Random Politics & Religion #00

Eorzea Time
 
 
 
Language: JP EN FR DE
Version 3.1
New Items
users online
Forum » Everything Else » Politics and Religion » Random Politics & Religion #00
Random Politics & Religion #00
First Page 2 3 ... 614 615 616 ... 1375 1376 1377
 
Offline
Posts:
By 2015-05-28 17:51:54
 Undelete | Link | Quote | Reply
 
Post deleted by User.
Comment: "sluts" is on the do not use list.
 Shiva.Onorgul
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Onorgul
Posts: 3616
By Shiva.Onorgul 2015-05-28 18:10:42
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Weren't you recruited by a new company recently?
You actually believe him?

"Yeah, I'm totally the CFO of a major corporation. Gives me plenty of time to post on a video game forum at virtually every hour of the day. By the way, people making boatloads of money work really hard, you guys!"
[+]
Offline
Posts: 35422
By fonewear 2015-05-28 18:38:58
Link | Quote | Reply
 
The thing is I"m the CEO of the internet at least that is what my business card says !
[+]
 Shiva.Viciousss
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Viciouss
Posts: 8022
By Shiva.Viciousss 2015-05-28 22:10:33
Link | Quote | Reply
 
fonewear said: »
Siren.Mosin said: »
needs more random religion.


Done

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/26/vatican-ireland-gay-marriage-referendum-vote-defeat-for-humanity

TLDR Vatican is not for gay marriage what a shock !

Just that one cardinal is against it, I think the pope will come out and rebut his colleague's opinion and offer the actual response from the Vatican. Good for Ireland btw, I notice the sky didn't fall as a result of their referendum.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-28 22:28:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
First off the bat: You are seriously going to bring up a case on anti-corporate intelligence theft?

Let's look at it another way: People are suing these companies for agreeing to not steal each other's employees. How is that screwing them over again? What is the harm again? Oh wait, it's for the benefit of the corporations, so I guess in your mind it's automatically bad for the employees, even though they have no effect on them at all.
I can't believe you're defending this....

Anti-competition agreements are the absolute opposite of a free market system.

Yeah, not getting recruited by another company would have no effect on an employee... Weren't you recruited by a new company recently?
So, are you for corporate espionage?

You do realize that this agreement between companies does not keep employees from leaving their jobs and moving to another job in one of those competing companies, right? All the agreement is doing is keeping the competing companies from cold calling and stealing their competitors key employees.

But I guess you think that's a bad thing, huh?

And yes, I was just hired for another company. I also signed a non-compete agreement with my firm I'm leaving. Is that also a bad thing in your mind? It protects my ex-employer from me stealing business away from them, and it protects me from any accusations of such theft. Which doesn't matter to me because I'm not going into public accounting, but private industry.

I'm surprised that you haven't signed a non-compete agreement with your employers yourself, being the professional you claim to be.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-28 22:31:51
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Shiva.Onorgul said: »
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Weren't you recruited by a new company recently?
You actually believe him?

"Yeah, I'm totally the CFO of a major corporation. Gives me plenty of time to post on a video game forum at virtually every hour of the day. By the way, people making boatloads of money work really hard, you guys!"
Ok bub. Whatever you say.

But I'm glad that you at least got 67% of my new job right. It means you care enough to pay attention. But you know what? I don't care if you believe me or not.
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2015-05-28 23:18:00
Link | Quote | Reply
 
YouTube Video Placeholder
 Leviathan.Chaosx
Offline
Server: Leviathan
Game: FFXI
user: ChaosX128
Posts: 20284
By Leviathan.Chaosx 2015-05-28 23:22:53
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
"vagina emotions make chicks a bunch of crazy broads"
No doubt man.
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 08:27:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Obamacare's cost $273 billion to Administrative expenses alone, taxpayers pay for it, not insurance

Quote:
Since Obamacare took effect, roughly 16.5 million more people have gained health insurance. And while the health care law is objectively succeeding in its key goal of expanding access to coverage to millions of Americans, those gains come with enormous costs to taxpayers — including inordinately steep ongoing administrative costs, according to a new study.

