In other words, you live your life in this little bubble where you don't do anything that could be a risk. Bad idea.
Children, in particular, are necessary for the future of the species, regardless of the consequences. It's a really good thing that people in general don't follow your advice.
It sounds to me like something of an experiment. The idea appears to be that normal respectful behavior will likely cut down on bullying. It's not completely out there. We know that, when attitudes cause external effects, changing the external effects can change the attitude.
One shouldn't be treated rudely if they are good at their job and are making $$ for the company.
Right. The problem here is that "shouldn't be" is not synonymous with "isn't". Some people like to behave in certain ways disregarding what it does to the company and company goals.
TFS said nothing about a moment of rudeness. It said monthly for a year. If your boss is rude to you once or twice, that doesn't count. It has to be a pattern.
If I'm rude to a colleague, that's almost certainly not bullying. If a colleague's manager is rude to a colleague, that could well be bullying, since the colleague usually has no choice other than to shut up and accept the rudeness. Depending on the rudeness, this can get serious.
You're mistaking the definition of bullying for the measures taken to avoid it. There's an office code of civility that is intended to create an atmosphere that discourages bullying. If bullying costs productivity, and in my experience it does, then trying to avoid it is a very reasonable thing to do.
Chamberlain was dealing with a large industrial giant with a large population. We're talking about a small, nearly starving, country. There's a very large difference there. Germany was quite capable of being dangerous to Europe. North Korea is capable of being dangerous to South Korea and Japan (and China, but they're not going that way).
Another 1950 would inflict tremendous civilian casualties among the South, but it's not at all obvious the North could win. US help, which would be forthcoming, would be decisive. The Japanese Self-Defense Forces are powerful armed forces, and could easily get involved.
From China's point of view, the problem is that they like having a buffer state there, and such aggression out of it would render it difficult to maintain. They're the ones keeping North Korea afloat, and they have influence. They want to keep North Korea at peace.
Non-proliferation was a good goal, but it's failing, as might have been predicted. Advancing science means that it takes less and less resources to make a nuke. The first nuclear bomb program was very expensive, a major effort by the richest Allied nation along with scientists from all over Europe included. The Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003 drove in the idea that having nukes was a very good idea if you wanted to stay safe from the US.
No. Have you any idea what socialism means? Try to find any trace of it in Nazi Germany. The totalitarianism was on a firm capitalist base, and Hitler didn't particularly care about individual Germans and their welfare.
Socialism, like capitalism, is a materialist philosophy. Socialism in the economic sense means the ownership of the means of production by the workers, directly or indirectly. The more modern meaning is to provide assistance for the less fortunate.
National Socialism was a mystic philosophy based on the Will and the People. It doesn't make much sense because it wasn't intended to. It did not care about individual members of the race, only the race as a whole, The economy was firmly capitalist.
I've found that, typically, people who claim there are differences and that they explain modern behavior have at least the same politics as those who deny that transsexuals can exist. Clearly there are differences, or there wouldn't be transsexuals, but there's a lot of other crap going on that obscures what would happen with ideal behavior.
"Did they have an easy life?" is not an appropriate question to determine privilege. "Would they have had a harder life if they were black?" is an appropriate question.
I'm aware that there are a lot of people out there of all skin colors who are having serious problems with life, and that there are many who will vote against their self-interest for a pocketful of sweet lies.
Um, you think a $250 fee is trivial? To me, it's not bad, but lots of people can't afford that. You appear to realize that fact, and you even appear to realize that people like me are in favor of tax money paying all expenses associated with getting to vote, and you still say something about not knowing where the DMV is?
In states that want to require voter IDs, the DMV was the local place that was closed down last year, but now is fairly distant and not reachable by public transportation, and it's only open when somebody is working and is afraid to take a day off.
As a leftist, I'm fine with voter ID, as long as acquiring the ID is free of charge and easy for everyone.
Speaking as something of a leftist, I don't consider it an insult. I consider people who use it (or "liberal") as insults to be largely inarticulate and not capable of serious coherent thought.
A sincere apology includes an attempt to do better in the future. If someone is a jerk to you, apologizes, and then continues being a jerk, that's conclusive evidence that the apology was insincere. Avoid that person if at all possible. If you're in a relationship, dump the jerk.
Last I checked, people 45-65 were a protected class, but people under 45 or over 65 could be discriminated against by reason of age. Personally, I think the high number should track the Social Security full retirement age, but right now it doesn't.
On the one hand, people make all sorts of claims about SJWs, and on the other those people accuse lots of people of being SJWs that don't match the claims. The net result is libel.
The "all whites are racist" stuff belongs to the lunatic fringe. "All whites are privileged" is what you're actually looking at, and that';s pretty much true.
And then you go and quote some drivel archived from therightstuff.biz.
