Comment on Occupied Wall Street by Balddog4
It's also a difference between which side should do more: public or private?
I guess you have the argument for the private side, but for the public side is the argument that for businesses, helping people comes second, third, or even last, but certainly not first; making money comes first. So when the primary goal is to make money, and they are allowed to make money by any means necessary, they're not necessarily going to look out for the prosperity of their workers, the ones other than the managers and officers. The idea that people are naturally selfish and greedy which I think is generally true. Therefore, since not everyone is altruistic (most people probably aren't) laws have to be made in order to make sure the bosses consider the prosperity of the workers. Stuff like safety laws, minimum wage laws, laws allowing workers to settle grievances with their bosses, etc. (Implying that the society isn't at a state of worker's self-management in which there is less of a dichotomy, if any, between workers and bosses.)
Or so the argument goes.
Also interesting is that Ron Paul is seen as a sort of "godfather" of the Tea Party, but I've encountered my fair share of Occupiers who support him as well.
I guess you have the argument for the private side, but for the public side is the argument that for businesses, helping people comes second, third, or even last, but certainly not first; making money comes first. So when the primary goal is to make money, and they are allowed to make money by any means necessary, they're not necessarily going to look out for the prosperity of their workers, the ones other than the managers and officers. The idea that people are naturally selfish and greedy which I think is generally true. Therefore, since not everyone is altruistic (most people probably aren't) laws have to be made in order to make sure the bosses consider the prosperity of the workers. Stuff like safety laws, minimum wage laws, laws allowing workers to settle grievances with their bosses, etc. (Implying that the society isn't at a state of worker's self-management in which there is less of a dichotomy, if any, between workers and bosses.)
Or so the argument goes.
Also interesting is that Ron Paul is seen as a sort of "godfather" of the Tea Party, but I've encountered my fair share of Occupiers who support him as well.