The First Amendment only protects speakers from GOVERNMENT overreach. The NLRB has encroached the freedom of employers to exercise the at will employment doctrine. This is a terrible decision. Again, you're for the little guy, since you are likely an employee, not an employer.
Small government for you, big government for people or organizations you don't like. Typical Slashdotter.
Freedom of association is protected, since, you know, it is listed in the First Amendment. In fact, it has been used by civil rights groups. The NAACP used it to protect anonymous speech to prevent retaliation in NAACP v Alabama. Read that case next time you think Microsoft shouldn't be able to exercise anonymous speech. You see, not only people or organizations you agree with get rights. Even the Klan has this right.
And private clubs still can be all male, just as colleges can be all female. You really think the government should tell people who they should associate with in private clubs? How about churches? Where does it end? Who you have to date?
who are happy about Big Nanny Government coming to their rescue in the workplace, are the people hailing aspects of Big Bad Government's Patriot Act expiring in the next article.
Another case of Slashdot's "libertarian for me, statism for the other guy."
Is to understand the rules of examination (asking questions). Basically, you need to introduce evidence via direct examination (of your own witnesses, the hardest thing in all trials, even for lawyers) and cross (of opposing party and their witnesses).
Google this, especially direct, which requires both laying a foundation and does not allow leading questions, and you'll have mastered the hardest of all trial skills.
It is also helpful to have the law and/or facts on your side.
Good luck!
IAALBNYATDNCLAJTDROALTLDEPTLIYSSDNROTASYOLC
I Am A Lawyer But Not Your Lawyer And This Does Not Constitute Legal Advice Just The Drunker Ramblings Of A Lawyer That Likely Doesn't Even Practice Law In Your State So Do Not Rely On This And Seek Your Own Legal Counsel.
What?!?!?! See what a US OB-GYN or Pediatrician makes in the US after taxes and malpractice insurance. You could make more selling shoes.
You are nuts. Canada has a huge doctor shortage, and 1 in 10 Canadian doctors go to the US to practice.
Limit what doctors can make, you'll limit the number abd quality of doctors.
But you guys are dead-on on this one. As an attorney, I've seen this first-hand - in my first criminal case! The cop lied his ass off on the stand, yet the judge said my client perjured himself. Unconscionable.
As I tell my students, before a lawyer can work as a criminal courts judge, he should have to work both sides of the criminal bar (defense and prosecution) for two years first.
When's the last time you heard of a police officer being charges with perjury?
And I am generally 100X more pro-law enforcement than most of the libs here. But a cop who testilies is a thug no better than la cosa nostra.
It isn't a piece of crap. That's just ridiculous. The data plans are what suck. I simply can't afford > $1K/year to use a phone.
The iphone is a nice piece of engineering. It doesn't do much more than what some of the other touch screens do, but it does have one advantage over any other handheld device: The applications. Of course, this has little to do with the iPhone's hardware as with its ubiquity. But the iTunes store is what sets it apart.
The iPhone isn't revolutionary. But to say it sucks is just flamebait.
Actually what this means is that those who think the logic in parent post is valid need to bone up on relativity and light cones.
This did not happen in 1054. I am well-aware of relativity smartass, and that has nothing to do with the simple historical fact that it happened 6,500 years before mankind experienced it.
Point out a different way of looking at things, get a nerd syntax error.
The Crab Nebula is 6,500 light years away from earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_Nebula).
This means the birth of the Crab Nebula was in the year 5446 BC. Mankind witnessed it 6,500 years later.
News stories on such phenomena invariably leave out this little fact, i.e., that which is witnessed by man in the sky usually happened thousands of years earlier than when he actually saw it. This makes it confusing for the average reader.
I think Doctorow's opinion is not "news." He takes a very interesting gadget and geek site and for some reason puts a hugely left spin on it.
But I do think he is right on this one. Newspapers will cease to publish print editions and become web-only. Every year they are hemorrhaging circulation and ad dollars. Every year. The NY Times is about as fiscally sound as General Motors.
So in this post you say "The US is where rich Canadians go to get their healthcare"; two posts earlier you said "Moore didn't exactly show the experience of the average Cuban. He and his prop were treated like a VIPs".
