Quote:
Originally Posted by Mikeuk
Yes, but you cannot impose equality without the exercise of state tyranny.
Arbitrary treatment of existing employees can cause severe hardship and in such cases it may be that intervention can be justified.
But this does not apply where no contract exists. I can see no justification whatsoever for regulating the right of employers to choose any candidate they want for any reason.
|
You shouldn't "impose" anything if you are the state organ. It is supposed to represent the will of the people in a democracy. (I am merely presuming this means anything. It doesn't mean much any more, but if one examines what people today think they want and what they are getting out of the state a lot of them are getting what they want. So, in one way, populist politics is proving its point.)
If I were up against you, for example, in a race for the hot seat and you said that you were against certain people being employed on the equality principle as we know it and I said that this should be addressed in terms of duty to those who pay for the system they democratically elect and that this seems to hold room for private employers to hire and fire whomever they please, but that the people who are most vulnerable must have their needs and concerns about employment law addressed, who do you think would win the election?
