does it? Iknow at my old job, when we got new servers eventhough the top bosses wanted the equipment destroyed/recycled, the lower management almost always gave us the parts to take home (minus the HDD) Same for netowrking equipment and pretty much any other scrap
nice straw man and all, but libertarians are not for no government. the republicans and democrats have done a good job of confusing libertarians with anarchists, and dolts seem to keep parroting the same lies over and over.
Or you could you know, just hire people that seem dependable and evaluate them on their performance, which seems a whole lot simpler and less judgmental.
and you know what, Rand paul is for that as well. its not an either or thing here.
Plain and simple if I own a business, I should be able to hire anyone I want , for any reason I want. the same goes for firing a person.
I know as an employee it sucks, but if i owned a business, I would not want anyone telling me "oh, you only have X working there? thats no good, you need to hire Y, if you dont hire Y you are racist/sexist etc."
This week, politicians on both sides of the aisle weighed in. Sen. Rand Paul was criticized for saying in an interview, “I’ve heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines.” He added that he’d vaccinated his own kids, and said, “I’m not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think they’re a good thing. But I think parents should have some input.”
i just dont see the issue. I think parents SHOULD have some input on what is put into their kids bodies, dont you?
im not sure the issue. in the long short of it he is saying that he doesnt want to change anything when it comes to vaxes, he is saying that vaxes are better than the low level risks out there, but there doesnt need to be a new law and the old laws shouldnt be struck down
The more i look into it, the more i see a manufactured "problem"
well for one, I do not have a problem with a business drug testing its employees. I dont personally like the idea, but i think as a business owner, I want employees i wont worry about getting arrested on their way to work when I need them here.
Its already that way now so why would you hold this against him when its how its been for decades in america already???
I think you are buying into the fear instead of actually looking at what he wants to do. Try looking at his page and seeing what he stands for rather than listening to talking heads and other people who are only talking about what talking heads have said about him
somehow i doubt that would be the case if we actually built newer reactors with modern tech. That is true today because we are running reactors that are past their intended lifespan. but because of hippies in the 70s, we havent gotten any new ones yet
so your problem is that he is taking a constitutional stance on something that happened when he was a child??? something he had nothing to do with?
I guess thats your right but you are ignoring the fact that he is the only one who is actually talking about doing anything for civil rights today. not even obama is doing anything for civil rights today.
i dont live next to it because thats not where my parents bought their home? Im not sure what you are getting at, that because I dont mind living 5 miles down the road i should live closer?
Should there be a nuke plant in downtown Manhattan? probably not, but having one along the hudson 30 miles away hasnt hurt anyone and its been running for 40 something years
who said anything about the market and civil rights? rand is talking about ending the war on drugs and restoring rights to those convicted of non violent drug charges. That Is what I mean when im talking about civil rights because everyone knows the system is stacked against black people. ending the war on drugs would be the single biggest civil rights gain for many americans out there
im not a fan of his stance on vax either. but you need to look at the bigger picture. his personal beliefs on vax? or his stance on larger issues at had?
I dont agree wit him personally on vax, abortion and a few other things, but in the end he is STILL better than the alternatives.
think of the children is never the right reason to throw money at a problem, no matter how much you want to save the kids
maybe if you are not qualified to do anything but flip burgers, maybe you should think about not having those 5 kids with 3 different women. im not saying forced sterilization, but people need to think.
Blame the parent who cant take care of their kids for having them, not the people who dont want to take care of other peoples kids. The parent is the problem, not me
the only certifiably crazy people running are those who want to keep doing more of the same
people voted for obama because he "wasnt bush" , well guess what, he is bush. What next? hillary? another war hawk??? no thanks
Rand paul only seems crazy because he is talking about things others wont. REAL civil rights issues, prison reform, auditing the FED, ensuring our money is sound. I mean yeah, if you go on what we have done for the past 40 years it sounds crazy. but, maybe its time for crazy
First we invent an arbitrary (but hopefully based on some observable phenomenon, like "these people/numbers look and behave differently than others") definition, like "race" or "integer", and then we attempt to study them.
That would be fine if the social science people would stop trying to change the definition of these things every few years. for example, gender
When I was in 9th grade i had an english teacher who was totally senile. Im talking she would yell at me and other kids for talking to students in class. the only problem is the students she would accuse of us talking to would not even be in class that day 1/2 the time. I got a perfect score on my regents exam (only one in the school to do so) and somehow she failed me.
so i had to take the class again next year, thankfully the english teacher i got is one i had before and she was so shocked at what happened she literally let me breeze through class and get me out after 1/2 a year (when taking a class for the 2nd time, an 85 and above gets you out 1/2 year, at least in our district)
Slashdot Mirror
insulin is also not a vax.
if you are diabetic and dont take insulin, you will die. like in hours or days. If you dont get a vax, you might get something, you might not.
apples and oranges
does it? Iknow at my old job, when we got new servers eventhough the top bosses wanted the equipment destroyed/recycled, the lower management almost always gave us the parts to take home (minus the HDD) Same for netowrking equipment and pretty much any other scrap
i think you forgot the /s tag
nice straw man and all, but libertarians are not for no government. the republicans and democrats have done a good job of confusing libertarians with anarchists, and dolts seem to keep parroting the same lies over and over.
thats apples and oranges.
