Boeing: 10,000 notifications in preparation for 5,000 actual firings: reason is expenses caused by Obama. On a smaller scale, there are many reports of doctors closing their practices, and businesses firing people to get below the cutoff at which point they don't have to buy mandated insurance. In the petroleum and chemical industries, regulations have become particularly onerous and small companies are shutting down.
Atlas is shrugging, and Fuhrer Obama is the reason.
Dear liar:
Stockholders are owners, not customers. The people who actually run the company (president, CEO, CFO, etc.) are required to act in the best interests of the owners. There are people who think that ruining the reputation of their company by cheating their customers is in their best interest, just as there are people who think that committing armed robbery is in their best interest, but they are not legally required to act in that manner.
Judging by your warped view of things, I bet you voted for Obama.
Your class envy rhetoric is idiotic. Manhattan has both rich and poor neighborhoods; flooding hurts both. Damaging business districts (which are interspersed throughout the island) hurts everyone.
Like New Orleans, New York City has a location which is important as an inherent part of its geography. Unlike New Orleans, it is not feasible to move it. It is surrounded by water (duh, that's what island means) and those areas on the other side of the water are already densely populated. There's nowhere to go. If the island and surrounding lowlying areas were vacated by force and government edict, the economy of the region and then the whole nation would be damaged.
Storm surge barriers might help, but the New York harbors are busy, so the barriers can't be a barrier to navigation. The Hudson and East Rivers aren't exactly shallow, so construction won't be cheap. Sea walls may be feasible in some regions, after all both LaGuardia and Idlewild (JFK) are build on land not far above sea level. Improved drainage is paramount; the possibilities for storing water where, in Stan Freberg's words "whole island concrete", are remote. Improved protection of tunnel and subway openings would help.
Alas, there are many forms of evil, and if you think you're safe if you separate yourself from religious screwballs, you're wrong. The northeast and the west coast have become increasingly accepting of violence, mobs, restrictions on liberty and property rights, and onerous taxation. That's a recipe for universal poverty and an invitation for a military invasion.
Beyond the US Constitution prohibition on unreasonable search, and the 9th and 10th amendments, the concept of legal privacy has developed more in the courtroom than the legislature. Thus, you can't be legally photographed without your permission on a toilet, in a dressing room, or in other places where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy; and this is generally the result of an accumulation of numerous court decisions rather than explicit law.
Parties do tend to straddle the middle, but consistent pressure will move the center, and that's what's been going on for over a century as the West drifts left. Since leftists own the schools, that's not likely to change.
However, consistent victories by politicians promoting a particular ideology will cause other politicians to imitate that message: they want to get elected, too. In that manner the center can be moved. Third party candidates in most situations cannot change the trend, it must be done within the existing structure and that means making one of the existing parties right-minded and successful.
Gary Johnson's message wasn't selling. "Power brokers" are superfluous if the message is strong enough and people are not incapable of seeing its virtues. Perot pulled 19% of the popular vote with a vacuous message and a waffling campaign, and for sure no "power brokers" favored him. Imagine what he could have done if he had had a coherent, strong, sensible program and a pleasing personal appearance.
Somalia is an example of vicious people forming gangs. Those gangs and their warlord leaders are proto-governments.
Look, it takes more than size to make government bad, it takes bad people. But big government does attract people who want to use power over other people, and those people are bad. Smaller government gives them less scope for their evil.
Goldman-Sachs is a known bad player, but generally companies need customers who are robust and enthusiastic enough to buy their product. Regulation is not what keeps people safe, it's the self-interest of rational providers of goods, who don't want to be murdered by the gun-toting man they've poisoned/defrauded/crushed/electrocuted/burned etc.. Regulations are superfluous, and provide a way for the meddling and dishonest to force their will on others. Mayor Bloomberg is a flaming example.
In the United States in 2011, 15.1% of the population was officially under the poverty line (wikipedia). That's what most people consider to be "in need". Keep in mind that a person at the US poverty line is at the global 85% wealth level. Obviously there is some fraud and deception going on here.
However, you missed the point. As the official definition of poverty becomes richer, there is increased incentive to appear poor, so as to score more swag, and decreased incentive to produce for your own life. The central fallacy is that there is no loss in societal wealth as each incremental person leaves the workforce, and thus that there will be no consequences when a massive portion of society doesn't work.
