User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 111

  1. #41
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    Given your assertion that this is statistically untrue, do you think you might be able to provide something to substantiate your assertion.

    Like maybe statistics?
    Productivity has been steadily increasing since the industrial revolution. It did not take a major plunge when the Equal Employment Opportunity Act passed in 1972.

    It's very easy to google "US productivity." Pretty sure you can manage.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  2. #42
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    Wouldn't this take away the opportunity for business owners to provide financial incentive for things like merit? Performance? Initiative?
    There is nothing excluding people from doing 'bonus pay' work either. But seriously, reflect on how many jobs you have worked where you knew what your other co-workers were making? And what the national average you should be paying is? The truth is, civilian companies can adjust exactly what they're paying each employee individually and no one would really know. How would you know if the person next to you is getting paid less for the same work without a basis standard that people are aware of?

    Even the army has their pay posted openly for all the world to read. That doesn't mean you can't make money other ways--going to schools, getting trained in other languages, waiving normal demands for promotions in the case of outstanding workers.. those sort of incentives are always there--and everyone complains about what garbage the army is. So, I don't think it'd be invasive to say "Hey, attention all cashiers at walmart ever. If you work here for 3 years or less, you get paid x for full time, and x for part time. You get x raise after 3 years. We also do performance bonuses for people who work full time and part time for outstanding work, covering for other employees, and not calling in sick." I don't at all see how posting the *baseline* pay detracts from incentive pay.

    And infact, if that pay were more out loud and in the open, both sides could be happy. Women know exactly what they're making at major companies, and everyone can shut up about whether short, black, disabled, or gender-whatever people are getting paid or not. Like I said, it doesn't have to be PUBLIC knowledge--like joe schmoe from x company cannot go into and see what you're making. But reporting to the government what employees are paid, and making each level aware of their base line standard, I think that's not at all invasive.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  3. #43
    Senior Member OWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    There is nothing excluding people from doing 'bonus pay' work either.
    I guess I'm not really talking about bonus pay. Let me try to ask the question differently. Should a man who does what he can to avoid work all day, or knows little about the job, or makes constant mistakes, make the same as a woman who does impeccable, professional, and more valuable work? It seems to me that under the system you propose by law, both would make the same. I as a business owner would prefer the ability to reward the better performer with higher compensation.

    But seriously, reflect on how many jobs you have worked where you knew what your other co-workers were making? And what the national average you should be paying is? The truth is, civilian companies can adjust exactly what they're paying each employee individually and no one would really know. How would you know if the person next to you is getting paid less for the same work without a basis standard that people are aware of?
    The primary focus of my political, economic, and philosophical worldview, is human liberty. I consider a job to be a contractual arrangement between an employer, and an employee. If both find the situation to their mutual satisfaction, they can and should continue the situation. If one or the other no longer finds the situation satisfactory, they may end the situation. When I work, my concern is not what the person next to me makes. It is what I make. I ask myself if the compensation fairly rewards the efforts and talents I put forth. If the compensation is inadequate, I will terminate the arrangement, and seek compensation which does satisfy me.

    In a free society, I am not at liberty to avail upon my neighbors through the instrument of government force, to compel my employer to provide compensation he is unwilling to provide. Nor am I as an employer, at liberty to compel services from others, under conditions they don't find satisfactory. This is the nature of a free market.

    Unfortunately we as a nation have destroyed the notion of free markets, and inserted players into the employment contract who are not party to the contract. The results have had a less than positive effect on the free market, and on the availability of jobs.

  4. #44
    Senior Member OWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cafe View Post
    Productivity has been steadily increasing since the industrial revolution.
    LOL

  5. #45
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    I guess I'm not really talking about bonus pay. Let me try to ask the question differently. Should a man who does what he can to avoid work all day, or knows little about the job, or makes constant mistakes, make the same as a woman who does impeccable, professional, and more valuable work? It seems to me that under the system you propose by law, both would make the same. I as a business owner would prefer the ability to reward the better performer with higher compensation.
    You'd be a bit naive, in my opinion, to think that doesn't currently happen. I've made less, or equal pay, to many a people that sucked at their jobs on purpose. But that's the thing about lower end jobs. If you want a job paid by performance, you typically aren't going to seek out walmart cashier position. And likely there are other factors there--disciplinary actions, and eventually being report, or fired. But until disciplinary actions are taken.. absolutely yes they ought to be paid the same. I've never ever worked a job where someone's pay was taken away because they showed up late. Usually that happened with sending them home early, or telling them not to come in that day.

