When you dig up an old bone, is there an easy way to distinguish the ones that the Devil planted to lure scientists to hell, vs. the ones that came from creatures that genuinely lived before creation?
The government's offered deal was basically...the legal equivalent of a gun to the head with a threat of prosecution if anyone didn't take it, in addition to a permanent financial blackballing.
Assuming your facts are correct, how is that any different from plea-bargaining?
They fucked up, picked the least bad way out, and now they're suing because they didn't get a better offer? Cry me a song.
They should be sending weekly thank-you notes to the Feds for not throwing them all in prison.
I always thought we should separate "money keeping" banks from "money investment" banks. The first kind is the one you really want to keep running. That would significantly reduce the harm whenever a bank crashes.
Isn't that exactly the Depression-era rule that was rolled back a few years before everything went pear-shaped?
'I feel like in my personal faith walk, I have felt instructed not to get a flu vaccination, but it's also the whole matter of the right to choose what I put in my body...' adding that she has not had a flu vaccine for 30 years as a result of a choice she made because of her Christian faith
Of course she can choose to be vaccinated or not. That is her legal right. However when vaccination demonstrably reduces risk to fellow patients and co-workers then she is welcome to seek employment elsewhere. Her religion has NOTHING to do with this.
Or more accurately, her religion forbids her from holding that job. That's the fundamental fact that she's refusing to acknowledge.
What is the death rate directly attributable to Flu shots? Then what's the death rate directly attributable to the Flu for those not vaccinated? If the death rate from the shot is lower, and I'm certain it is, then then how can any one make any kind of logical argument against getting the vaccine? Maybe someone can find the facts on this?
It would be easier if you didn't require a logical argument.
The problem is that people can and do use religion to justify any belief they want to hold or any action they want to take.
There's not a referee to tell people that their religion won't let them draw oddball conclusions that aren't actually supported by their religion's sacred documents and traditions.
Has anyone ever met anyone whose religion made them do or not do something they really didn't want? Humans, including us non-religious types, are experts at rationalizing anything they want to believe of do.
Nurses have to challenge themselves to take care of people with a myriad of backgrounds and walks of life. You have to support them in their care even if you don't support their color, religion, lifestyle, etc. They're nurses because they can do that. However, that doesn't mean any of us should shed our own beliefs and become a blank slate. We have rights just like the Jehovah's witness that doesn't want blood products when they're bleeding to death but wants you to fix them without transfusing them.
What if the nurse is the JW and doesn't want to administer a transfusion to someone who needs and wants it?
If your religious scruples won't let you do your job, you shouldn't be in that profession. Especially for jobs that other people's life and health depend on.
Specifically, the site argues that the scriptures say that foreign substances should not be injected into the body and also that that the human body is perfect and shouldn't be altered in any way. (A few other things are thrown in for good measure, but this is the crux of it.)
That would be a strange belief for someone working in healthcare.
Frankly, I don't want my wellbeing to be in the hands of religious nutters.
... So you think you should be able to sign a contract agreeing to certain terms, then blow them off at your descretion, basically doing what benefits you whenever you want and expecting them to also do what benefits you?
Self entitled fuck wad. Don't agree to the terms of employment if you don't mean to stand by them.
I don't think a breach of contract has been established. If it had, HP wouldn't need the depositions they're requesting.
the only ones left are trying to milk the cash out of HP before it deteriorates into nothingness.
Isn't that the standard view of what corporations are for these days?
Optimize for short-term profit at the expense of long-term profit, then bail out when the company takes a dive. Except this time it's the employees rather than the execs that are bailing...
Slashdot Mirror
What kind of timetable could mankind do designer creatures or is that not In the foreseeable future, or just too far distant to speculate?
I'm more concerned about the timetable for when designer creatures could do us.
When you dig up an old bone, is there an easy way to distinguish the ones that the Devil planted to lure scientists to hell, vs. the ones that came from creatures that genuinely lived before creation?
II+
I read it as "Apple Lie". Silly marketing people.
Heh. Me too. I thought this was going to be a fun diatribe+flamefest.
All gone missing. There's something funny goin' on 'round here.
You don't see the difference between product placement and a cult using a newspaper to ruin more lives?
When does slashdot run ads for crack cocaine? That would be similar to what we are talking about here.
Well, Slashdot is always pushing bitcoin. If that won't ruin your life, nothing will.
I think a better analogy might be two dying dogs, lying down together in a last feeble attempt to fend off the cold.
Hey, they're both just chasing the Almighty Buck. You should show a little patriotic respect.
One of us must be drunk.
Don't go into the light, Luke!
