.

  • ||

    Wow, how have you not accidentally drank from a bottle with a skull and crossbones on it yet?

  • Privation Property||

    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege.

    Private property is the rich depriving the peasants of land in the Roman days. Just like the elite of agricultural civilization always do to those that they can.

    If you can't address simple etymology that reveals how words came about, just admit it, Tinkle Weigle.

  • sevo||

    "Ever pretend to know what etymology even means?
    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege."

    I'll bet you can tell us what numerology "means" just as well as you told us what etymology "means".
    'See, a 19 is the same as a 9 with a one in front of it, right? See what that "means"?!?!?'
    Yeah, it means you're a imbecile.

  • sevo, good boy||

    Thanks, sevo, repetition helps everybody remember it. And now the simple etymological lesson is living rent-free in your head.

    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege.

  • sevo||

    "Thanks, sevo, repetition helps everybody remember it. And now the simple etymological lesson is living rent-free in your head.

    Privation.
    Private.
    Privilege."

    9
    19
    9
    19
    9
    19
    Yep, still an imbecile.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Clearly the Fascists has a nuanced position on the subject that you just don't understand. Mucking Foron.

    Clearly a quote by Hitler doesn't have anything to do with a passage by Rothbard. You stupid neckbeard.

  • White Indian||

    clearly

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Let's see... I own my home outright, and make roughly twelve dollars an hour... but somehow, I'm a rich bastard practicing "the rich depriving the peasants of land" thing just like the ancient Roman agriculturists or some shit...

    Yeah, that makes total sense.

  • libtardwhochangesname||

    Yeah because you know, I have no fucking idea what I am talking about. I leave out portions of quotes and ignore hyperbole because I am humorless asshole.

  • goneGalt||

    I own my home outright, and make roughly twelve dollars an hour.

    How did you pull that off? I'm asking sincerely here. I can take care of getting the 12 dollar an hour job part. But, I really need a roadmap as to how to ...

    1. Pay taxes to the men with guns.
    2. Feed and shelter myself.
    3. Do the above two and retain enough of my income to pay for a house outright.

    I'm serious, I'm your padawan, show me the way.

  • Embarassing Rothbard Quotes ||

    More on the EMBARASSING ROTHBARD:

    Murray Rothbard, Lew Rockwell and Scientific Racism
    July 06, 2010
    http://holocaustcontroversies......l-and.html

  • ||

    Oh my god, not this bullshit again. Notice how your link is short on direct quotes attributing racism. I've read the so called "racist" newsletters that Rothbard didn't even write, and none of them come off as overtly racist nor do they espouse racist policy suggestions.

    Also, I've read through that article that supposedly ties Rothbard to racism, but if you read it, he doesn't mention anything specific about any specific race. He simply points out that some people are inherently smarter, taller, faster, etc than others. Egalitarianism tries to ignore that, which was Rothbard's point.

    Also, Rothbard was jewish!

    And here's more from Rothbard:

    http://oll.libertyfund.org/ind.....&task=view

    In the link above, he seems pretty sympathetic to the black movements of the time.

    Here's another quote:

    I had the privilege of seeing Malcolm speak on two occasions in the year before his death. It was a delightful experience. His answers to questions were a match for any political leader, for intelligence and wit. He was, for example, a lot more impressive than Bill Clinton. My favorite memory of Malcolm was the second speech, before a large gathering, when he made mincemeat out of the insufferable Jimmy Wechsler, ex-Communist turned Social Democrat, and beloved columnist and editor of the New York Post. In his speech, Malcolm had spoken of black tenants living in Harlem, while their landlords "lived on the Grand Concourse" (a large, once fashionable street in the west Bronx, then almost exclusively Jewish). In the question period, Jimmy Wechsler bounced up, and pointed out that Malcolm's remark had "anti-Semitic" implications. "Oh," replied Malcolm in fine mock indignation: "Are you telling me that only Jews live on the Grand Concourse? Why that's terrible; that's 'segregation'; that needs to be investigated!"
    ----------------------------------

    Yes, Rothbard believed that the races were inherently different genetically. But he was no extreme racist.

    Pull your head out of your ass.

  • ||

    Oh, Rothbard was speaking about Malcolm X, by the way.