The analysis, published in Health Affairs this week, found that Obamacare will add about $273.6 billion in administrative costs between 2014 and 2022, including $172.2 billion in higher private insurance overhead — bringing the total spent on administering government health programs and private insurance overhead to nealry $2.76 trillion for that period.

The authors of the study, Drs. David Himmelstein and Steffie Woolhandler, professors at the City University of New York School of Public Health and lecturers at Harvard Medical School, attribute the soaring overhead to rising enrollment in private plans, as well as the law’s Medicaid expansion. This year 9.6 million people signed up for plans on the state and federal exchanges.

The study also attributes the uptick in overhead to the high cost of setting up and running the exchanges, which are essentially brokers between the government and private health plans.

In comparison, the federal government spends just 2 percent in overhead costs on its traditional Medicare program.

The latest estimate breaks down to about $1,375 in extra administrative costs per newly insured person per year, according to the report. That’s “over and above what would have been expected had the law not been enacted,” Himmelstein wrote on the Health Affairs blog.

Some of the overhead will be added to Medicare and Medicaid programs, but most of it—about $172.2 billion—will come from private insurance.

The researchers acknowledge that expanding access to health coverage for tens of millions of Americans — as Obamacare was intended to do — comes at a high price, but they say that soaring administrative costs are avoidable.

“Insuring 25 million additional Americans, as the [Congressional Budget Office] projects the ACA will do, is surely worthwhile. But the administrative cost of doing so seems awfully steep, particularly when much cheaper alternatives are available,” the report says.

The researchers point out that Medicare Advantage, which also involves federal reimbursement to private insurers, also had “bloated administrative costs,” though in that case the overhead averaged 13.7 percent in 2011, or about $1,355 per enrollee. “But rather than learn from that mistake, both Democrats and Republicans seem intent on tossing more federal dollars to private insurers,” they wrote.

In the report, the researchers push for adopting a universal single-payer system, saying that it would significantly scale back on administrative costs.

Of course, adopting a single-payer model in the U.S. in this political environment is not likely to happen anytime soon.

Last summer, an effort by progressive lawmakers in Vermont to craft the first single-payer model in the country died off when liberal Democratic Gov. Peter Shumlin, a longtime leader of the movement, realized it would cost his state more than it could afford.

Other states like New York are considering a similar model, though it will be an uphill battle.

Thing is, although this is not a partisan source (it applauds Obamacare, just pointing out what it's costing taxpayers), it does make the logical conclusion which opponents of the law made while it was still being "debated" in Congress (I use debated loosely, it was written and forced down our throats because the liberals/democrats knew they didn't have a lot of time to get that law passed), which is to go to a single-payer health system. Hell, it even stated that these systems failed in specific states because the costs would be too great, but we all know the federal government doesn't give a ***about costs. I mean, it's not their money they are spending.
[+]
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 09:04:59
Link | Quote | Reply
 
fonewear said: »
The thing is I"m the CEO of the internet at least that is what my business card says !

can totally see you passing them out to chicks in a dive bar.... "but...let's go to your place baby, they're still trimming mine in gold leaf"

[+]
 Bahamut.Milamber
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: milamber
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-05-29 12:50:11
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Bahamut.Kara said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
First off the bat: You are seriously going to bring up a case on anti-corporate intelligence theft?

Let's look at it another way: People are suing these companies for agreeing to not steal each other's employees. How is that screwing them over again? What is the harm again? Oh wait, it's for the benefit of the corporations, so I guess in your mind it's automatically bad for the employees, even though they have no effect on them at all.
I can't believe you're defending this....

Anti-competition agreements are the absolute opposite of a free market system.

Yeah, not getting recruited by another company would have no effect on an employee... Weren't you recruited by a new company recently?
So, are you for corporate espionage?