Do you agree that women's minds and men's minds are alike, that there are no significant systemic differences? No? In that case, why would it be a stretch of imagination to think that, in rare cases, male minds can be born in female bodies or vice versa?
Two biological sexes would mean classifying everyone as biologically male or biologically female. That mostly works, but reality is more complicated. People are born with genotypes other than XX and XY, and sometimes with two sets of sex organs.
Ok...I thought "No meant NO".....what more empowerment does it require?
It would be nice if "no meant NO" in all cases, but that currently doesn't seem to work always. Also, empowerment includes access to family planning methods and education.
Say no, and quit spreading your legs unless you want to risk having a kid, even with "protection", you can't be 100% sure.
You know what children with mothers have? Fathers. If you keep your pants zipped, guess what? No children! Are you so misogynous that this didn't occur to you?
Birth control where you are is free and/or cheap, sure. Same as where I live. However, there are places in the US that try to get rid of Planned Parenthood and other women's health facilities. Moreover, there are places in the world that are not in the US, and not all of them have readily available birth control, for whatever reason.
The problem isn't the US population. Last I checked, our fertility was under replacement rate, offset by immigration. The problem is in undeveloped countries, where access to birth control can be difficult and expensive.
Microsoft software works. It may not be the best, and it sure isn't the cheapest, but you can set up a Microsoft environment that reliably works for a given amount of money. If something doesn't work,
Linux mostly works. The software may be the best, and is often the cheapest, but there will be problems because it's not a drop-in replacement. Not all widely-used Windows software is available on Linux. The Linux equivalents are different, and that can be a problem.
So, a business can spend $X and be sure they get what they need, or they can spend $Y without the practical guarantee. Most businesses aren't in the business of setting up desktop environments, they just use them like infrastructure. They don't have the expertise to adapt any situation to Linux, and they don't want to pay to maintain the expertise. They're much happier paying $X and knowing the situation is unlikely to blow up in their face.
Yeah, but the governments of the world, working together, ELIMINATED THE MOST DEADLY DISEASE IN HISTORY. No disease killed as many people as smallpox, and it's gone. They're working on polio, which was widely feared when I was young. I don't care about someone saying "that was easy", because it wasn't. It took massive coordinated government effort. Smallpox was what started inoculation, and if the free market was going to eliminate it it would have been done long ago.
Slashdot Mirror
In other words, you live your life in this little bubble where you don't do anything that could be a risk. Bad idea.
Children, in particular, are necessary for the future of the species, regardless of the consequences. It's a really good thing that people in general don't follow your advice.
It sounds to me like something of an experiment. The idea appears to be that normal respectful behavior will likely cut down on bullying. It's not completely out there. We know that, when attitudes cause external effects, changing the external effects can change the attitude.
Right. The problem here is that "shouldn't be" is not synonymous with "isn't". Some people like to behave in certain ways disregarding what it does to the company and company goals.
TFS said nothing about a moment of rudeness. It said monthly for a year. If your boss is rude to you once or twice, that doesn't count. It has to be a pattern.
If I'm rude to a colleague, that's almost certainly not bullying. If a colleague's manager is rude to a colleague, that could well be bullying, since the colleague usually has no choice other than to shut up and accept the rudeness. Depending on the rudeness, this can get serious.
You're mistaking the definition of bullying for the measures taken to avoid it. There's an office code of civility that is intended to create an atmosphere that discourages bullying. If bullying costs productivity, and in my experience it does, then trying to avoid it is a very reasonable thing to do.
Chamberlain was dealing with a large industrial giant with a large population. We're talking about a small, nearly starving, country. There's a very large difference there. Germany was quite capable of being dangerous to Europe. North Korea is capable of being dangerous to South Korea and Japan (and China, but they're not going that way).
Another 1950 would inflict tremendous civilian casualties among the South, but it's not at all obvious the North could win. US help, which would be forthcoming, would be decisive. The Japanese Self-Defense Forces are powerful armed forces, and could easily get involved.
From China's point of view, the problem is that they like having a buffer state there, and such aggression out of it would render it difficult to maintain. They're the ones keeping North Korea afloat, and they have influence. They want to keep North Korea at peace.
Non-proliferation was a good goal, but it's failing, as might have been predicted. Advancing science means that it takes less and less resources to make a nuke. The first nuclear bomb program was very expensive, a major effort by the richest Allied nation along with scientists from all over Europe included. The Bush invasion of Iraq in 2003 drove in the idea that having nukes was a very good idea if you wanted to stay safe from the US.
No. Have you any idea what socialism means? Try to find any trace of it in Nazi Germany. The totalitarianism was on a firm capitalist base, and Hitler didn't particularly care about individual Germans and their welfare.
Socialism, like capitalism, is a materialist philosophy. Socialism in the economic sense means the ownership of the means of production by the workers, directly or indirectly. The more modern meaning is to provide assistance for the less fortunate.