    The primary focus of my political, economic, and philosophical worldview, is human liberty. I consider a job to be a contractual arrangement between an employer, and an employee. If both find the situation to their mutual satisfaction, they can and should continue the situation. If one or the other no longer finds the situation satisfactory, they may end the situation. When I work, my concern is not what the person next to me makes. It is what I make. I ask myself if the compensation fairly rewards the efforts and talents I put forth. If the compensation is inadequate, I will terminate the arrangement, and seek compensation which does satisfy me.
    Except this isn't one person talking to one employer. It's an entire group speaking to the bigger picture. And the bigger picture is as long as companies are not reporting what they pay their employees, there is no one on either side that can say for sure "yes, equal pay does exist now, stfu feminazis" or "holy crap, you're right, we're paying chicks like shit." There is really nothing to hide.. especially when this would benefit everyone and literally cause no ache or pain to anyone except companies being shady already.

    I've definitely accepted garbage pay for work I knew others were being paid more for simply because I needed money bad enough. And yeah, theoretically, that's my problem. But on a bigger scale of things.. we shouldn't treat people who need the money more than someone else just because they'd be willing to work for less. It's still the same amount of work, regardless of motivations--rich kid being independent of mommy and daddy's money, or poor kid trying to pay medical bills.

    In a free society, I am not at liberty to avail upon my neighbors through the instrument of government force, to compel my employer to provide compensation he is unwilling to provide. Nor am I as an employer, at liberty to compel services from others, under conditions they don't find satisfactory. This is the nature of a free market.
    I have a hint for you: free markets don't work. Time and time again it is shown that welfare, government subsidies and funding, and government support and regulations are absolutely necessary for sustaining an economy. A truly free market was in this country once--and it was disgusting and awful for both consumers and workers. There is a reason we have regulatory pieces in place. You're likely not old enough to have grown up in times before government regulations.. but if you read any of the literature on the matter, I'd like to think you'd be grateful that there is at least a little bit of hope that there is care put into the system. It's still a broken shit storm.. but it's not killing people with shit food and unregulated waste disposal and destroying anything beautiful and natural. The idealism of free market economies don't work in reality. It's the polar extreme opposite of communism.

    And at either rate, posting what you pay your employees for their work does not interrupt that even if free markets were your goal. I'm not saying change the rates--we have minimum wages and shit already. I'm saying just post it. Make people aware of what they should be making--so they know whether to report people or not.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  6. #46
    deplorable basketcase Tellenbach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    MBTI
    ISTJ
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Posts
    3,953

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jaquar
    People lie. Not just politicians.
    Let me guess - you've never lied. The OP has never lied.
    Yes, people lie, but not everyone is a habitual, serial liar like President Obama. There is a huge difference between a president who tells one lie/year and a president who tells 20 lies/year. You would struggle to find a single lie from George Washington or Honest Abe. By trivializing this immoral behavior, you are in effect, saying that honor and integrity don't matter. That's your right to hold such an opinion, but I'd like to think that Americans would hold their elected officials to higher standards.

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei
    But I would like to see two things in legislation:
    - Companies larger than x number of employees posting what they pay workers for x amount of work over x years of service. It doesn't have to right there on their website, but every employee ever should be able to look at walmarts in x state and see exactly what they are suppose to be getting paid.
    Very thoughtful post. I think this is a terrific idea but it should be voluntary.

    Quote Originally Posted by SpankyMcFly
    FTR I don't think Obama "lied", technically, when he said that women make 27% less, but it sure is misleading/deceitful when you don't take into account all the factors that have been discussed.
    That wasn't the lie. The lie was in saying that the disparity was for equal work. Thanks for the Thomas Sowell clip; I just read one of his books.

