This rule seems to be trying to discourage other countries from acting upon their own laws and morality.
This concept is trying to discourage other countries from applying their laws to Americans WHILE IN AMERICA. The example would be the DEA going to Canada, and arresting Canadians because they're in possession of weed.
A firm doesn't need to have plans consistent with climate goals in order for an investment in that firm to produce results consistent with climate goals. The reason oil and gas companies got such a large share of green investment is because they
Yeah in the past year they've all backed off, but that didn't mean that BP wasn't one of the biggest wind producers in America, or one of the largest solar companies in Europe, or that Shell doesn't have a *massive* EV charging network, or that Total isn't at the forefront of floating windfarms or that Chevron isn't building massive amounts of green hydrogen generation.
The investment here is in engineer, and fossil fuel companies are the undisputed leaders in execution of major energy engineering projects.
It's all about power and control. If you don't pledge fealty to the climate targets, you can't be controlled by them, and thus we must put you on blast as being on the naughty list.
This entitled moron wants you to believe he did 1290X the work of a salaried employee at 150k.
That's not how pay works except on an assembly line.
>But why should we accept that a contract between an individual and a multinational corporation is fair? And that one between a union and a corporation is unfair?
Because we've seen the game play out with unions before. It isn't year zero, you know.
It means that when there is crunch time for a release of a "product", in this case technical updates to an existing platform, you are expected to work after hours and be ready on a moment's notice to do some hardcore coding for extended periods, which can in fact be considered working hard.
Say this to any junior investment banker, and watch them laugh in your face. Neither is right, staff your fucking companies properly, but coders aren't working hard if crunch time isn't all the time.
What kills me is vax deniers claim to have "done their research" but seem oblivious to what life was like before vaccines. Pretty much every one of us would know someone who had died or had lasting side effects from diseases that we now have vaccines for. We really don't want to go back to the way things were before vaccines or we'd have shit tons more horrible stories like yours, many of which would end a lot worse.
For a website for supposedly intelligent people, it's amazing how quickly we go straight to binary thinking. Maybe we take whole a byte and get away from anything we call a vaccine is always good vs anything we call a vaccine is always bad, and have some room for some things called vaccines aren't actually vaccines, and some things called vaccines aren't actually good?
Because not vaccinating is simply one thing: dumb. And not vaccinating your childen is child abuse.
Yes, anything has risks. Not doing something alos has risks. The smart thing is to honestly and neutrally look at the data and then make a decision. Instead panicky, insight-less and idological approaches have replaced rationality. Pathetic.
Would you say that it's a good idea, then, to not allow the unvaccinated to stream across a horribly protected border?
That means that salespeople are best on the road seeing clients in their home territory, not sitting in a home office, in front of a computer or in meetings with middle managers. Pulling salespeople back to the office will probably reduce sales performance, not enhance it. This means that IBM is expecting a MAJOR sales drop in the coming months and, yes, this is a stealth layoff. I’m not sure how I feel about stealth layoffs. In many ways, they’re more humane than the standard in-your-face layoffs.
I think you're making the mistake that these people still live in their sales territories, and just aren't coming into the office in that location. I bet what is happening is that all of the California sales team moved to Texas because it's cheaper when they were allowed to be remote.
To be completely fair though, President Trump to do $THING is often followed by disaster. Check the stock market today, for example. Oh, I know, fifth dimensional chess and all that, but still. My 401k valuations look like a rollercoaster this week.
And that has never happened in the history of ever before Trump?
What you get remotely is a pale imitation of the bonds built through direct interaction. It's kinda hard to go out for a post-work beer with your colleagues if you're not working together. No office birthday parties, no community-building activities, no chit-chat at the copier... The claim is a load of nonsense, either intentionally or delusionally.
You are correct that it's not...but why is that important? Expect for a handful of extroverts and the type of people who are specifically paid TO build community, it's fake. We do it when we're forced to, and avoid it by any means necessary. I work for a satellite office of my company, and have missed every single corporate-HR "happy hour" that they schedule when they're in town checking on us for 7 years running.
If uptight people weren't so uptight and just minded their own fkn business - or just came out of the closet and accepted themselves as they are - gays wouldn't have to march.
This is exactly why we have a feces and needle problem in all our major cities: you just can't have any basic standard of morality at all - about anything ever - without being accused of being "uptight" and "closeted." Is it possible that some people just want to have a cohesive, functional society where they have a reasonable idea of how to properly interact with each other? What you want is a society that's like dial up internet, but for which we've declared all the handshaking we used to hear as "uptight".........you'd never make a stable connection because you can't agree on any protocol.
It's like the people who when you tell them that trans people without gender-affirming care have a 50% suicide rate they think that it's better to just let them kill themselves.
How far does that rate drop post-op?
That's self loathing because of the complexities of your denial, bro.
As an actual gay man, I'd like to point out that it's entirely possible for someone to be entirely heterosexual and still homophobic. It's ironic how no one ever gets accused of being a "closet black" when they say something racist, but say something anti-gay and...
As an actual straight man, I'd like to point out that it's entirely possible for someone to be entirely heterosexual and not homoPHOBIC. Nothing about your preferences scares me in the slightest, I just don't think we should be celebrating it with parades. Especially not sexually explicit ones which, unfortuantely because homoSEXUALITY is all about sex, is what they all devolve to.
"Just Say No." - Nancy Reagan "No." - Ronald Reagan