You do realize that this agreement between companies does not keep employees from leaving their jobs and moving to another job in one of those competing companies, right? All the agreement is doing is keeping the competing companies from cold calling and stealing their competitors key employees.

But I guess you think that's a bad thing, huh?
You can still use those employees in other areas of your company which don't compete, until the duration of the clause elapses. In many cases, it isn't specific knowledge of <product_x> or <process_y> which makes someone valuable. It tends to be the person themselves. By agreeing to not "poach" employees from each other, it directly impacts the amount those employees (and indirectly, the remaining employees) could earn, in a manner which specifically circumvents the existing protections (non-competes and NDAs).

Both of which, by the way, are very anti-capitalism.


Asura.Kingnobody said: »
And yes, I was just hired for another company. I also signed a non-compete agreement with my firm I'm leaving. Is that also a bad thing in your mind? It protects my ex-employer from me stealing business away from them, and it protects me from any accusations of such theft. Which doesn't matter to me because I'm not going into public accounting, but private industry.

I'm surprised that you haven't signed a non-compete agreement with your employers yourself, being the professional you claim to be.
Agreements with individuals (non-competes) is not collusion. Non-competes are also not universally valid in all states, and have rather stringent requirements that need to be met in order to be upheld. (Typically specific material/items/knowledge, location, duration)

These agreements weren't with the employees, they were among the companies.

And frankly, the only job I've ever had which required a non-compete was a retail job.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 13:48:57
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
By agreeing to not "poach" employees from each other, it directly impacts the amount those employees (and indirectly, the remaining employees) could earn, in a manner which specifically circumvents the existing protections (non-competes and NDAs).
How so? You do realize that this only applies to cold calling other employees.

What's stopping those employees, when they are dissatisfied with their employer, from looking at the other employers (even if they are in the non-compete agreement) for a new job?

Can you prove to us that these agreements prevent such employees from switching jobs to the other companies in this no-compete agreement? Can you prove to us that this agreement does nothing more than agree to not cold call and poach their competitor's employees?

Prove the collusion. Don't imply, and certainly don't imply by strawmaning the argument.
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Flavin
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-05-29 13:53:21
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Signing a non-compete has nothing to do with being a professional lol... they're not always required and honestly aren't really worth the paper they're written on a lot of times.

Edit: I find it strange that you claim you waited until you put in your resignation to sign a noncompete as well. Also, why would you be surprised if he hasn't signed one if you didn't sign one until a week ago?
[+]
 Bahamut.Milamber
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: milamber
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-05-29 14:12:17
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
By agreeing to not "poach" employees from each other, it directly impacts the amount those employees (and indirectly, the remaining employees) could earn, in a manner which specifically circumvents the existing protections (non-competes and NDAs).
How so? You do realize that this only applies to cold calling other employees.

What's stopping those employees, when they are dissatisfied with their employer, from looking at the other employers (even if they are in the non-compete agreement) for a new job?

Can you prove to us that these agreements prevent such employees from switching jobs to the other companies in this no-compete agreement? Can you prove to us that this agreement does nothing more than agree to not cold call and poach their competitor's employees?

Prove the collusion. Don't imply, and certainly don't imply by strawmaning the argument.
Oh by Thor's thews.

http://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/
[+]
 Bahamut.Milamber
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: milamber
Posts: 3691
By Bahamut.Milamber 2015-05-29 14:13:27
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Lakshmi.Flavin said: »
Signing a non-compete has nothing to do with being a professional lol... they're not always required and honestly aren't really worth the paper they're written on a lot of times.

