Unemployment Rate

[Gustaf]

I don't like intellectual dishonesty and general hypocrisy

huh?  he is dishonest and admits to being dishonest.  where's the hypocrisy?

you both should stop replying.

let's have peace

No, at least I haven't seen him admit to it. If he does, I will let it go.

Why do you care so much?

Because the most fundamental prerequisite for any sort of progress is clear thinking. If contradictions are allowed, it is impossible to have meaningful discussions.

Besides, it is the only sort of thing really worth my while to discuss. If someone says, "freedom is better than equality" and someone else says "no, equality is better than freedom" it doesn't usually lead anywhere. Just stating contrarian value judgements is a dead-end, since you are usually unable to convince anyone. Sure, it may be important for politicians to do it, but why would I waste my time preaching my opinions to random people on the internet?

Furthermore, why would I not care about this? BRTD cares about suburbs, Phnrocket about boobs, Jmfcst about the Bible, Stark about Jews, CarlHayden about Mexicans, etc...what makes inconsistency and dishonesty less worthwhile than the majority of subjects discussed here?

I try to do a little work by fighting stupidity. Hopefully, something good eventually comes out of that.

[opebo]

Let me get some fact straight here:

1. You think workers are better off in the United States than in Thailand? Is that on the record?

Yes, they have more money in toto, certainly.  I have never claimed otherwise.

2. Hookers have to give HALF the money to the owner? Sounds like they are being used and exploited to me. (and I'm going to save you the embarassement of saying "why, Gustaf, you silly Swede, half is a lot more than the slaves under American capitalism can expect" and tell you right now that labour providers typically recieve about two-thirds of GDP in developed countries, with capital owners getting roughly a third). Besides, I did a little internet research and it seems as if half is the best they can hope for.

Yeah, 1/2, 1/3, whatever.  I'm sure that there are plenty of hookers in Thailand who only pay 1/3 to the owner.  There are those - freelancers - who seem to get away with paying nothing.  Most girls working in bars which cater to foreigners tend to make a bigger percentage - probably more like 70%.  When I mentioned 50/50 I was referring to the lower end Thai venues - basically describing a 'worst case scenario'.

.. But that is for Swedish 50-year olds going to bars specifically catering to them. I'm pretty sure Thais buy their prostitutes much, much cheaper.

Some thais do, but middle class ones typically spend more than Swedes or Americans on holiday.  Thai men are very picky.  But, as you say, 500-1000 back (say 15-30 dollars) is normal in cheap beach towns, and double that is the norm in expensive bangkok.  High end Thai venues will be 1,500-2,500 per 1.5 hour session, with a very few in the 2,500-5,000 baht range who have to be 'model quality'.  Basic Thai brothels and so forth will be around 500 or so.

As you said, the foreigner serving girls usually get only a couple per day, while those in thai venues usually get several, and the lower down the rungs, they more they get.

And you talk about the attraction of the job - do you mean to imply that these Thai  prostitutes are free agents following their ultimate goal in life, as opposed to the rest of us deluded drones working in the West?

No, its just like any other job, Gustaf.  Perhaps with a little more social stigma and a big of a pay bonus as a result, but basically just like any other job.

[Gustaf]

Let me get some fact straight here:

1. You think workers are better off in the United States than in Thailand? Is that on the record?

Yes, they have more money in toto, certainly.  I have never claimed otherwise.

2. Hookers have to give HALF the money to the owner? Sounds like they are being used and exploited to me. (and I'm going to save you the embarassement of saying "why, Gustaf, you silly Swede, half is a lot more than the slaves under American capitalism can expect" and tell you right now that labour providers typically recieve about two-thirds of GDP in developed countries, with capital owners getting roughly a third). Besides, I did a little internet research and it seems as if half is the best they can hope for.

Yeah, 1/2, 1/3, whatever.  I'm sure that there are plenty of hookers in Thailand who only pay 1/3 to the owner.  There are those - freelancers - who seem to get away with paying nothing.  Most girls working in bars which cater to foreigners tend to make a bigger percentage - probably more like 70%.  When I mentioned 50/50 I was referring to the lower end Thai venues - basically describing a 'worst case scenario'.

.. But that is for Swedish 50-year olds going to bars specifically catering to them. I'm pretty sure Thais buy their prostitutes much, much cheaper.

Some thais do, but middle class ones typically spend more than Swedes or Americans on holiday.  Thai men are very picky.  But, as you say, 500-1000 back (say 15-30 dollars) is normal in cheap beach towns, and double that is the norm in expensive bangkok.  High end Thai venues will be 1,500-2,500 per 1.5 hour session, with a very few in the 2,500-5,000 baht range who have to be 'model quality'.  Basic Thai brothels and so forth will be around 500 or so.

As you said, the foreigner serving girls usually get only a couple per day, while those in thai venues usually get several, and the lower down the rungs, they more they get.

And you talk about the attraction of the job - do you mean to imply that these Thai  prostitutes are free agents following their ultimate goal in life, as opposed to the rest of us deluded drones working in the West?

No, its just like any other job, Gustaf.  Perhaps with a little more social stigma and a big of a pay bonus as a result, but basically just like any other job.

So, they too are being exploited by their owners, living as miserable wretches under the capitalist boot, unable to do what they really want with their lives?

[opebo]

So, they too are being exploited by their owners, living as miserable wretches under the capitalist boot, unable to do what they really want with their lives?

Obviously.  Only owners have power, Gustaf, as you well know.  However, being a cute young girl does have some advantages, particularly in an aging society like Thailand (or the US, or most parts of the world).

[Gustaf]

So, they too are being exploited by their owners, living as miserable wretches under the capitalist boot, unable to do what they really want with their lives?

Obviously.  Only owners have power, Gustaf, as you well know.  However, being a cute young girl does have some advantages, particularly in an aging society like Thailand (or the US, or most parts of the world).

And do you feel any moral qualms about exploting them, being the owner of the boot that presses them into the mud, so to speak?

[opebo]

And do you feel any moral qualms about exploting them, being the owner of the boot that presses them into the mud, so to speak?

Gustaf, you don't seem to know me very well after all these years.  I have always poo-pooed the idea of objective morality.  I never have any moral qualms.

[Gustaf]

And do you feel any moral qualms about exploting them, being the owner of the boot that presses them into the mud, so to speak?

Gustaf, you don't seem to know me very well after all these years.  I have always poo-pooed the idea of objective morality.  I never have any moral qualms.

So, you do not then, I trust, have any objections to other people exploiting the poor? This compassionate warm heart that you sometimes refer to is just pretending, I gather?

[opebo]

And do you feel any moral qualms about exploting them, being the owner of the boot that presses them into the mud, so to speak?

Gustaf, you don't seem to know me very well after all these years.  I have always poo-pooed the idea of objective morality.  I never have any moral qualms.

So, you do not then, I trust, have any objections to other people exploiting the poor? This compassionate warm heart that you sometimes refer to is just pretending, I gather?

The objection is a political one and to some extent an intellectual one, Gustaf, not a moral one.  I don't think of it as 'wrong' that the rich eat the poor, but I just find it somewhat dubious that the poor don't seem to mind.  It seems they may be taken in by some deceptions, or in any case their political actions do not seem to serve their own interests.