    Finally, consider this point (made by a caller to the Larry Elder show):

    If employers can get away with paying women less for doing the same work, wouldn't they just hire women exclusively and then pocket the savings themselves?
    Senator Rand Paul is alive because of modern medicine and because his attacker punches like a girl.

  7. #47
    Senior Member OWK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    MBTI
    ENTP
    Enneagram
    7w8
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    You'd be a bit naive, in my opinion, to think that doesn't currently happen. I've made less, or equal pay, to many a people that sucked at their jobs on purpose. But that's the thing about lower end jobs. If you want a job paid by performance, you typically aren't going to seek out walmart cashier position.
    I guess that was my earlier point. If you find the conditions or compensation unfair, inadequate, or inappropriate, you exercise your option to leave, or not accept the conditions by taking the job in the first place.

    And likely there are other factors there--disciplinary actions, and eventually being report, or fired. But until disciplinary actions are taken.. absolutely yes they ought to be paid the same.
    Hmmm.. so who decides what their same pay ought to be? Is it you? The central committee of the people's worker's party? Who?

    I've never ever worked a job where someone's pay was taken away because they showed up late. Usually that happened with sending them home early, or telling them not to come in that day.
    Interesting. You must have a pretty limited workforce experience. Most people with something other than a transient or union job are subject to annual performance reviews. In that review, performance, attendance, tardiness, effort, generally factor into determining whether you will receive a pay increase, and the amount of said pay increase.

    Except this isn't one person talking to one employer. It's an entire group speaking to the bigger picture.
    Really? I'm pretty sure that every job is still just one employee talking to one employer.

    And the bigger picture is as long as companies are not reporting what they pay their employees, there is no one on either side that can say for sure "yes, equal pay does exist now, stfu feminazis" or "holy crap, you're right, we're paying chicks like shit." There is really nothing to hide.. especially when this would benefit everyone and literally cause no ache or pain to anyone except companies being shady already.
    I guess I wasn't making myself clear earlier. I have no objection whatsoever, if a company should decide to hire exclusively women just because they are women, and pay them twice the going rate. Nor do I have an objection if a company should hire exclusively men, and pay them twice the going rate. I am not a party to their employment contract, and it is therefore none of my business.

    I've definitely accepted garbage pay for work I knew others were being paid more for simply because I needed money bad enough.
    So at the time you made the decision, you weighed the options, and considered the path you chose better than the alternatives.

    And yeah, theoretically, that's my problem. But on a bigger scale of things.. we shouldn't treat people who need the money more than someone else just because they'd be willing to work for less. It's still the same amount of work, regardless of motivations--rich kid being independent of mommy and daddy's money, or poor kid trying to pay medical bills.
    I think I basically understand what you're saying here. We simply disagree as to causes and solutions.

    Decent fundamental middle-class life-sustaining jobs are scarce in this country. More scarce than they have ever been. In spite of all the nonsense talk about a "recovery", the economic conditions in this country are very poor. Labor (available workers who want jobs) are at a heavy surplus. Jobs are a quite limited commodity. The laws of economics dictate that job-seekers compete over the limited jobs, and the natural result is that employers can find adequate labor at a comparative discount at this time. This results in considerably lower pay.

    But why are jobs scarce? What happened to basic manufacturing jobs? Where did they go? Well they went overseas of course? But why? Why did they go overseas?

    They went overseas because of government policy.

    The United States currently has the highest corporate income tax rate in the world. Those who manufacture are penalized by having a tremendous amount of their profit confiscated by the state. They are also subjected to ridiculous regulatory burdens (compliance with which takes a company of 50 people approximately 3 or 4 full time employees who add noting to the bottom line). They are required benefits mandated by the government to full time employees that are expensive. This causes them to have to limit the hours of their employees, resulting in fewer full time jobs. The result of all of these burdens make it attractive to companies who manufacture, to do so overseas. Even including the burden of shipping materials overseas, and finished goods back.

    It is sad really. The United States used to be an industrial powerhouse. Now it is a dying economy propped up by cash infused into the markets by the FED, with money stolen from our grandchildren.