Helping people in need, particularly when that help is at a distance from the needy person, causes many problems. Frauds of all sorts emerge. Some people even destroy their own possessions, just for the fun of the destruction, knowing that Uncle Sam will buy them newer stuff. Some people deliberately remain needy, just so that they don't have to work.
Charity is best applied locally by people who can watch the recipients and cut off aid if the poor turn out to be slackers.
Government-forced charity is evil in all its aspects:
stealing from the productive
giving to the shiftless, destructive, and dishonest
providing an undeserved income to government employees
Air in the 787 weighs about 340 pounds at sea level, about 255 pounds with typical pressurization at altitude. That 85 pound difference isn't a big deal.
The combined pay for the top 4 executives of Southwest Airlines is 0.026% of the total revenue, which is on the order of 3 cents per passenger per flight. Quite simply, it is not significant. It is swamped by airport fees, fuel costs, and flight crew wages.
Bad grammar and bad spelling can lead to interpretations opposite the writer's intent. It is not impossible that a lazy mistake in a contract could bankrupt you. Then you'll not only "give a fuck", you'll be fucked.
I have aquariums that are forty years old that have just a microscopically thin lawyer of silicone holding hundreds of gallons of water in a glass box.
Not only is any pencil at or below 0.3 mm too fragile, it tends to tear paper.
Pentel RSVP and other moderately priced (below $1) fine point black pens with rubber grips are a fair choice for general application. Use it until it starts to blob, then toss it and get another.
Alas, money is also a factor here. If the kid were able to hire an effective law firm, take the case to a higher court and make sure that the mall knew they were in an expensive and no-win position, they'd settle for actual damages, legal expenses, and a moderate penalty pretty quickly.
Slashdot Mirror
I hope where you live is invaded first; you deserve it.
Boeing: 10,000 notifications in preparation for 5,000 actual firings: reason is expenses caused by Obama. On a smaller scale, there are many reports of doctors closing their practices, and businesses firing people to get below the cutoff at which point they don't have to buy mandated insurance. In the petroleum and chemical industries, regulations have become particularly onerous and small companies are shutting down.
Atlas is shrugging, and Fuhrer Obama is the reason.
Dear liar:
Stockholders are owners, not customers. The people who actually run the company (president, CEO, CFO, etc.) are required to act in the best interests of the owners. There are people who think that ruining the reputation of their company by cheating their customers is in their best interest, just as there are people who think that committing armed robbery is in their best interest, but they are not legally required to act in that manner.
Judging by your warped view of things, I bet you voted for Obama.
Decades ago we "knew" that civilization was causing a new ice age.
People could start taking Cthulhu seriously and start sacrificing to him. Same results.
Your class envy rhetoric is idiotic. Manhattan has both rich and poor neighborhoods; flooding hurts both. Damaging business districts (which are interspersed throughout the island) hurts everyone.
Like New Orleans, New York City has a location which is important as an inherent part of its geography. Unlike New Orleans, it is not feasible to move it. It is surrounded by water (duh, that's what island means) and those areas on the other side of the water are already densely populated. There's nowhere to go. If the island and surrounding lowlying areas were vacated by force and government edict, the economy of the region and then the whole nation would be damaged.
Storm surge barriers might help, but the New York harbors are busy, so the barriers can't be a barrier to navigation. The Hudson and East Rivers aren't exactly shallow, so construction won't be cheap. Sea walls may be feasible in some regions, after all both LaGuardia and Idlewild (JFK) are build on land not far above sea level. Improved drainage is paramount; the possibilities for storing water where, in Stan Freberg's words "whole island concrete", are remote. Improved protection of tunnel and subway openings would help.
Alas, there are many forms of evil, and if you think you're safe if you separate yourself from religious screwballs, you're wrong. The northeast and the west coast have become increasingly accepting of violence, mobs, restrictions on liberty and property rights, and onerous taxation. That's a recipe for universal poverty and an invitation for a military invasion.