Michael Moore showed how the 50 or so high-ranking Communist Party Members and select VIPs get treated. In contrast, Canadians come to America to get the healthcare that the vast majority of Americans (80+%) get (of course they have to pay out of pocket since they don't have American insurance or medicaid). If you can't see the the difference, you must have been educated in American public schools, another argument against the government running anything.
Looking at WHO's methodology, what a joke. "Fairness of financial contribution?" And of course, Cuba is a police state. Not exactly an open, transparent society. So how is WHO they getting open access to information?
Plus, Americans are unhealthy because they are fat and don't exercise and drive everywhere. Cubans, who are starving most of the time and have to walk everywhere obviously have some "advantages" that have nothing to do with healthcare.
Any ranking that puts Canada ahead of the US is one I give little credence to. The US is where rich Canadians go to get their healthcare, LOL.
There is no other country in the world that I would rather be that America when I get sick. Not Cuba, not Canada, not the UK, not France. The USA. Because some part of the population here 1) are illegal aliens or 2) would rather drive late model cars instead of paying for the privilege of heath care (lets face it, the poor already have medicaid), does not affect the 80% of Americans who have kick ass healthcare.
The ranking I care about isn't compiled with some silly left wing methodology. It's called mortality rates for diseases like cancer and heart disease. And the US does a lot better than most of those socialized medicine countries in survivability of those diseases, those which I am most likely to get. You can take your free abortions in Cuba.
Actually many of the drugs are found by universities using federal dollars and THEN the drug companies buy the rights and bend you over.
Of course, then the university uses that money to invest in R&D further, since uni's can't actually mass-produce the drugs. But this is a red herring, as the vast majority of new drugs in the US (and therefore the world) are introduced by Big Pharma. Yes, NIH and uni's are important parts of drug research, but the largest part of drug research is done by the private sector. You want to remove that extra research? OK, well you do so by making it unproftable.
I bet the profit margins on THOSE drugs are beyond insane which is why they push them so hard. But if we don't get a handle on the multi $$$$% profits the drug companies are making we are ALL going to lose
No, we are ALL going lose if investors take their billions and invest elsewhere when Big Pharma no longer makes those profits. Investors simply call their brokers and buy stocks in different sectors, and the dollars dry up. No amount of taxing and spending (especially in the broke USA) can ever compensate for that lost investment capital. Bye bye new drugs.
Think of what you are talking about here. Private companies using private dollars to invest in R&D, and you are telling them what they can do with their discoveries and want to arbitrarily limit the return on their investment dollar. Doesn't sound like an industry I want my 401k to be invested in, and I think most investors would agree.
Who are you to tell investors to do this? It is so amazing how "libertarian"/. is until it's someone else's ox to be gored.
This is a multi-billion dollar a year industry we are talking about here. They have no conscience and no morals. Profit is their only motivator. No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance. This is doubly so with the drug industry.
I can't believe what I am reading here. You don't want drug companies to be profitable? Investment dollars follow profit. Would you prefer that people invested in oil companies or tech stocks? If drug companies were not profitable - or even less profitable, those billions would flow elsewhere, leading to less R&D, and less new drugs.
The NIH and university research is great, but why would you want to kill billions more of research dollars by making Big Pharma unprofitable? Who cares what their motives are if it leads to good results? (and yes, expensive drugs are better than no drugs - sorry, I do not believe in Utopia).
Personally, I want Big Pharma to be as profitable as possible, so investment dollars flow into cancer cure research and better heart drugs.
Moore didn't exactly show the experience of the average Cuban. He and his prop were treated like a VIPs so Castro could embarrass Bush and the US. I've been to Cuba and know people currently living there. The healthcare system sucks there. My friend's family members always ask us to bring basic medical supplies, aspirin, antibiotics, vitamins, antiseptics, you name it.
All you need to know about Cuba is police officer make more than doctors, and if you want to find a doctor, hail a cab, because they moonlight driving taxis. Great system!
Then they are going to be prosecuted themselves for practicing law without a license. I hope Massachusetts has a certified law student rule, or that we get a better summary.
Slashdot Mirror
The First Amendment only protects speakers from GOVERNMENT overreach. The NLRB has encroached the freedom of employers to exercise the at will employment doctrine. This is a terrible decision. Again, you're for the little guy, since you are likely an employee, not an employer.
Small government for you, big government for people or organizations you don't like. Typical Slashdotter.