  • Rothbard Denialist Rages||

    Like talking to Fundamentalist Muslims. Rothbard was a man of peace, eh? LOL

    The quote is right here:

    In that case, the intelligence argument will become useful to defend the market economy and the free society from ignorant or self-serving attacks. In short; racialist science is properly not an act of aggression or a cover for oppression of one group over another, but, on the contrary, an operation in defense of private property against assaults by aggressors.

    The Irrepressible Rothbard
    Essays of Murray N. Rothbard
    Edited by Llewellyn H. Rockwell, Jr.
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/ir/Ch75.html

  • ||

    Yeah, he believed that races were genetically different, even to the point of saying that some races are smarter than others. I disagree, but testing seems to support this conclusion. Personally, I agree that intelligence and genetics are related, but even within racial groups, intelligence varies dramatically. Notice how he never actually said that he thinks that black people are genetically "dumb." They are just wired "differently" in Rothbard's opinion. Sorta racist, but you clearly don't understand a goddamn thing about the man.

  • ||

    Considering that is the worst quote that you have, I'm not impressed. Dig up something real, or GTFO.

  • Goddam Thing||

    Clearly, I do understand him. First, he was often contradictory, as many people are, and as all libertarians are.

  • ||

    Where did he contradict himself? What are you going on about now, moron. You came in here waving your cock around, and now you are acting like you want to change the subject. Fuck off.

  • Libertarian Jesus Fuck Off||

    Is Rothbard going to strike me with lightning at any second now for my apostasy?

  • ||

    No. But now everyone realizes how stupid and arrogant you are.

  • sevo||

    Goddam Thing|8.29.11 @ 9:14PM|#
    "Clearly, I do understand him."

    Along with most every other 'subject' you've included in your posts.

  • Arrogant White Indian||

    Why can't I be arrogant for being better than libertarians propertarians?

    Yes, I am feeling might damn superior! Better than you!

    You have the courage to tell the masses what no politician told them: you are inferior and all the improvements in your conditions which you simply take for granted you owe to the effort of men who
    are better than you.

    ~Ludwig von Mises, letter to Ayn Rand, January 23, 1956

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    you are inferior and all the improvements in your conditions which you simply take for granted you owe to the effort of men who
    are better than you.

    Including that computer you're typing on, Princess.

    Weev's not going to make you his bottom no matter how hard you try to impress him.

  • Red Rocks Rockin taxes?||

    Do you pay taxes? How's them public roads you drive on to take your children to a public school?

    Hypocrite!

    LOL

    And fun was had by all.

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Do you pay taxes? How's them public roads you drive on to take your children to a public school?

    Are you living the Shackbrah lifestyle? How long have you subsisted on what Mother Nature provided you?

    Hypocrite!

    LOL

  • ||

    Dude, am I going to have to go through quote by quote pointing out exactly how each one is retarded and taken out of context? Goddammit.

  • sevo||

    You should actually read the links you post. And be embarrassed.

  • sevo||

    tk,
    My comment was directed at brain-dead-primitivist, not you.

  • ||

    lol, i know. I just can't understand how people can call Rothbard a racist. He clearly had some opinions that make you wince at first glance, but he was a fan of MALCOLM X FOR FUCK'S SAKE! Yeah, over an eighty year career of writing ALL OF THE TIME, i'm sure that anybody would have a few writings that they would be embarrassed about. Considering that he wrote during a time when racism was the norm, it is amazingly non racist of him that he never wrote an article, "Why I hate Niggers, by Murray Rothbard." He could have easily written such an article when the black power movement was new, and nobody would have called for his head or anything.

  • Some of my best friends are...||

    Black.

    LOL

    Sorry, tinkle weige, you can't erase what Rothbard said. You can't try to put it in the context you wish it were in, as Fundamentalists also do with their Holy Scriptures.

    Rothbard's quotes show he was less interested in liberty and more interested in getting more stuff.

    Libertarian? Propertarian!

    Which makes you the laughing stock of the nation.

    Get the Hell Off My Property!
    http://www.theonion.com/articl.....rty,16579/

  • ||

    In other words, you have no fucking argument!

    I'm not racist either, in my opinion, but I do believe in differences between races. My girlfriend is asian, I'm white, and I have plenty of black friends, and we all pretty much agree about Rothbard.

    Can I assume that you are just an idiot white boy overcompensating by pretending to be the anti racist?

  • Argument Clinic||

    In other words, you have no fucking argument!

    White courtesy phone, Tinkle Winkle, Monty Python is on the line.

