The questionnaire requests a list of those individuals who have taken part in international climate talks over the past five years
How petty is that?
What Alphabet did is by definition Robbery.
If they'd given, or promised, a Christmas Bonus, then yes it would be robbery.
If the (or their predecessors) had led the workers to expect bonuses only by voluntarily giving them in the past, but had never written contract terms or otherwise promised the bonuses for this year, then the hypothetical missing bonus was never the property of the workers in the first place.
I mean getting caught doesn't exactly inspire confidence...
That they caught it and went public with it helps inspire confidence in Georgia's election process and results. "The DHS tried to crack us (the dirty sons of Bs), failed, and got caught!"
In the DHS, not so much.
Hell they probably would have accepted the offer for a free pen test. Instead many orgs react rather violently if they dont know about it and you did it.
An unexpected, unauthorized, "free pen test" is indistinguishable from a bad-guy cracking attempt, and must be treated as if it's a real threat. This causes ENORMOUS extra costs as the victim has to batten the hatches, examine everything for corruption and/or possible persistent threat instalation, compare working databases to backups and examine the differences vs. update audit trails, and so on.
Not to mention the concern that it might be a real attempt by the DHS, or a rogue group within it, to hack the election.
Drivers at the taxi-hailing app company reported feeling forced to work extremely long hours, sometimes more than 70 a week, just to make a basic living
Sounds like a typical Silicon Valley startup to me.
If your company removes money from you and gives it to someone else, that is called Robbery.
But if the company just doesn't give you a Christmas/End-of-Year gift that they had been voluntarily giving previously, it may be a disappointment but it isn't Robbery.
= = = =
It may also be really stupid move on the company's part, though. It's going to cost them a bunch in employee satisfaction, and thus performance, over the next year or more.
Of course, if they were thinking of replacing a bunch of the employees with H1Bs or the like, tweaking them off so they perform poorly could then be used in claims that they were not good performers and thus needed replacing.
If I can't write a donation off on my taxes, then I didn't donate it.
If you weren't given the money you weren't taxed on it. So it was just as much "written off on your taxes" as if you'd gotten it, donated it, and deducted it.
> Because no one's Insurance Company ever told them what doctor's were covered before Obamacare.
Before Obamacare, the private insurance plans in my state were better. You could buy a proper insurance plan on the open market. Now those types of plans are gone. Can't buy them at any price.
That means that the best facilities are out of your reach if you're on Obamacare and have cancer.
I've actually had to go BACK to being on an employer provided plan because of Obamacare.
> Yes, I'm sure taking away subsides of millions of people will work great, they can stop paying $150 per month
I don't know anyone like this and most of my family are the sorts of people that white knights like you claim to champion.
I'm not sure this mythical "obamacare beneificiary" even exists. Are you capable of describing what such a person should look like?
How about the opportunity to spend your money on more immediate necessities rather insane insurance premiums.
Remember, Obamacare only gives you the "privelege" of paying a lot for something you may never need.
If you are normal person hysterically fixated on the possibility of medical bankruptcy, then the liberal media has already damaged you. Your mental problems are the fault of liberals, not republicans.
> Almost all Christians have reformed.
They haven't reformed THAT much. This is why extremist pro-abortion rhetoric can still help sink a presidential candidate.
I live in the least car friendly city in Europe, a city where I would get fined if I drive from one side to the other. Yet I still need to own a car.
Not needing a car on a daily basis is quite different from a blanket ban of cars in a city, which is just out right stupid. But I see you have put as much thought into your post as the GP.
In spite of what you seem to think, the trend in many cities is to reduce and gradually remove cars from the inner city.
>It's probably going to be the LG G5.
That's a pretty fucking sad state of affairs. (I owned the G3 and G4...I couldn't stomach more of the same but in a clunkier package)
Do tell more. I haven't heard anything negative about the G5, but I also have not done a super-thorough research, either. Any and all accounts would be of value to me.
Egotist: A person of low taste, more interested in himself than in me. -- Ambrose Bierce