Beyond the US Constitution prohibition on unreasonable search, and the 9th and 10th amendments, the concept of legal privacy has developed more in the courtroom than the legislature. Thus, you can't be legally photographed without your permission on a toilet, in a dressing room, or in other places where you have a reasonable expectation of privacy; and this is generally the result of an accumulation of numerous court decisions rather than explicit law.
We are witnesses to the suicide of the United States of America, and the end of freedom and Western Civilization.
Parties do tend to straddle the middle, but consistent pressure will move the center, and that's what's been going on for over a century as the West drifts left. Since leftists own the schools, that's not likely to change.
However, consistent victories by politicians promoting a particular ideology will cause other politicians to imitate that message: they want to get elected, too. In that manner the center can be moved. Third party candidates in most situations cannot change the trend, it must be done within the existing structure and that means making one of the existing parties right-minded and successful.
Gary Johnson's message wasn't selling. "Power brokers" are superfluous if the message is strong enough and people are not incapable of seeing its virtues. Perot pulled 19% of the popular vote with a vacuous message and a waffling campaign, and for sure no "power brokers" favored him. Imagine what he could have done if he had had a coherent, strong, sensible program and a pleasing personal appearance.
Somalia is an example of vicious people forming gangs. Those gangs and their warlord leaders are proto-governments.
Look, it takes more than size to make government bad, it takes bad people. But big government does attract people who want to use power over other people, and those people are bad. Smaller government gives them less scope for their evil.
Goldman-Sachs is a known bad player, but generally companies need customers who are robust and enthusiastic enough to buy their product. Regulation is not what keeps people safe, it's the self-interest of rational providers of goods, who don't want to be murdered by the gun-toting man they've poisoned/defrauded/crushed/electrocuted/burned etc.. Regulations are superfluous, and provide a way for the meddling and dishonest to force their will on others. Mayor Bloomberg is a flaming example.
Help! I'm being attacked by a Big Gulp (TM).
In the United States in 2011, 15.1% of the population was officially under the poverty line (wikipedia). That's what most people consider to be "in need". Keep in mind that a person at the US poverty line is at the global 85% wealth level. Obviously there is some fraud and deception going on here.
However, you missed the point. As the official definition of poverty becomes richer, there is increased incentive to appear poor, so as to score more swag, and decreased incentive to produce for your own life. The central fallacy is that there is no loss in societal wealth as each incremental person leaves the workforce, and thus that there will be no consequences when a massive portion of society doesn't work.
Helping people in need, particularly when that help is at a distance from the needy person, causes many problems. Frauds of all sorts emerge. Some people even destroy their own possessions, just for the fun of the destruction, knowing that Uncle Sam will buy them newer stuff. Some people deliberately remain needy, just so that they don't have to work.
Charity is best applied locally by people who can watch the recipients and cut off aid if the poor turn out to be slackers.
Government-forced charity is evil in all its aspects:
It is inherently that way, and cannot be fixed.
Air in the 787 weighs about 340 pounds at sea level, about 255 pounds with typical pressurization at altitude. That 85 pound difference isn't a big deal.
So you wish to return to the times when the government gave thousands of square miles of land to railroad companies?
Airplanes like the 747 reach EOL when customers stop buying.
Is that delusion or dilution?
Most airlines run at quite high utilization factors: above 80%. That does not agree with your claim of overbuilding.
The combined pay for the top 4 executives of Southwest Airlines is 0.026% of the total revenue, which is on the order of 3 cents per passenger per flight. Quite simply, it is not significant. It is swamped by airport fees, fuel costs, and flight crew wages.
Bad grammar and bad spelling can lead to interpretations opposite the writer's intent. It is not impossible that a lazy mistake in a contract could bankrupt you. Then you'll not only "give a fuck", you'll be fucked.
That can't be true. Lawyers are made of 'poxy.
Not only is any pencil at or below 0.3 mm too fragile, it tends to tear paper.
Pentel RSVP and other moderately priced (below $1) fine point black pens with rubber grips are a fair choice for general application. Use it until it starts to blob, then toss it and get another.
Alas, money is also a factor here. If the kid were able to hire an effective law firm, take the case to a higher court and make sure that the mall knew they were in an expensive and no-win position, they'd settle for actual damages, legal expenses, and a moderate penalty pretty quickly.