The reason a lot of people (myself included) don't like unions, is because they fight for all employees, not just the good ones.
And how is it bad? More importantly, how do you define "good employee"? Is it someone who does a magnificient job by the standards on how the job is measured, or is it someone whose boss is pleased when he sees him?
Basically everybody in the same position gets the same pay, and employees are paid more based on years of service.
With the advanced years of service, you get more experience, thus automatically becoming more valuable as your quality of work increases. This insures that the bosses don't play favourites by promoting the ass-lickers who don't really do a better job.
This means that all you have to do to keep advancing your salary, is to do just good enough to not get fired.
This also means that you don't have to suck more arse as you get more valuable and thus paid more, making you more and more susceptible to firing when the next round of "right-sizing" comes along. Witness the Worst Buy (or is it Sucker city?) decision to fire the best salesmen because they earned more money...
And unions make it plenty hard to fire union members also.
It's hard to get a job. It should be hard to lose it too! This insures that due process is duly followed and that one really gets fired for doing the real wrong thing, as opposed to piss-off a stupid manager the wrong way.
People should get paid based on what they bring to the company.
This is in Utopia. If companies paid their workers what they are worth, there would be no need to labour standards laws.
If a guy straight out of university, his first year on the job, brings more to the company then the guy who has been working there 40 years, then he should be paid more.
Sure, but how do you do this be done in a equitable way? A single worker can be crushed by the whole company. However, when workers unite, they can present a greater counterforce to the company. After all, a company is also an union, an union of investors. The union is simply a union of the workers. Why should the workers get a shorter stick than the investors???
But libertarians tend to be social darwinists in that regard: "let the harsh markets weed out the weak". However, it may lead to the "ugly capitalism" found in 1800's Britain that inspired tons of novels and discourses bashing capitalism.
In retrospect, our reaction when HR notified us that we were (mostly) being changed from exempt to hourly was not what one might expect. There was much indignation because for many, reaching exempt status in IT is a sort of badge of honor, a sign that one has made it out of the trenches. We felt like we were being downgraded.
Snob. You don't have to broadcast that you have been "downgraded". What counts is nothing else than the change you carry home.
I don't know if this can be done (the details of this are a lawyers job to sort out), but I doubt that AG's are going to be able to help much given the precedents that colleges have alredy set for the wrong reasons.
(sneer). That's what happens when you have a primitive law system solely based on precedent. That's not very far above stone age tribes that have "law" based on custom...
In an age where fools routinely think the Patriot Act has turned the United States into a police state resembling Nazi Germany, it's just another symptom of our spoiled culture having absolutely no sense of historical perspective.
I like Civilization. I will not return to living in caves, and I will not give up my SUV.
Not only you drank the cool-aid, tool, but you bought the whole bourgeois line, hook and sinker.
I'll gladly watch you squeal when you won't be able to fill-up your SUV any more...
A lot of folks agitating for changes in oversea working conditions (at least with respect to China) might be very surprised to learn the actual opinions of all those poor, downtrodden folks they are "protecting."
Never underestimate the power of the bourgeois to manipulate people into believing that they are doing a great job. After all, the bourgeois have centuries of experience in screwing the proletarians.
Think of it each time you buy a trinket advertised on TV -- you seem to have drunk their cool-aid...
The "Industry"? Surely not. Maybe the musicians and the artists themselves, yes, but certainly not the "Industry", which thives on artificial rarity...
What scares the hell out of me is how readily our government will sell this data to private concerns. Anything to boost revenue.
So, stop voting for politicans who only want to lower taxes. Make sure the government will be sufficiently financed by proper taxation and it won't happen.
Freedom of travel is a right and the constitution does not contain any language restricting it. Just because a lot of bureaucrats have tried to usurp that right and a lot of sheeple have accepted it, does not mean it still isn't a right.
Travelling is not ONLY done by car, but can be done by foot, helicopter, bicycle, bus, hack, horseback, train, dirigible, truck, airplane, donkey, riverboat, section-car, lorry, goat carriage, jitney, pogo-stick or stage coach. At the time your holy "just a piece of paper" constitution was written, the fastest thing that travelled was a galloping horse, and it didn't gallop for very long before getting exhausted.
This isn't much different then demanding one's papers on the street randomly, 'just to check you out', even when you are just minding your own business.
Not at all.
It's really only just like reading people's name tags at a convention.
Will someone please explain to me how operating a device I own, on infrastructure that I am required to pay for, is a privilege?
You are perfectly free to operate that device you own on your very own private property that you personally own, without any interference.
However, when you operate it on a public road (or the private property of someone else), it is quite legitimate for the property owner (or the Statew -- which is the People) to require that those who do so both are competent to operate it safely AND pay for the upkeep of the infrastructure used.