    But I want you to imagine what it would be like, if the corporate tax rate were reduced to zero percent for companies that manufacture exclusively inside the united states. If the regulatory burdens which are so overwhelming and so vast that no one even knows what the rules are, were curtailed. (bear in mind here that I'm not talking about environmental regulations).

    The economy would absolutely EXPLODE.

    Manufacturers would be scrambling to claim previously dormant industrial space. Jobs would be in abundance.

    And what would the impact of this boom be on the job market? Manufacturers would be fighting over labor resources. Competing for workers. Workers would be in short supply relative to industrial demand. And the laws of economics would dictate that wages would rise sharply as a result of the competition. That is how free markets work.



    I have a hint for you: free markets don't work. Time and time again it is shown that welfare, government subsidies and funding, and government support and regulations are absolutely necessary for sustaining an economy.
    I find these kinds of statements particularly interesting. They never come with any supporting evidence. Simply a declaration of "they exist, therefore they are necessary".

    I'm going to challenge you here.

    Tell me why these things are necessary. Show me some evidence.

  8. #48
    Emperor/Dictator kyuuei's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    MBTI
    enfp
    Enneagram
    8
    Posts
    13,877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    I guess that was my earlier point. If you find the conditions or compensation unfair, inadequate, or inappropriate, you exercise your option to leave, or not accept the conditions by taking the job in the first place.
    This is a bit out of scope though, don't you think? When you're talking to an employer, you might think you're getting a proper salary and pay. I literally had an employer flip the script on me in 10 minutes--saying $10 an hour, then $9 an hour for the exact same job in the exact same company but 10 minutes down the road at a different location. When I argued with him for a while, I got the $10 pay. If he had mentioned $9 off the bat, I would have never known that he intended on paying assistant managers $10 a hour. And a $1 an hour makes a big difference in pay for an hourly worker. And that's what I mean. You don't know what to argue your base line is. You assume bigger companies like that have a set standard, and they paint the picture to you to reflect that. And that's just not the case in reality.

    Hmmm.. so who decides what their same pay ought to be? Is it you? The central committee of the people's worker's party? Who?
    I would say it would be up to the company, as it has been before--only now they're reporting their decision to someone for reference purposes. There are standards like minimum wage out there they have to follow no matter what. You seem to be missing the point here with this question. The idea is not to force companies to change their pay rates--only to report what they are. This would force shady companies to fix their standards, because if they didn't, when employees flood to ask if their pay is correct or not, they'll find out this time.. instead of having literally no reference point like the way it's set up right now.

    Interesting. You must have a pretty limited workforce experience. Most people with something other than a transient or union job are subject to annual performance reviews. In that review, performance, attendance, tardiness, effort, generally factor into determining whether you will receive a pay increase, and the amount of said pay increase.
    I guess we're just thinking two different scopes here. I don't have much experience with a lot of fancy white collar work. Most of my work experience has been blue collar. Yeah there are people subject to things like reviews.. but for the most part? Starting out jobs? The jobs people tend to usually work, like manager positions at x store, or assistant manager positions at y store? You can slack off a lot, be tardy a lot, and depending on who your manager or boss is.. they might not care at all. It happens all the time. I'm sure at a big, fancy law firm or something, performance reviews matter--but you're also getting pay that demands being on-time all the time, and better performance each year, or whatever. That isn't really the job most people have though. So it isn't the job I really want to discuss here. Usually you don't get 'downgraded' in pay if your performance sucks at a 'regular' job. You get fired. Because usually you aren't working at a job that can be downgraded in any way because the work has a bare minimum baseline and nothing extra.

    Really? I'm pretty sure that every job is still just one employee talking to one employer.
    And I'm saying that that is the problem. There is no resource any employee can go to to see if their particular store, or branch, or boss is stiffing them out of benefits and pay and hours. They can go to HR--which is within the company, but you have to hope it's a good HR branch. And if you work at Walmart, one of the biggest job suppliers in the country, good luck. The bigger picture is, if the employee wants the job.. many times, they won't make much noise about things, no matter what their gender or pay is.