    Argument Clinic
    MontyPython
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQFKtI6gn9Y

  • sevo||

    Some of my best friends are...|8.29.11 @ 9:12PM|#
    "Black."

    Could well be. But I'm guessing they're embarrassed for you.

  • libtardwhochangesname||

    Ridicule and insults. That is all I am good for, you point out misquotes, out of context links and I just laugh at you because I have got no points at all to my delusional bull shit.

  • jtuf||

    *Sigh* Knowing that the Liberals will be back here preaching the virtues of limited government as soon as Team Red is in charge makes their trolling more bearable.

  • facepalm||

    "But by not doing anything to try and stop that, you’re condoning it"

    Nice criteria for government intervention there. We must ban all behaviors we aren't willing to condone. The left isn't socially liberal for any actual principled reasons, they just happen to condone those deviant behaviors.

  • jtuf||

    But is “unemployee” a career path?

    Yes. It's called working in film/theater.

  • ||

    I must have added at at least another dozen handles to my ignore list tonight.

    I suggest that everyone do that, instead of feeding it's pathetic need for attention.

  • Whitey the Injun||

    Sorry, Mmy derp drugs ran out last night

  • sevo||

    Enough.
    Brain-dead-primitive joins Tony and MNG as 'clever' in responses, without a clue as to how stupid they really are.

  • Arrogant White Indian||

    Does anybody care if I feel a little arrogant tonight for being better than pissant libertarians propertarians?

    Yes, I am feeling might damn superior! Better than you!

    You have the courage to tell the masses what no politician told them: you are inferior and all the improvements in your conditions which you simply take for granted you owe to the effort of men who are better than you.

    ~Ludwig von Mises, letter to Ayn Rand, January 23, 1956

    God I love those people for giving me the courage to tell you that you are inferior and I am better than you.

    And to hell with Eddie Willers. (You're a mere Eddie Willers unless you're as rich (i.e., productive) as the billionaire Koch Bros. Ya didn't know that?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    For someone who's that superior, you sure seem to have a problem kicking that technology addiction you lambaste everyone else for.

    When you do start the Shackbrah lifestyle you pine so hard for? BLM land is out there by the square mile.

  • Red Rocks Rockin taxes?||

    you sure seem to have a problem kicking that technology addiction you lambaste everyone else for

    You sure seem to have a problem kicking that public roads and public schools and paying taxes for civilization addiction you lambaste everyone else for.

  • ||

    Sigh, if somebody robs you and then gives you something, you don't sit and wonder at the magnificence of the "gift." You demand that the person not rob you in the first place.

  • Arrogant White Indian||

    Ya think, Tinky Winky? Now does that apply to me too? hmm?

    The agricultural City-State (civilization) is externally invasive and internally repressive.

    Lots of us can't live like we want. Including libertarians.

    Problems is, you're libertarian because you miss the liberty your ancestors had until a short time ago. Yet you're sucking on the City-Statists' dick, because they've sold you a switch-and-bait bill of goods, and libertarians propertarians end up supporting the system that enslaves them.

    All because you don't understand the last 60 years of archeology and anthropology that has discredited the Hobbesian mythology.

    Life wasn't nasty, brutish and short. It was the Original Affluent Lifestyle. (Sahlins) In a Non-State sociopolitical typology. (Service)

    So how's that Stockholm Syndrome working out?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    Lots of us can't live like we want. Including libertarians.

    Sure you can--it's been repeatedly pointed out that in the US, there are plenty of spaces to set up your shack and live your Affluent Lifestyle. The Unabomber managed it for several years and would have lived out the rest of his days in his own Shackbrah paradise if he hadn't decided to start bombing people.

    So what exactly is holding you back?

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    You sure seem to have a problem kicking that public roads and public schools and paying taxes for civilization addiction you lambaste everyone else for.

    You sure seem to have a real problem kicking that shopping in the grocery stores and living in a climate-controlled building and using the technology of civilization addiction you lambaste everyone else for.

  • ||

    YOu see, this is why you will never learn. All you do is look for "gotcha" quotes made by your opponents instead of actually trying to understand what is that they are saying. Please, seek help.

  • ||

    Me and my girlfriend are sitting here laughing our asses off at your comments, by the way.

  • White Indian||

    Like the crackling of thorns under the pot, so is the laughter of fools. This too is meaningless. ~Ecclesiastes 7:6

  • Red Rocks Rockin||

    We certainly see it in action from your posts on a daily basis.