Gee, those libertarians, what a bunch of freeloading cheapies.
since the US Constitution does not enumerate a right to drive, you do not have that right, which is contradictory to the 9th amendment. He should read his constitution again. You have the right to do anything (regardless of whether it's enumerated in the Constitution) not prohibited by the laws governing people in your state and/or federal district.
The right to be safe from incompetent drivers trumps the "right to drive" any day.
Oh, wait. There is no "right to drive"; it's a ******PRIVILEGE****** you EARN by passing a competency exam, and that you KEEP by driving properly.
You need to get out more. I'd suggest a car and driving. There are some of us who truly NEED to be able to drive in order to function in today's society.
Not all societies are as retarded as the US is by having gutted it's public transportation network and forcing people to sacrifice a significant portion on their income to car and oil companies.
Driving is a ***PRIVILEGE***, not a right. Drive bad enough, and expect your privilege to be revoked.
Driving is done **ON PUBLIC ROADS**, where there is **NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY**, none whatsoever. So it is perfectly legitimate to have cars movement tracked. Traffic rules have to be enforced, and it is perfectly legitimate to track cars to do so.
You don't like it? Take the bus or the train. No buses or trains? Though fucking noogies, or move to an area that was not moronic enough to trash them.
People I talked to about this issue generally have contradictory feelings -- on one hand they like the idea of "democracy" -- on the other they don't think it is the solution for China; they could point out failed examples like Mexico, India, Russia (under Yeltsin,) Philippines, Thai, eastern European countries,... or maybe the US political system (long before Bush). In short democracy is good on principles but does not do much better on what the people found really matter -- quality of life, jobs, education, health care
Democracy is absolutely dependent on an educated populace. When people are illiterate and have no access to balanced information that shows both the good points and the bad points, it is totally illusory to think that Democracy may flourish.
Furthermore, there is the question of national characters and attitude. You mention the Philippines as a failure; why did the Philippines fail as a democracy, given that it's constitution is a carbon-copy of the American constitution! Surely, by now, the Philippines would have enjoyed tremenduous prosperity by now, yet it is dismally wallowing in the Turd-World country club. The reason, of course, is that the mentality of the people. The Philippines have been bludgeoned for three centuries by the spanish into becoming a scatholic country, and then the anglo-saxons par excellence impose an anglo-saxon (read: protestant) constitution on them. The effort was doomed to failure from the start, as scatholics do not believe in personal responsibility the way protestants do.
Every single one of the Chinese interviewed for that article needs to take a ride on the Waaaahmbulance. "Oh no, other countries are criticizing us, they don't like us, who's going to take us the prom now?" An entire country filled with teenage girls, just wonderful.
Don't you think for a second that the communist party made sure no one who didn't perfectly toe the party line would be interviewed???
Unless there is **TOTAL** freedom of speech, not a single statement by anyone in China can be trusted.
And despite their horrible record on Israel/Palestine, Amnesty International are pretty reputable on almost all other issues.
What? You mean that Amnesty International do not portray the sionists nazis under a favourable light? Oh, the horror! They have to be antisemites! Oh, the humanity!!!
It's the same thing with Canada; identical products will cost 10% to 25% more, and in some cases, like automobiles, manufacturers will go to extreme lenghts to insure that canadians cannot buy stuff in the US and import it themselves.
And no, in Canada too, prices are quoted without taxes.
Bleh. Anti-piracy is just like a lock. It will never stop someone determined enough to break the lock. The question, as always, is not "if", but "when".
Slashdot Mirror
And how is it bad? More importantly, how do you define "good employee"? Is it someone who does a magnificient job by the standards on how the job is measured, or is it someone whose boss is pleased when he sees him?
With the advanced years of service, you get more experience, thus automatically becoming more valuable as your quality of work increases. This insures that the bosses don't play favourites by promoting the ass-lickers who don't really do a better job.
This also means that you don't have to suck more arse as you get more valuable and thus paid more, making you more and more susceptible to firing when the next round of "right-sizing" comes along. Witness the Worst Buy (or is it Sucker city?) decision to fire the best salesmen because they earned more money...
It's hard to get a job. It should be hard to lose it too! This insures that due process is duly followed and that one really gets fired for doing the real wrong thing, as opposed to piss-off a stupid manager the wrong way.
This is in Utopia. If companies paid their workers what they are worth, there would be no need to labour standards laws.
Sure, but how do you do this be done in a equitable way? A single worker can be crushed by the whole company. However, when workers unite, they can present a greater counterforce to the company. After all, a company is also an union, an union of investors. The union is simply a union of the workers. Why should the workers get a shorter stick than the investors???
Not to mention communism...
Likewise if you want to sell yourself into slavery?