Edit: I find it strange that you claim you waited until you put in your resignation to sign a noncompete as well. Also, why would you be surprised if he hasn't signed one if you didn't sign one until a week ago?
I highly doubt he signed a non-compete at resignation. If he did, he's an idiot. You would typically sign a non-compete at employment.
[+]
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:16:02
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Prove the collusion. Don't imply, and certainly don't imply by strawmaning the argument.

dude they settled with the doj the only one stawmaning is you

"the companies agreed to a more broad prohibition against entering, maintaining or enforcing any agreement that in any way prevents any person from soliciting, cold calling, recruiting, or otherwise competing for employees for five years"
[+]
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Flavin
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-05-29 14:17:10
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Lakshmi.Flavin said: »
Signing a non-compete has nothing to do with being a professional lol... they're not always required and honestly aren't really worth the paper they're written on a lot of times.

Edit: I find it strange that you claim you waited until you put in your resignation to sign a noncompete as well. Also, why would you be surprised if he hasn't signed one if you didn't sign one until a week ago?
I highly doubt he signed a non-compete at resignation. If he did, he's an idiot. You would typically sign a non-compete at employment.
It would be highly unusual for sure.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 14:29:40
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
By agreeing to not "poach" employees from each other, it directly impacts the amount those employees (and indirectly, the remaining employees) could earn, in a manner which specifically circumvents the existing protections (non-competes and NDAs).
How so? You do realize that this only applies to cold calling other employees.

What's stopping those employees, when they are dissatisfied with their employer, from looking at the other employers (even if they are in the non-compete agreement) for a new job?

Can you prove to us that these agreements prevent such employees from switching jobs to the other companies in this no-compete agreement? Can you prove to us that this agreement does nothing more than agree to not cold call and poach their competitor's employees?

Prove the collusion. Don't imply, and certainly don't imply by strawmaning the argument.
Oh by Thor's thews.

http://pando.com/2014/03/22/revealed-apple-and-googles-wage-fixing-cartel-involved-dozens-more-companies-over-one-million-employees/
You know, you might help your case out a little better if you, instead of posting a link to a sensationalized article, you actually, you know, post the legal documents themselves.

But I guess it's because you don't want to show the fact that these companies are agreeing to settle this out of court (my guess is because the negative publicity would be damaging along with drawn out legal costs associated with it) instead of actually going to court and argue their case.

After reading a bit about the background, it seems like in most other states (California being the weird case), this would have been laughed at and thrown out of court. California, they have a small chance of winning, but mainly because that state's all *** up in the legal sense anyway.

But anyway, please show us where it states that there was collusion, and not the appearance of such, as accused by the plaintiffs. I, for one, would have loved to see this actually go to court and watch it get thrown out of court (as it would have most likely happen, they have no evidence nor is there any reasonable excuse to state as such). Then the only bitching you would hear is how evil corporations are and how they just paid the courts to screw the little people over.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 14:31:18
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Bahamut.Milamber said: »
I highly doubt he signed a non-compete at resignation.
Yeah, in professional employment where one can leave a company to start their own, non-compete clauses exist to prevent the leaving employee from stealing the clients when they leave.

Seriously, are you that obtuse, or does this come natural for you?
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:31:25
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
you asked them to show you the evidence. and then you acted surprised/offended when they provided it. and now it somehow doesn't meet some imaginary criteria that you just made up. and then here comes the name calling.....
[+]
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:33:46
Link | Quote | Reply
 
YouTube Video Placeholder
[+]
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 14:34:24
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
you asked them to show you the evidence. and then you acted surprised/offended when they provided it. and now it somehow doesn't meet some imaginary criteria that you just made up. and then here comes the name calling.....

I question their evidence. Is that too hard for you to see?

Because their evidence uses second-handed information in their reasoning. I used primary sources in mine.

I again ask Mil to prove the collusion and all Mil did was post articles that speculated on the collusion, nothing more.
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:47:29
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
I question their evidence. Is that too hard for you to see?

All anyone can see is the boring and repetitive nature of your arguments. I wrote a script for it. I'm going to call it the Boring as Hell Kingnoobie All Purpose Argument Flow Chart

Step 1.) you ask them to show you evidence.
Step 2.) you acted surprised/offended when they provide it.
Step 3.) and then you say it somehow doesn't meet some imaginary criteria that you just made up.
Step 4.) and then here comes the name calling....

granted "obtuse" isn't you best put down...

but I could see it coming a mile away and I'm like oh goodie here it comes...wait for it...boom
[+]
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Flavin
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-05-29 14:48:23
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
Yeah, in professional employment where one can leave a company to start their own, non-compete clauses exist to prevent the leaving employee from stealing the clients when they leave.