  • ||

    I have been, as well... at 3 am

  • Arrogant White Indian||

    I understand what he's saying. Libertarians propertarians will always put privation property ahead of any other value. "Liberty" is just a bait-and-switch strategy to sell a secular economic religion* of getting more stuff, and Rothbard & Co. are the well-paid priestcraft of those who want that message spread.
    __________
    Rome under the Republic had a civic religion, consisting of the reading of entrails and other sensible precautions. The civic religion of the modern world is social engineering, which depends on similar techniques of divination…

    The members of the American economics profession, as [Thurman] Arnold contended, performed a vital practical role in maintaining this unique system of corporate socialism American style. It was their role to prevent the American public from achieving a correct understanding of the actual workings of the American economic system. Economists instead were assigned the task to dispense priestly blessings that would allow business to operate independent of damaging political manipulation. They accomplished this task by means of their message of “laissez faire religion, based on a conception of a society composed of competing individuals.” However false as a description of the actual U.S. economy, this vision in the mind of the American public was in practice “transferred automatically to industrial organizations with nation-wide power and dictatorial forms of government.” Even though the arguments of economists were misleading and largely fictional, the practical — and beneficial — result of their deception was to throw a “mantle of protection … over corporate government” from various forms of outside interference. Admittedly, as the economic “symbolism got farther and farther from reality, it required more and more ceremony to keep it up.” But as long as this arrangement worked and there could be maintained “the little pictures in the back of the head of the ordinary man,” the effect was salutary — “the great [corporate] organization was secure in its freedom and independence.” It was this very freedom and independence of business professionals to pursue the correct scientific answer — the efficient answer — on which the economic progress of the United States depended.
    — Robert H. Nelson, REACHING FOR HEAVEN ON EARTH

    Economic efficiency has been the greatest source of social legitimacy in the United States for the past century, and economists have been the priesthood defending this core social value of our era.

    — Robert H. Nelson, ECONOMICS AS RELIGION

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Is there some sort of point to this, White Indian?

  • libtardwhochangesname||

    No there isn't because I don't have a point, don't you heartless bigots get it. I am just trying to piss you off even though I am making you laugh your asses off. I am a failure, always will be a failure I'll go back to jerking off at gay porn living in my mom's basement, too fat to get out of this chair that has broke a dozen times! White Indian! Propertarian! Need a big black man to suck my cock!

  • Eddie Willers||

    Stop quoting me!!

  • [Thurman] Arnold||

    I agree. 100%.

  • Robert||

    I'm chronically unemployed/underemployed. You can't just pitch yourself lower and expect to be given better consideration. Potential employers consider you overqualified and hence taboo. The only exception is gov't work, where they hire on the basis of how you test on objective exams in most cases, and of political cx in others.

    Also, potential employers don't trust potential employees. They don't trust them to be smart, and thus be able to pick up the skills they need on the job within a short time -- less time than the time they cast about for an applicant with the very particular experience they're looking for. And they don't trust them, period, so jobs are best gotten thru personal cx such as friends and in a few cases friends-of-friends; social networking on the Internet doesn't cut it. So if your friends aren't people in your field, you're screwed.

  • sevo||

    "So if your friends aren't people in your field, you're screwed."

    Dunno what to say about this, other than you've convinced yourself that starvation is the only option.
    Have a ball being the victim; many have found great solace in blaming 'the system' rather than doing something.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Man, if I had to choose between starving to death or a government job...

  • Robert||

    These are just observ'ns I've made. Someone upthread suggested that somebody wasn't having trouble getting a job, they were just having trouble getting one at the salary s/he was used to. I have to point out there are barriers to employment at lower paying jobs than one has worked at in the past. It doesn't make sense to me; I would think employers would be happy to pick up a bargain. However, I'm told that employers are afraid anyone hired under such conditions would be bored and/or bitter and hence a bad worker.

    All I know is, I didn't mind working in various capacities for the 2010 US census. The Census Bureau has no qualms about hiring the overqualified. Of course it might be the same for a private employer undertaking a massive infrequent project with temps, but the only ones I can think of like that are in construction, mostly very specialized work.

  • ||

    My wife was looking for a part-time job as a waitress - she has two college degrees - and ended up getting turned down everywhere, even though she has experience being a waitress.

    My theory at the time was the managers (not the owners) were afraid of hiring someone more "credentialed" than themselves.