National Socialism was a mystic philosophy based on the Will and the People. It doesn't make much sense because it wasn't intended to. It did not care about individual members of the race, only the race as a whole, The economy was firmly capitalist.
I've found that, typically, people who claim there are differences and that they explain modern behavior have at least the same politics as those who deny that transsexuals can exist. Clearly there are differences, or there wouldn't be transsexuals, but there's a lot of other crap going on that obscures what would happen with ideal behavior.
"Did they have an easy life?" is not an appropriate question to determine privilege. "Would they have had a harder life if they were black?" is an appropriate question.
I'm aware that there are a lot of people out there of all skin colors who are having serious problems with life, and that there are many who will vote against their self-interest for a pocketful of sweet lies.
Do not try being racist in my house. Best I can do.
Um, you think a $250 fee is trivial? To me, it's not bad, but lots of people can't afford that. You appear to realize that fact, and you even appear to realize that people like me are in favor of tax money paying all expenses associated with getting to vote, and you still say something about not knowing where the DMV is?
In states that want to require voter IDs, the DMV was the local place that was closed down last year, but now is fairly distant and not reachable by public transportation, and it's only open when somebody is working and is afraid to take a day off.
As a leftist, I'm fine with voter ID, as long as acquiring the ID is free of charge and easy for everyone.
Speaking as something of a leftist, I don't consider it an insult. I consider people who use it (or "liberal") as insults to be largely inarticulate and not capable of serious coherent thought.
A sincere apology includes an attempt to do better in the future. If someone is a jerk to you, apologizes, and then continues being a jerk, that's conclusive evidence that the apology was insincere. Avoid that person if at all possible. If you're in a relationship, dump the jerk.
Last I checked, people 45-65 were a protected class, but people under 45 or over 65 could be discriminated against by reason of age. Personally, I think the high number should track the Social Security full retirement age, but right now it doesn't.
On the one hand, people make all sorts of claims about SJWs, and on the other those people accuse lots of people of being SJWs that don't match the claims. The net result is libel.
The "all whites are racist" stuff belongs to the lunatic fringe. "All whites are privileged" is what you're actually looking at, and that';s pretty much true.
And then you go and quote some drivel archived from therightstuff.biz.
Do you agree that women's minds and men's minds are alike, that there are no significant systemic differences? No? In that case, why would it be a stretch of imagination to think that, in rare cases, male minds can be born in female bodies or vice versa?
Two biological sexes would mean classifying everyone as biologically male or biologically female. That mostly works, but reality is more complicated. People are born with genotypes other than XX and XY, and sometimes with two sets of sex organs.
That sounds awful! Where is it that young men go to prison for years for consensual sex?
It would be nice if "no meant NO" in all cases, but that currently doesn't seem to work always. Also, empowerment includes access to family planning methods and education.
You know what children with mothers have? Fathers. If you keep your pants zipped, guess what? No children! Are you so misogynous that this didn't occur to you?
Clinton wanted to allocate money for retraining. But, no, easier to fall for the sweet lies.
Birth control where you are is free and/or cheap, sure. Same as where I live. However, there are places in the US that try to get rid of Planned Parenthood and other women's health facilities. Moreover, there are places in the world that are not in the US, and not all of them have readily available birth control, for whatever reason.
The problem isn't the US population. Last I checked, our fertility was under replacement rate, offset by immigration. The problem is in undeveloped countries, where access to birth control can be difficult and expensive.
Alternately, a short jail sentence. I wouldn't really notice a $100 fine, but I would notice a day in jail.
You're very close to the truth here.
Microsoft software works. It may not be the best, and it sure isn't the cheapest, but you can set up a Microsoft environment that reliably works for a given amount of money. If something doesn't work,
Linux mostly works. The software may be the best, and is often the cheapest, but there will be problems because it's not a drop-in replacement. Not all widely-used Windows software is available on Linux. The Linux equivalents are different, and that can be a problem.
So, a business can spend $X and be sure they get what they need, or they can spend $Y without the practical guarantee. Most businesses aren't in the business of setting up desktop environments, they just use them like infrastructure. They don't have the expertise to adapt any situation to Linux, and they don't want to pay to maintain the expertise. They're much happier paying $X and knowing the situation is unlikely to blow up in their face.
The problem is that, when a great F/OS application is written for Linux, it's usually profitable to port it to Windows.
Yeah, but the governments of the world, working together, ELIMINATED THE MOST DEADLY DISEASE IN HISTORY. No disease killed as many people as smallpox, and it's gone. They're working on polio, which was widely feared when I was young. I don't care about someone saying "that was easy", because it wasn't. It took massive coordinated government effort. Smallpox was what started inoculation, and if the free market was going to eliminate it it would have been done long ago.