    So at the time you made the decision, you weighed the options, and considered the path you chose better than the alternatives.
    Yeah. Which is okay for myself and my particular situation. But that isn't really making the country grow as a whole, either. It's still barbaric for a developed country to take advantage of hungry people that are on the edge of collapse and know it. If you're taking a minimum wage job, it's because you have nothing else and you need it. That doesn't mean you can deny them promotional opportunities, and leave them in the dark about what others around them are getting paid, just because of their motivations. There ought to be an unbiased baseline. Something straight, and forward.

    You're saying people ought to be compensated for their performance. I agree. But the average job does not do that with quick promotions and bonus incentives outside of sales jobs. Most people get that promotion via slow grind, and effort, and time. And it doesn't matter how outstanding of an employee they are, sometimes they have to wait for seniority. And those people are absolutely necessary in the work force still. I'm thinking of the most common jobs out there--waitresses, cashiers, stockers.. the people that supply and function everything you touch in your daily life outside of work at the biggest companies in the country. I'm thinking something as simple as reporting what they pay everyone in a particular state and area is an easy, effective way of eliminating this "Do women get paid less" issue. If the bigger businesses aren't doing it, chances are the smaller businesses aren't either.

    Decent fundamental middle-class life-sustaining jobs are scarce in this country. More scarce than they have ever been. In spite of all the nonsense talk about a "recovery", the economic conditions in this country are very poor. Labor (available workers who want jobs) are at a heavy surplus. Jobs are a quite limited commodity. The laws of economics dictate that job-seekers compete over the limited jobs, and the natural result is that employers can find adequate labor at a comparative discount at this time. This results in considerably lower pay.
    My idea still doesn't impact the actual pay itself--it just compares equal work and equal pay within a particular division or store.

    But I want you to imagine what it would be like, if the corporate tax rate were reduced to zero percent for companies that manufacture exclusively inside the united states. If the regulatory burdens which are so overwhelming and so vast that no one even knows what the rules are, were curtailed. (bear in mind here that I'm not talking about environmental regulations).
    If you're saying buying American helps America, I absolutely agree and have no objections there. It has nothing to do with my simple proposal though. If you're saying the government sucks, I agree on several levels. But that doesn't mean it isn't without some purpose, and my proposal is a pretty straight forward one.

    I find these kinds of statements particularly interesting. They never come with any supporting evidence. Simply a declaration of "they exist, therefore they are necessary".

    I'm going to challenge you here.

    Tell me why these things are necessary. Show me some evidence.
    Ooohh, getting all super intellectual on me. :c poor me, how am I ever suppose to prove that a government agency does its job to the extent that it protects its citizens? The truth is, if you don't want to see something, you won't. There is loads and loads of history, text, research, and foundations of government agencies like the people that protect and create national parks and the food and drug administration that do important work and have people that vibrantly and genuinely care about their roles. OSHA, the FDA, the FDIC.. those are all there to protect citizens. The government gets a lot of shit wrong--and those things are not perfect--but they are there to protect citizens, and even with their existence we're still fighting an uphill battle about what is poisonous to us or not. That doesn't mean the government agency is total garbage though just because it isn't perfect.

    http://www.ourarchives.wikispaces.net/Factory
    The Jungle is a book that almost everyone is forced to read in school because of its appallingly accurate details about the meat industry despite it being a fictional novel. The ONLY real reason we aren't eating total garbage still is because of government intervention. Because someone said somewhere "If you don't stop doing this, we'll shut you down. And we have the power to do it. And we'll be inspecting your factories to make sure you're complying." The poisons, toxins, and other bullshit put into people's food is well documented in America, and not hundreds of years ago--in the lifetimes of people that were alive not too long ago.

    I've worked with, talked hours with, and held the hands of people who actually grew up in deplorable conditions--people who grew up in shittier times. With companies that advocated putting lysol into a woman's lady parts to 'clean' them. These sort of misinformation wasn't a new practice.. And misinformation gets spread around all the time still.