    Heck, you even see this is in the larger corporate world. Our IT director didn't want to hire someone for an entry-level position because the applicant used to run an entire (and larger) IT department. The poor guy just wanted a job, but he was "over-qualified".

  • Robert||

    I've frequently left credentials off my resume for this reason. I tried applying to work for Lab Support Inc. (now On Assignment), only to find out they didn't hire Ph.D.s. Later I tried applying as someone without a Ph.D., but they said they knew me already. I've thought about working up a new identity.

  • yeah its called "competing"||

    "So if your friends aren't people in your field, you're screwed."

    Or paraphrasing: "if people don't have some reason to hire you instead of the hundreds over the other applicants, you're screwed".

    Welcome to the way the world has always worked.

  • Almanian||

    I see White Injun managed to torment the throng all day. That's cause he's "independently wealthy", libertardians!

    PWNED!

    See you tomorrow (metaphorically speaking).

  • steve||

    anyone else think Martin Short is the most unfunny comedian in the history of comedy?

  • Mr. FIFY||

    There was some pear-shaped "comedian" who used to appear on NBC-era Letterman, but - thankfully - I can't remember his name.

  • Whitey the Injun||

    no, that would be Jay Leno

  • ||

    That would be Dane Cook or Seth Rogan.

  • goneGalt||

    Calvert DeForest, better known as Larry "Bud" Melman.

  • Metazoan||

    The only lesson that I've learned from this whole thing is that I was told not to feed the troll earlier for a VERY good reason.

  • canada goose parkas ||

    Very cool, some interesting arguments! I appreciate you making these thoughts online, the rest of the site is also high quality.

  • casquette new era dc||

    well!

  • ||

    I've been out of the military for nearly a year now, going to school. I've had 3 jobs, and quit them all to focus on school. None of them were high skilled jobs, and certainly paid less than the military did. AZ isn't exactly a hot spot for job growth, but they're out there, if you bother to actually look ...

  • Sean Mack||

    It seems almost unsporting to offer a serious comments this late in the thread, but the true heart of this story is fairly simple:

    Anti-discrimination statutes and wrongful termination case law have driven employers to be afraid of firing, and thus, to be terrified of hiring. That fear has led them straight into the arms of Human Resources "experts", who promise to protect them against bad decisions with a bunch of pseudoscience about how you can pick the "right people" everytime. Rather poetically, the basic gist of that pseudoscience is to force individuals into stupid categories like "long-term unemployed" and "overqualified", and then to discriminate against them with a prejudice totally blind to even the most obvious mitigating factors.

    The solution, of course, is not to keep piling on laws until every group is protected, but to dismantle the so-called protections that led to this in the first place. That, and everyone who holds an H.R. degree should be taken out and shot...you know, with some sort of non-lethal, libertarian-approved munitions.

  • ||

    RTFA
    She's not asking for a law. She's trying to influence the labor market...as labor. She's trying to influence the company Monster.com as one of its customers.

    That's called capitalism.

  • Sean Mack||

    RTF...my comment. I wasn't just talking about the petition lady, but about the many statists who share her opinion and are happy to use force on its behalf.

    Besides, do you really think that woman wouldn't support a law banning such "discrimination", if that were offered to her?

  • ||

    All one needs to do is read the comment “The whole entrepreneurial thing has become more of a focal point, sadly, in the last couple years.” to understand this woman's frame of reference. Yes, its a shame that people now need to learn how to be self sufficient instead of waiting for corporate american to bestow its largess on them.

  • ||

    "waiting for corporate american to bestow its largess on them"

    This happened where in the article?

  • ||

    Aw, gee. The SBA declined to give a left-winger a loan? I'm so sad.

  • ||

    If you're over-qualified, strongly consider 'dumbing down' your resume. Instead of touting your uber-leadership position in IT, tout your knowledge as a Desktop services drone, sysadmin or whatever. Talk about all the discrete technical skills you used in your position (especially those which relate to the position you're applying for, and DON'T go on about 'Managed a 100-member team of...yadda yadda yadda.'

    There's no law that say you have to shoot yourself in the foot. You don't have to show ALL your cards ALL the time.

  • ||

    I agree in the main with the advise. However be prudent. If you get to the second phase of consideration and the company does a background check and finds you are applying for a position several levels below your skill set that you did not put down. It might be the emphasis they need to just eliminate you.