Or you could you know, just hire people that seem dependable and evaluate them on their performance, which seems a whole lot simpler and less judgmental.
and you know what, Rand paul is for that as well. its not an either or thing here.
Plain and simple if I own a business, I should be able to hire anyone I want , for any reason I want. the same goes for firing a person.
I know as an employee it sucks, but if i owned a business, I would not want anyone telling me "oh, you only have X working there? thats no good, you need to hire Y, if you dont hire Y you are racist/sexist etc."
This week, politicians on both sides of the aisle weighed in. Sen. Rand Paul was criticized for saying in an interview, “I’ve heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines.” He added that he’d vaccinated his own kids, and said, “I’m not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think they’re a good thing. But I think parents should have some input.”
i just dont see the issue. I think parents SHOULD have some input on what is put into their kids bodies, dont you?
im not sure what that has to do with us not building new plants though
im not sure the issue. in the long short of it he is saying that he doesnt want to change anything when it comes to vaxes, he is saying that vaxes are better than the low level risks out there, but there doesnt need to be a new law and the old laws shouldnt be struck down
The more i look into it, the more i see a manufactured "problem"
well for one, I do not have a problem with a business drug testing its employees. I dont personally like the idea, but i think as a business owner, I want employees i wont worry about getting arrested on their way to work when I need them here.
Its already that way now so why would you hold this against him when its how its been for decades in america already???
I think you are buying into the fear instead of actually looking at what he wants to do. Try looking at his page and seeing what he stands for rather than listening to talking heads and other people who are only talking about what talking heads have said about him
somehow i doubt that would be the case if we actually built newer reactors with modern tech. That is true today because we are running reactors that are past their intended lifespan. but because of hippies in the 70s, we havent gotten any new ones yet
so your problem is that he is taking a constitutional stance on something that happened when he was a child??? something he had nothing to do with?
I guess thats your right but you are ignoring the fact that he is the only one who is actually talking about doing anything for civil rights today. not even obama is doing anything for civil rights today.
i dont live next to it because thats not where my parents bought their home? Im not sure what you are getting at, that because I dont mind living 5 miles down the road i should live closer?
Should there be a nuke plant in downtown Manhattan? probably not, but having one along the hudson 30 miles away hasnt hurt anyone and its been running for 40 something years
who said anything about the market and civil rights? rand is talking about ending the war on drugs and restoring rights to those convicted of non violent drug charges. That Is what I mean when im talking about civil rights because everyone knows the system is stacked against black people. ending the war on drugs would be the single biggest civil rights gain for many americans out there
im not a fan of his stance on vax either. but you need to look at the bigger picture. his personal beliefs on vax? or his stance on larger issues at had?
I dont agree wit him personally on vax, abortion and a few other things, but in the end he is STILL better than the alternatives.
right next door no, but i drive 5 miles down the road and its there right on the hudson (indian point)
ive never once worried about it melthing down and ive lived here 95% of my life
again, not the point i was getting at at all.
think of the children is never the right reason to throw money at a problem, no matter how much you want to save the kids
maybe if you are not qualified to do anything but flip burgers, maybe you should think about not having those 5 kids with 3 different women. im not saying forced sterilization, but people need to think.
Blame the parent who cant take care of their kids for having them, not the people who dont want to take care of other peoples kids. The parent is the problem, not me
the only certifiably crazy people running are those who want to keep doing more of the same
people voted for obama because he "wasnt bush" , well guess what, he is bush. What next? hillary? another war hawk??? no thanks
Rand paul only seems crazy because he is talking about things others wont. REAL civil rights issues, prison reform, auditing the FED, ensuring our money is sound. I mean yeah, if you go on what we have done for the past 40 years it sounds crazy. but, maybe its time for crazy
I do, and ive never been concerned about it
while true, we also shouldnt be telling any kids that its easy. theres a lot of hard work, but the rewards are worth it.
lets try being truthful with our kids.
First we invent an arbitrary (but hopefully based on some observable phenomenon, like "these people/numbers look and behave differently than others") definition, like "race" or "integer", and then we attempt to study them.
That would be fine if the social science people would stop trying to change the definition of these things every few years. for example, gender
When I was in 9th grade i had an english teacher who was totally senile. Im talking she would yell at me and other kids for talking to students in class. the only problem is the students she would accuse of us talking to would not even be in class that day 1/2 the time. I got a perfect score on my regents exam (only one in the school to do so) and somehow she failed me.
so i had to take the class again next year, thankfully the english teacher i got is one i had before and she was so shocked at what happened she literally let me breeze through class and get me out after 1/2 a year (when taking a class for the 2nd time, an 85 and above gets you out 1/2 year, at least in our district)
Except for the truth is that for a family, when all is broken down it is close to 50 grand. Im sure administrative costs factor in but still
Sure, and we can het even more if we just take everyones money, and give them what they need
A child shoyldnt be on forums or anywhere that can happe