Snob. You don't have to broadcast that you have been "downgraded". What counts is nothing else than the change you carry home.
(sneer). That's what happens when you have a primitive law system solely based on precedent. That's not very far above stone age tribes that have "law" based on custom...
Not only you drank the cool-aid, tool, but you bought the whole bourgeois line, hook and sinker.
I'll gladly watch you squeal when you won't be able to fill-up your SUV any more...
Never underestimate the power of the bourgeois to manipulate people into believing that they are doing a great job. After all, the bourgeois have centuries of experience in screwing the proletarians.
Think of it each time you buy a trinket advertised on TV -- you seem to have drunk their cool-aid...
The "Industry"? Surely not. Maybe the musicians and the artists themselves, yes, but certainly not the "Industry", which thives on artificial rarity...
This is why Belgium is teetering on the edge of extinction.
So, stop voting for politicans who only want to lower taxes. Make sure the government will be sufficiently financed by proper taxation and it won't happen.
Travelling is not ONLY done by car, but can be done by foot, helicopter, bicycle, bus, hack, horseback, train, dirigible, truck, airplane, donkey, riverboat, section-car, lorry, goat carriage, jitney, pogo-stick or stage coach. At the time your holy "just a piece of paper" constitution was written, the fastest thing that travelled was a galloping horse, and it didn't gallop for very long before getting exhausted.
Not at all.
It's really only just like reading people's name tags at a convention.
You are perfectly free to operate that device you own on your very own private property that you personally own, without any interference.
However, when you operate it on a public road (or the private property of someone else), it is quite legitimate for the property owner (or the Statew -- which is the People) to require that those who do so both are competent to operate it safely AND pay for the upkeep of the infrastructure used.
Gee, those libertarians, what a bunch of freeloading cheapies.
The right to be safe from incompetent drivers trumps the "right to drive" any day.
Oh, wait. There is no "right to drive"; it's a ******PRIVILEGE****** you EARN by passing a competency exam, and that you KEEP by driving properly.
As long as the State, who willingly lets this happens, setups a special fund to **PROPERLY** indemnify the victims of uninsured drivers.
Not all societies are as retarded as the US is by having gutted it's public transportation network and forcing people to sacrifice a significant portion on their income to car and oil companies.
Driving is a ***PRIVILEGE***, not a right. Drive bad enough, and expect your privilege to be revoked.
Driving is done **ON PUBLIC ROADS**, where there is **NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY**, none whatsoever. So it is perfectly legitimate to have cars movement tracked. Traffic rules have to be enforced, and it is perfectly legitimate to track cars to do so.
You don't like it? Take the bus or the train. No buses or trains? Though fucking noogies, or move to an area that was not moronic enough to trash them.
Democracy is absolutely dependent on an educated populace. When people are illiterate and have no access to balanced information that shows both the good points and the bad points, it is totally illusory to think that Democracy may flourish.
Furthermore, there is the question of national characters and attitude. You mention the Philippines as a failure; why did the Philippines fail as a democracy, given that it's constitution is a carbon-copy of the American constitution! Surely, by now, the Philippines would have enjoyed tremenduous prosperity by now, yet it is dismally wallowing in the Turd-World country club. The reason, of course, is that the mentality of the people. The Philippines have been bludgeoned for three centuries by the spanish into becoming a scatholic country, and then the anglo-saxons par excellence impose an anglo-saxon (read: protestant) constitution on them. The effort was doomed to failure from the start, as scatholics do not believe in personal responsibility the way protestants do.
Don't you think for a second that the communist party made sure no one who didn't perfectly toe the party line would be interviewed???
Unless there is **TOTAL** freedom of speech, not a single statement by anyone in China can be trusted.
This is great! Now, the phone companies will be able to blame the customers directly for their troubles!!!
One of the strangest trolls on USENET is happenning right now on news.admin.net-abuse.email. The thing is that instead of ONE individual trolling the froup, about 50 individuals are trolling ONE PERSON, a spammer named Jamie Baillie with extremely poor social skills who is quite abusive and is a legend when it comes to complain to ISPs.
The situation has been fluctuating for more than 5 years on news.admin.net-abuse.email, and currently, the Jamie Baillie activity is at a historic peak.
What? You mean that Amnesty International do not portray the sionists nazis under a favourable light? Oh, the horror! They have to be antisemites! Oh, the humanity!!!
It's the same thing with Canada; identical products will cost 10% to 25% more, and in some cases, like automobiles, manufacturers will go to extreme lenghts to insure that canadians cannot buy stuff in the US and import it themselves.
And no, in Canada too, prices are quoted without taxes.
Those costs are still a tiny fraction of the actual development costs...
Bleh. Anti-piracy is just like a lock. It will never stop someone determined enough to break the lock. The question, as always, is not "if", but "when".