    Happened to me once.

  • ||

    Your goal is to convince the person hiring you that you're *almost* as good at (and qualified for) the job as he or she is...but not quite.

  • Rick||

    Yeah sure, blame the unemployed and pretend that comment thread snark directed toward "them" will make any difference at all. It's amazing that Cavanaugh has a job writing useless drivel like this. I find the vague calls for "do it yourself" amusing, especially since that passes for intelligent economic discussion around here. I don't suppose Reason is ever going to seriously reconsider its faith in central banking, fiat money, and Friedman? Or how about Federalism for that matter and the naive notion around here that the Federal government is somehow redeemble if it just magically "got smaller". Probably not. It's easier instead to have a shallow hack like Cavanaugh and other shallow commentators who believe they're infallible rip a lady for collecting signatures. It's nice to see that nothing has changed at the "libertarian" Reason.com. The liberty movement does not need any of you.

  • ||

    My general rule is that if they have "Editor" underneath their name, their official (not blog) stuff is pretty well vetted, researched, and put together. If they are anything other than some kind of "Editor"--read at your own risk.

  • ||

    (It’s also not clear how shaming or hurting employers is an effective job search strategy.)

    It's not clear how sitting in the front of a segregated bus and shaming the bus company is an effective transportation strategy.

    It's not clear how trying to attend an all-white school and hurting those white students is an effective education strategy.

    Reason's new official social policy: Don't rock the boat.

    Reason's new official labor policy: Don't try to influence the labor market; it's inelastic and the invisible hand is bullshit. Don't claim that labor is voluntary or that you have any bargaining power as a worker. Capitalism is top-down and works one-way only. We're all slaves and shouldn't get uppity, it inconveniences the masters and only leads to beatings.

  • Kelly Wiedemer||

    jcalton - You have summed it up better than most of us could - well stated.

    There is so much that's left out of this article and so many judgemental assumptions** are made (as is always the case)that it is ointless toi even begin.

    For that reason and many others, your comment couldn't bemore succinct or accurate - and is much appreciated buy someone who couldn't agree more.

    **
    incomplete and arrogant 'assumptions' being made (ie I've been more successful in advocating for the unemployed than I was in my career?!).

    I guess maybe it depends on what facts are known - and more importantly whatfacts remain unknown, how you define 'success' and a host of many optherfactors for this statement to have any validity to it...

    Kelly Wiedemer

  • ||

    Personally I don't like the idea of posting 'only employed need apply'. It defeats the baseline that will lead to a recovery.

    However I can see the employers side of it. In an economy like this the number of resumes/applications will probably double. Well that translates into costs. By law employers have to keep the applications/resumes on file for a proscribed period of time. To save costs one will attempt to stem the flow of applicants. Sad but real fact.

  • You dont know what poor is...||

    I moved to the US from a developing country in 2008, right after the crash. I lived off of minimum wage workcing at subway. Sure, I had a shitty apartment that i shared with my cousin and our two friends but guess what. It was right on the beach in Miami. I was able to go out 6 nights a week. I was able to buy a computer for my father. I was able to travel for one month in mexico. I was able to buy new clothes and save some dollars to bring back when my visa expired.

    Fuck you. Fuck you all in the ass.

  • ||

    Hm? In 1970 I had 5 roommates in one flat living in a bad part of town. What is your point? Is your point that when you are young, living a spartan lifestyle is ok. On that point I will agree. Try that spartan lifestyle when you have 3 kids, a new baby or you are much, much older.

    From your post ya gotta be young because nobody with responsibilities goes "out six nights a week." Also your "F" statement points to a very infantile manner of making points.

  • ||

    What's the problem here? If Chinese workers will work for 75 cents and hour, I guess American's should suck it up and take the 75 cent an hour job. But seriously....this is a problem that isn't going to be addressed by new laws. They have a law against age discrimination but ask anyone 50 if it exists. Yes it does and if you are in your mid to late fifties....finding a good paying job is rare. The solution is one of production but the same business owners that say unemployed need not apply have the mentality that using Chinese 75 cent an hour labor production is ok. Ok for them but not so ok for society.

    But what do I know? I've been self employed since 1974. All that I know is what I see happening to other people.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Video Game Nation: How gaming is making America freer – and more fun.
  • Matt Welch: How the left turned against free speech.
  • Nothing Left to Cut? Congress can’t live within their means.
  • And much more.

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement