It would be interesting what kind of money such a fundraiser can collect. Somehow I can see this getting a LOT of money.

I do have a lot of respect for the women (and men, let's not forget them) who provide a valuable service by selling professional aid in the area of satisfying one of the most powerful human urges.

But these people I'd certainly call prostitutes. Or maybe, if I have to skirt the issue, a "working girl/guy".

I would never dream of calling someone who actually has a decent job and provides a valuable service a hoe or a whore!

"I have here your son. He can be alive tomorrow provided you..."

That kind?

Wasn't Win10 the system where you can't turn off updates? Now, how does that work out for you?

Yes, but we ain't living in a perfect world and politicians as well as officials who should work for taxes deliberately choose to be whores and sell themselves to the highest bidder. So ok, I can't change the game so I want in. How much? How much is the whore? How much for a law? How much to actually get it executed? How much to get a law bent and turned inside out to use it against its intent?

Apparently these hoes are for sale, so what's left to be determined is the price.

"Every Child Achieves" is an even WORSE name for an education bill than "no child left behind". Please tell me it's just a name. Please tell me it's not some sort of "everyone's a winner" bullshit that undermines education even more than it already is.

Just want to know. Maybe if we chip in, we could get one that works for us for a change.

It takes a good actor to deliver it convincingly. Not the joke. It being funny.

I'd rather have this piece of dung being forgotten than copyrighted. But yes, of course jokes are creative work and can be copyrighted. Even though in this time and age, and this copyright, I'd rather not. It's one thing if the latest and greatest crap some whining buoy howled cannot be distributed (and it would actually do the world a great favor if it wasn't), but laughter and humor should not be reigned in.

If you buy a company by the way the employees dress, you get what you deserve.

There is a difference, and I do sincerely hope you know it, between dirty, stained rags and informal attire. Believe it or not, it's possible to wash jeans and t-shirts so they not only look but also smell nice.

As for your picture, you might notice that this is from a very different time. That's like complaining about the fashion of the 70s and questioning the sexual preference of the guys.

The reason for me to ask whether it is STILL an issue is that I spent some time working in the US and they were quite strict with work dress code, something I was by no means used to from the European work places I have been to.

That plus the fact that I was the only one who considered it odd that people have to dress up when there is no way they could possibly come into contact with customers leads me to the conclusion that it was back then the norm in the US.

And hence me wondering whether it still is the norm.

What has he done to deserve a reward?

Too bad we can't do the same with management. We'd probably find that the bum begging for your change at the entrance has a better business plan and better money management down than the whole useless VP combo.

What's your problem with Jerry? I don't really know how he gets his work done in a gimp suit ... and somehow I really don't WANT to know ... but why the fuck should I care as long as he DOES get his work done?

Get your priorities straight!

Why does it matter? As long as it's clean (and I mean the clothing AND the person inside it!), I couldn't care less how my staff is dressed.

Stuff a tech into a three piece suit and you can watch productivity plummet.