The government's offered deal was basically...the legal equivalent of a gun to the head with a threat of prosecution if anyone didn't take it, in addition to a permanent financial blackballing.
Assuming your facts are correct, how is that any different from plea-bargaining?
They fucked up, picked the least bad way out, and now they're suing because they didn't get a better offer? Cry me a song.
They should be sending weekly thank-you notes to the Feds for not throwing them all in prison.
I always thought we should separate "money keeping" banks from "money investment" banks. The first kind is the one you really want to keep running. That would significantly reduce the harm whenever a bank crashes.
Isn't that exactly the Depression-era rule that was rolled back a few years before everything went pear-shaped?
Government should have let AIG go under, then arrested the Executives for reckless and negligent endangerment to their employees.
A companies first and foremost responsibility is to it's customers, 2nd to it's employees and finally 3rd to it's shareholders.
I would add "the public" to the front of that list.
Except there was no money elsewhere and AIG is the biggest insurance company in the world.
1929 all over again. Same cause, some consequence.
Good argument for not allowing companies "too big to fail" to exist.
Does anyone know what the Flying Spaghetti Monster's take on flu shots is?
I think the Free Range Orthodox Pastafarians reject them, whereas the Corn Fed Orthodox Pastafarians require them.
'I feel like in my personal faith walk, I have felt instructed not to get a flu vaccination, but it's also the whole matter of the right to choose what I put in my body...' adding that she has not had a flu vaccine for 30 years as a result of a choice she made because of her Christian faith
Of course she can choose to be vaccinated or not. That is her legal right. However when vaccination demonstrably reduces risk to fellow patients and co-workers then she is welcome to seek employment elsewhere. Her religion has NOTHING to do with this.
Or more accurately, her religion forbids her from holding that job. That's the fundamental fact that she's refusing to acknowledge.
What is the death rate directly attributable to Flu shots? Then what's the death rate directly attributable to the Flu for those not vaccinated? If the death rate from the shot is lower, and I'm certain it is, then then how can any one make any kind of logical argument against getting the vaccine? Maybe someone can find the facts on this?
It would be easier if you didn't require a logical argument.
ya know?
The problem is that people can and do use religion to justify any belief they want to hold or any action they want to take.
There's not a referee to tell people that their religion won't let them draw oddball conclusions that aren't actually supported by their religion's sacred documents and traditions.
That's why there are reportedly 41,000 defined flavors of Christianity, plus Bog-knows how many more non-denominational congregations and individuals.
Has anyone ever met anyone whose religion made them do or not do something they really didn't want? Humans, including us non-religious types, are experts at rationalizing anything they want to believe of do.
Nurses have to challenge themselves to take care of people with a myriad of backgrounds and walks of life. You have to support them in their care even if you don't support their color, religion, lifestyle, etc. They're nurses because they can do that. However, that doesn't mean any of us should shed our own beliefs and become a blank slate. We have rights just like the Jehovah's witness that doesn't want blood products when they're bleeding to death but wants you to fix them without transfusing them.
What if the nurse is the JW and doesn't want to administer a transfusion to someone who needs and wants it?
If your religious scruples won't let you do your job, you shouldn't be in that profession. Especially for jobs that other people's life and health depend on.
So if the nurse is not okay with the flu shots, she has the choice to go elsewhere for another kind of job.
Ditto for pharmicists who won't fill prescriptions that offend their politico-religious cult beliefs.
Specifically, the site argues that the scriptures say that foreign substances should not be injected into the body and also that that the human body is perfect and shouldn't be altered in any way. (A few other things are thrown in for good measure, but this is the crux of it.)
That would be a strange belief for someone working in healthcare.
Frankly, I don't want my wellbeing to be in the hands of religious nutters.
Isn't that how investment bankers talk all the time?
Yeah, I thought "write off" was standard operating procedure.
Though I don't suppose that means it can't be fraud too...
#1: Don't write the rules.
Do you wait until your friend kills someone before you do the right thing?
Or himself.
... So you think you should be able to sign a contract agreeing to certain terms, then blow them off at your descretion, basically doing what benefits you whenever you want and expecting them to also do what benefits you?
Self entitled fuck wad. Don't agree to the terms of employment if you don't mean to stand by them.
I don't think a breach of contract has been established. If it had, HP wouldn't need the depositions they're requesting.
the only ones left are trying to milk the cash out of HP before it deteriorates into nothingness.
Isn't that the standard view of what corporations are for these days?
Optimize for short-term profit at the expense of long-term profit, then bail out when the company takes a dive. Except this time it's the employees rather than the execs that are bailing...