Seriously, are you that obtuse, or does this come natural for you?
I think you're missing the point he's making in that it's extremely unusual for employees of a company to sign a non-compete after they've resigned. The company at that point has no leverage and the employee can just leave if they want to. That's why non-competes are typically signed upon the beginning of your employement at that company.

Non-competes are not standard in all professional employment either.
[+]
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:49:51
Link | Quote | Reply
 
I will send $20 american dollars to anyone besides KN and Mil that remembers what the original argument was...

NO BACKREADING!!!

YouTube Video Placeholder
[+]
 Shiva.Nikolce
Offline
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
user: Nikolce
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-05-29 14:53:24
Link | Quote | Reply
 
YouTube Video Placeholder
 Lakshmi.Flavin
Offline
Server: Lakshmi
Game: FFXI
user: Flavin
Posts: 18466
By Lakshmi.Flavin 2015-05-29 14:53:39
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
But I guess it's because you don't want to show the fact that these companies are agreeing to settle this out of court (my guess is because the negative publicity would be damaging along with drawn out legal costs associated with it) instead of actually going to court and argue their case.
Yes... negative publicity can be damaging and yes it is cheaper to settle outside of going to court... What does this have anything to do with the issue at hand? You just gave two examples of how they're trying to shield themselves from damage and it has nothing to do with the case at hand and whether they did what they're accused of.
[+]
 Caitsith.Zahrah
Offline
Server: Caitsith
Game: FFXI
user: zahrah
By Caitsith.Zahrah 2015-05-29 14:56:32
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
I will send $20 american dollars to anyone besides KN and Mil that remembers what the original argument was...

NO BACKREADING!!!

YouTube Video Placeholder

/buzzes in

ROXETTE and Micky Mouse GIF combos!
[+]
 Bahamut.Kara
Offline
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
user: Kara
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2015-05-29 14:58:20
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
But I guess it's because you don't want to show the fact that these companies are agreeing to settle this out of court (my guess is because the negative publicity would be damaging along with drawn out legal costs associated with it) instead of actually going to court and argue their case.

There are TWO different cases here.

The class action lawsuit, which has not been settled yet.

The DOJ final judgement, which is final for all respective companies involved. Which Nik has already quoted as it was in the link Mil already provided.
Quote:
IV. PROHIBITED CONDUCT

Each Defendant is enjoined from attempting to enter into, entering into, maintaining or enforcing any agreement with any other person to in any way refrain from, requesting that any person in any way refrain from, or pressuring any person in any way to refrain from soliciting, cold calling, recruiting, or otherwise competing for employees of the other person.
 Asura.Kingnobody
Bug Hunter
Offline
Server: Asura
Game: FFXI
Posts: 34187
By Asura.Kingnobody 2015-05-29 15:10:28
Link | Quote | Reply
 
Shiva.Nikolce said: »
Asura.Kingnobody said: »
I question their evidence. Is that too hard for you to see?

All anyone can see is the boring and repetitive nature of your arguments. I wrote a script for it. I'm going to call it the Boring as Hell Kingnoobie All Purpose Argument Flow Chart

Step 1.) you ask them to show you evidence.
Step 2.) you acted surprised/offended when they provide it.
Step 3.) and then you say it somehow doesn't meet some imaginary criteria that you just made up.
Step 4.) and then here comes the name calling....

granted "obtuse" isn't you best put down...

but I could see it coming a mile away and I'm like oh goodie here it comes...wait for it...boom
Let me know when I ever reach step 2, ok? Since you think you know my arguments better than me.
First Page 2 3 ... 614 615 616 ... 1375 1376 1377