    If you want proof on how shitty the food industry was in America--you need only pick up literally any book ever on the subject. It is well documented knowledge. National parks were seriously threatened to be destroyed until the concept of National Parks was founded in the first place. This is simple history and research. I'm not going around collecting all the cute data for you so that I can fulfill your shitty 'challenge'. It's common information--and THE MOST common information at that. I don't agree on 77% because it's one single statistic that's vague. I do agree the food inspection government agency does its job because not only do I see them doing their jobs (x company has been tested and found to have horse meat in their food) all the time, but there is tons and tons of literature and resources on the matter over spans of time.

    You can demonize the government all you want, and no one is denying here between you and I that it is an inefficient system. But to go so far as to say that people won't do LITERALLY whatever they want when the government stops regulating how they prep, prepare, and serve food? Sorry. I don't buy that for a second. That is the idealism that created government agencies in the first place. We wouldn't need them if people had a personal moral code to uphold--but that isn't the way of big business. We have minimum wage because businesses were paying awful pay to people for no reason--regardless of gender. We have drug administrations because businesses weren't regulating themselves like decent people usually tend to do.

    If you're saying that if the government stopped protecting citizens that businesses would protect citizens just as much if not better.. I'm going to say you're full of shit and we have nothing more to discuss here because time and time again businesses have failed to protect their employees without government standards and regulations being required to be upheld.

    and NONE Of this at all effects my proposal. If you just want to argue about free markets, there are plenty plenty of threads on the subject elsewhere. This has nothing to do with women, and I really don't like your haughty "Oh, hunny, lets try to act like intellectuals for a moment" attitude. Stick to the subject at hand, or start a new thread elsewhere. (And before you get all "omg you're taking that sooo personally and emotionally :c you poor thing" your attitude is subjective data--meaning if I say you're sounding like a pretentious ass because of the comment you made, there's really no sense in refuting it with "You're just taking something personal that's meant to be rational and intellectual." There are literally a hundred ways to go about things.. and your attitude was one of the shittiest ways to do it out of all of them. So it's fair to say you were intending on being a little condescending in the way you were talking down to me. "Oh, please, go do what I do all the time little girl. Let me know what you find." I don't assume you're an uneducated person just because you're spouting all kinds of free market garbage. I should think the same courtesy ought to be extended to me.)

    And it was within females' lifetimes right now that companies openly posted segregated pay for women. I understand entirely why females still don't trust the system--because honestly, not enough history has been written that reflects equal pay yet. Women have recently still been openly denied job opportunities within their career fields and told it was because they were female. People are still in their careers that worked for disparity-style pay within their working careers. So, yeah, I don't blame the lack of trust. There is NOTHING right now that truly proves otherwise. Just shitty statistics from both ends.

    It's why I'm saying make a baseline. Make something people can look at as employees and know for sure they're making their marks in a company.
    Kantgirl: Just say "I'm feminine and I'll punch anyone who says otherwise!"
    Halla74: Think your way through the world. Feel your way through life.

    Cimarron: maybe Prpl will be your girl-bud
    prplchknz: i don't like it

    In Search Of... ... Kiwi Sketch Art ... Dream Journal ... Kyuuei's Cook book ... Kyu's Tiny House Blog ... Minimalist Challenge ... Kyu's Savings Challenge

  9. #49
    Senior Member cafe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    9w1
    Socionics
    INFj None
    Posts
    9,827

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    LOL
    The google fu is weak with this one.
    “There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”
    ~ John Rogers

  10. #50
    Senior Member Jaguar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    12,409

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OWK View Post
    So first, you object to calling politicians liars. Then you call politicians liars.
    I object to anyone being called a liar without the facts being fully investigated. Period. "Imagine that. Politicians lie." was mocking. If I have to take you by the hand and explain every nuance and sarcastic comment I make, just skip replying to me. I value my time.

Similar Threads

  1. What is this strange behavior called and why do people do it?
    By theflame in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 04-17-2017, 06:07 PM
  2. Electoral College in the US Pros and Cons for Keeping?
    By Anew Leaf in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: 11-12-2012, 12:43 AM
  3. What type is the most independent and why?
    By INTPness in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 121
    Last Post: 06-13-2010, 02:19 PM
  4. What is "hope," and why do I "need" it??
    By ArbiterDewey in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-14-2008, 05:04 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO