Should an employee be fired for viewing slashdot at work?
Should an employee be fired for viewing slashdot at work?
Here's what happened in about 150 years under "conservative" US government policies:
Grew from small, isolated, breakaway country to the richest, most powerful country on the planet, with the highest standard of living.
Here's what happened under "liberal" government policies:
You have the right to be on Slashdot and argue about which ideology is better because of liberal policies.
Along the way, freed slaves and saw life expectancy become the highest in the world.
Lincoln was most assuredly not conservative. Republican, yes. Conservative, no. His policies resembled those of modern progressives more than modern conservatives, though even that is something of a stretch, because unlike 99% of modern politicians, Lincoln was actually a respectable statesman.
Contrast to what happened in "progressive"/socialist/liberal nations such as Venezuela, Greece, and the Soviet Union.
Progressive != socialist != liberal.
Additionally, Greece's problems stemmed from government overspending without enough taxation to cover the expenses. That's more similar to what Republicans do today than Democrats. And both Venezuela and Russia had problems where a few people at the top of the party essentially lived in luxury while the poor starved, which makes it more like a caste system than true socialism.
Besides, essentially zero modern progressives view socialism as the be-all and end-all of public policy, but rather as a useful tool to use in limited ways for the public good. That's radically different from a country that attempts to use pure socialism as its sole policy (which is exactly as foolish as using pure capitalism as the sole public policy).
sure thing. what ever makes you feel better. go ahead a preach the benefits of socialism and how you are going to force that on people that don't want it.
Point to where I said that, son.
Of course they care if net neutrality will kill off 800 startups. The government loves to kill off small corporations, small business, etc. Big corporations lobby for laws which benefit them and harm new players. These 800 startups would have better stayed quiet, because all they've done is just give just one more reason to kill net neutrality.
Only a total cuck dumbfuck could believe that our government supports free trade.
So believing what Hamilton, Jefferson and Madison put in writing during the ratification debates about what the phrase meant is arguing the writers on the Constitution were unable to properly express themselves??? You obviously didn't bother to read the quotes from them in the link.
I'm not twisting anything. The real puzzle is why some people have created this myth that it somehow includes everything. Standard legal construction (for hundreds of years) is to read phrases as adding meaning to the text, not being superfluous. If it can cover any kind of spending, then there would have been no point in adding it to the Constitution. Only if it expresses a limitation on what kind of spending is allowed does it convey a meaning.
For a consumption tax, you don't have to track people's purchases. Instead, you track people's sales and the tax is collected by the seller.
In terms of privacy, this is much better, as you pretty much already know that Widget Corp. is a seller of Widgets and the government doesn't need to collect exactly _who_ they sold widgets to, just how much they sold them all for.
In terms of tracking, 90% of the States currently already track sales. It's how they collect State-level sales taxes. Piggybacking on an existing system is much cheaper/easier than running a completely different system, which is why most States currently piggy-back on the federal system for their income taxes.
In terms of black markets, even income made on the black market (currently untaxed due to the income tax system) gets taxed when used to consume things.
As for cheating, it's relatively simple to catch businesses cheating and they already have the structure and the . For the most part, individuals can't cheat because they're the buyers, not the sellers. You may get some used-market under the table cheating, but you can either call that a recycling incentive, or else create monetary incentives to catch it, i.e. a reward (no penalties) to any buyer who turns in a seller who sold them something without charging the tax.
It's funny how you respond to a post almost entirely about interest representing the compensation for the choice to defer consumption with no mention whatsoever of that point.
Just repeating your mistaken economic views over and over again while deriding the views of actual economists isn't very convincing. Try addressing the actual argument next time.
Legally, it's a grey area. If your employment contract has morality clauses, for example, you can be punished for things done outside of work. However, usually that is limited to situations where your contract explicitly states it, which usually happens when working for religious institutions (or, occasionally, schools). You can also be fired for actions that reflect badly on your company, but that assumes that A. people know the author works for that company, and B. they have reason to somehow connect the two. And of course, in at-will states, your employment can be potentially terminated for any reason, though in many, the implied covenant of good faith might give the author grounds to argue that this was without cause, done out of malice arising out of personal embarrassment on the part of the management team.
The bottom line would be that the author should contact a lawyer who regularly deals with employment law in that part of the country, because whether he has a case or not is highly dependent on where the author is located, and I'm pretty sure it won't be open-and-shut no matter where the author lives. However, the fact that the author has not revealed where he works does open the opportunity for the lawyer to point out that bringing this to court will cast their company in a very bad light publicly, whereas an out-of-court settlement for... say ten years' salary will not. Depending on how terrified the company is, such (entirely legal) blackmail might actually be more effective than bringing a suit.
With that said, there's a magic point beyond which developers start to leave the platform and less software gets developed for the platform. So they still have to care about developers enough to stay on the right side of that tipping point.
In my experience, what makes it chaotic is the vast expanse of code that you didn't write personally. I've seen big chunks of functionality have to be completely rewritten because even major frameworks from major companies like Apple sometimes have bugs that are showstoppers when used in some way that the original author didn't expect. Most people normally assume that external dependencies already work when estimating, because after all, those are major frameworks written by major companies with testing resources.
Now extend that to code written by random engineers with limited testing resources. Normally, you assume that your internal code works, because after all, people are using it every day. But what happens when there's an edge case you didn't notice? If it isn't a crash, a bug in a suitably complex app often isn't easy to track down, and even when it is a crash, it might be some subtle multithreading race condition that can be utter misery to debug. And the larger the app, the more opportunities for untested code paths to suddenly find themselves on the hot path. This is why estimating is hard; you aren't just estimating how long it will take to get your code working; you're also estimating how long it will take you to fix everybody else's mess.
top kek, There's that authoritarian slant I was waiting for. Gas all those who disagree and the world will be a better place!
Wow, you really skipped your meds today.
The advantage for Americans is we expend our labor making other things,
Except we don't. That's partially automated, so we don't need as many people as before anyway. It doesn't help preserve jobs, so/because it doesn't require more labor.
That is to say: the import of cheap goods from China has made every single American--from the poorest class to the richest class--more-wealthy, improving our standards-of-living immensely.
CO2: 410 PPM
It seems fairly limited to me. Only Intel CPUs, only Windows 10, special drivers needed.
And only worth the money, I presume, if you have a HDD. If you're building a new system, which is highly likely given all the required specs, it seems unlikely that you would spec one. I'd much sooner get a slow-by-SSD-standards SSD.
If only they had developed a product which would somehow work with any system with a M.2 slot (which by extension could be slapped into PCI-E) then it would seem there would be a lot more potential takers.
Maybe Intel developed this product in response to a specific customer's demand, and commercialized it in an attempt to recoup R&D costs?
lol, it's the internet bro, i am entitled to be a nutty shit.
I didn't say you weren't. Just don't expect anyone to think anything should happen to you other than scraping you off of their shoe.
Even if true, how does that help anyone younger fix those issues?
They are still here and still voting for things which will actually hurt them too.
LOL, yes, they are cucks for profiting from the times they were in as opposed to the person that hates the country and prior generations because their retirement outlook isn't as good.
They're hurting now too. Lots of them don't actually have a retirement outlook. The last few big bank scandals wiped those out. Now they're [barely] living in a shit hole. That's why they're cucks. Instead of supporting social programs upon which they depend, like say social security, they've been shitting on the whole idea of socialism as if it were stupid. Well, it ain't. It's what makes a society.
Thanks for that, AC. You would think that on a site supposedly for nerds that the residents would know how to use google by now, but apparently that's a little too complicated for some of these right-wing cucks. (Yes, I'm planning to use that word on them until they're tired of hearing it. All others are encouraged to join in. And that's precisely what someone is when they repeat bullshit talking points which were old when the Puritans picked them up and ran with them.)
Economists can certainly disappoint you. One said that the economy would turn up by the last quarter. Well, I'm down to mine and it hasn't. -- Robert Orben