Freedom of association is protected, since, you know, it is listed in the First Amendment. In fact, it has been used by civil rights groups. The NAACP used it to protect anonymous speech to prevent retaliation in NAACP v Alabama. Read that case next time you think Microsoft shouldn't be able to exercise anonymous speech. You see, not only people or organizations you agree with get rights. Even the Klan has this right.
And private clubs still can be all male, just as colleges can be all female. You really think the government should tell people who they should associate with in private clubs? How about churches? Where does it end? Who you have to date?
1) Take proceeds from myy sugar and corn ETFs that went up from Ethanol;
2) Sit back and wait for Spinach ETF;
3) Profit.
Obamacare? Wow, two Slashdotters in one!
my employer is mean to me when I post derogatory things about him on Facebook. Then I want my Big Government Mommy to come in and save me!
Small government for me, big government for you!
private employers?
who are happy about Big Nanny Government coming to their rescue in the workplace, are the people hailing aspects of Big Bad Government's Patriot Act expiring in the next article. Another case of Slashdot's "libertarian for me, statism for the other guy."
Google this, especially direct, which requires both laying a foundation and does not allow leading questions, and you'll have mastered the hardest of all trial skills.
It is also helpful to have the law and/or facts on your side.
Good luck!
IAALBNYATDNCLAJTDROALTLDEPTLIYSSDNROTASYOLC I Am A Lawyer But Not Your Lawyer And This Does Not Constitute Legal Advice Just The Drunker Ramblings Of A Lawyer That Likely Doesn't Even Practice Law In Your State So Do Not Rely On This And Seek Your Own Legal Counsel.
Nonsense. Where does the statute say, "due diligence, and it's yours to do what you wish."
What?!?!?! See what a US OB-GYN or Pediatrician makes in the US after taxes and malpractice insurance. You could make more selling shoes. You are nuts. Canada has a huge doctor shortage, and 1 in 10 Canadian doctors go to the US to practice. Limit what doctors can make, you'll limit the number abd quality of doctors.
On the expert singleplayer level.
That seems to be the gist of this article.
"Disaster," as written by submitter, seems a little strong. 1,000's of people starving in a refugee camp is a disaster. This is just foolish.
So if the reward is coupons, then the lawyers get 30% of the coupons.
Class Action Fairness Act of 2005
But you guys are dead-on on this one. As an attorney, I've seen this first-hand - in my first criminal case! The cop lied his ass off on the stand, yet the judge said my client perjured himself. Unconscionable.
As I tell my students, before a lawyer can work as a criminal courts judge, he should have to work both sides of the criminal bar (defense and prosecution) for two years first.
When's the last time you heard of a police officer being charges with perjury?
And I am generally 100X more pro-law enforcement than most of the libs here. But a cop who testilies is a thug no better than la cosa nostra.
It isn't a piece of crap. That's just ridiculous. The data plans are what suck. I simply can't afford > $1K/year to use a phone.
The iphone is a nice piece of engineering. It doesn't do much more than what some of the other touch screens do, but it does have one advantage over any other handheld device: The applications. Of course, this has little to do with the iPhone's hardware as with its ubiquity. But the iTunes store is what sets it apart.
The iPhone isn't revolutionary. But to say it sucks is just flamebait.
Actually what this means is that those who think the logic in parent post is valid need to bone up on relativity and light cones.
This did not happen in 1054. I am well-aware of relativity smartass, and that has nothing to do with the simple historical fact that it happened 6,500 years before mankind experienced it.
Point out a different way of looking at things, get a nerd syntax error.
1054 AD, which was the birth of the Crab Nebula
The Crab Nebula is 6,500 light years away from earth (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crab_Nebula).
This means the birth of the Crab Nebula was in the year 5446 BC. Mankind witnessed it 6,500 years later.
News stories on such phenomena invariably leave out this little fact, i.e., that which is witnessed by man in the sky usually happened thousands of years earlier than when he actually saw it. This makes it confusing for the average reader.
I think Doctorow's opinion is not "news." He takes a very interesting gadget and geek site and for some reason puts a hugely left spin on it.
But I do think he is right on this one. Newspapers will cease to publish print editions and become web-only. Every year they are hemorrhaging circulation and ad dollars. Every year. The NY Times is about as fiscally sound as General Motors.
So in this post you say "The US is where rich Canadians go to get their healthcare"; two posts earlier you said "Moore didn't exactly show the experience of the average Cuban. He and his prop were treated like a VIPs".
Michael Moore showed how the 50 or so high-ranking Communist Party Members and select VIPs get treated. In contrast, Canadians come to America to get the healthcare that the vast majority of Americans (80+%) get (of course they have to pay out of pocket since they don't have American insurance or medicaid). If you can't see the the difference, you must have been educated in American public schools, another argument against the government running anything.
Looking at WHO's methodology, what a joke. "Fairness of financial contribution?" And of course, Cuba is a police state. Not exactly an open, transparent society. So how is WHO they getting open access to information?
Plus, Americans are unhealthy because they are fat and don't exercise and drive everywhere. Cubans, who are starving most of the time and have to walk everywhere obviously have some "advantages" that have nothing to do with healthcare.
Any ranking that puts Canada ahead of the US is one I give little credence to. The US is where rich Canadians go to get their healthcare, LOL.
There is no other country in the world that I would rather be that America when I get sick. Not Cuba, not Canada, not the UK, not France. The USA. Because some part of the population here 1) are illegal aliens or 2) would rather drive late model cars instead of paying for the privilege of heath care (lets face it, the poor already have medicaid), does not affect the 80% of Americans who have kick ass healthcare.
The ranking I care about isn't compiled with some silly left wing methodology. It's called mortality rates for diseases like cancer and heart disease. And the US does a lot better than most of those socialized medicine countries in survivability of those diseases, those which I am most likely to get. You can take your free abortions in Cuba.
Actually many of the drugs are found by universities using federal dollars and THEN the drug companies buy the rights and bend you over.
/. is until it's someone else's ox to be gored.
Of course, then the university uses that money to invest in R&D further, since uni's can't actually mass-produce the drugs. But this is a red herring, as the vast majority of new drugs in the US (and therefore the world) are introduced by Big Pharma. Yes, NIH and uni's are important parts of drug research, but the largest part of drug research is done by the private sector. You want to remove that extra research? OK, well you do so by making it unproftable.
I bet the profit margins on THOSE drugs are beyond insane which is why they push them so hard. But if we don't get a handle on the multi $$$$% profits the drug companies are making we are ALL going to lose
No, we are ALL going lose if investors take their billions and invest elsewhere when Big Pharma no longer makes those profits. Investors simply call their brokers and buy stocks in different sectors, and the dollars dry up. No amount of taxing and spending (especially in the broke USA) can ever compensate for that lost investment capital. Bye bye new drugs.
Think of what you are talking about here. Private companies using private dollars to invest in R&D, and you are telling them what they can do with their discoveries and want to arbitrarily limit the return on their investment dollar. Doesn't sound like an industry I want my 401k to be invested in, and I think most investors would agree.
Who are you to tell investors to do this? It is so amazing how "libertarian"
This is a multi-billion dollar a year industry we are talking about here. They have no conscience and no morals. Profit is their only motivator. No company does anything out of the goodness of their heart unless it will lead to greater profits and/or market dominance. This is doubly so with the drug industry.
I can't believe what I am reading here. You don't want drug companies to be profitable? Investment dollars follow profit. Would you prefer that people invested in oil companies or tech stocks? If drug companies were not profitable - or even less profitable, those billions would flow elsewhere, leading to less R&D, and less new drugs.
The NIH and university research is great, but why would you want to kill billions more of research dollars by making Big Pharma unprofitable? Who cares what their motives are if it leads to good results? (and yes, expensive drugs are better than no drugs - sorry, I do not believe in Utopia).
Personally, I want Big Pharma to be as profitable as possible, so investment dollars flow into cancer cure research and better heart drugs.
Moore didn't exactly show the experience of the average Cuban. He and his prop were treated like a VIPs so Castro could embarrass Bush and the US. I've been to Cuba and know people currently living there. The healthcare system sucks there. My friend's family members always ask us to bring basic medical supplies, aspirin, antibiotics, vitamins, antiseptics, you name it.
All you need to know about Cuba is police officer make more than doctors, and if you want to find a doctor, hail a cab, because they moonlight driving taxis. Great system!
Then they are going to be prosecuted themselves for practicing law without a license. I hope Massachusetts has a certified law student rule, or that we get a better summary.