MEMBERS COMMENTS

< Prev  1 / 37  Next >
Guy annoys girlfriend with puns at IKEA 88% Posted May 2017

Guy annoys girlfriend with puns at IKEA

Comment: 10 hours ago

A bad attempt at a remake of an old Emily Pun video.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQgaO-vymMg

TYT - Here comes Corbyn 88% Posted May 2017

TYT - Here comes Corbyn

Comment: 3 days ago

It woud be nice if the media just reported the news but we all know the media is biased so that will never happen.

TYT - Here comes Corbyn 88% Posted May 2017

TYT - Here comes Corbyn

Comment: 3 days ago

The Turks meddling in foreign elections.  This is not reporting the news but encouraging people to vote a particular way.

First modern images of a human brain on LSD 87% Posted May 2017

First modern images of a human brain on LSD

Comment: 7 days ago

LSD was a good psychiatric aid in the 1940's and 1950's but they banned it after it was used recreationally.  Both Bill Gates and Steve Jobs have admitted to using LSD and they were both very creative individuals.

Stephen Fry analyses Donald Trump 89% Posted May 2017

Stephen Fry analyses Donald Trump

Comment: 8 days ago

No, it's false.  http://www.snopes.com/donald-trumps-intelligence-quotient/

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto 46% Posted May 2017

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto

Comment: 8 days ago

"fixed term contract offered. "  We don't usually offer contracts here beause it's only beneficial for one of the parties.  For example, if you invest in a lot of training for yor employees and a contract requires that they work for you for a year after you hire them to make sure the costs of training is fully utilized, they could find a better job somewhere else but are stuck in your lower paying job for that year (beneficial to the employer).  If you hire someone and give them a contract and then they cannot do the job, then the employee has the right to stay and you continue to pay them but still have to hire someone else to do the job they are incapable of doing (beneficial to the employee).

Jobs by default are at-will employment meaning the employer can terminate you at any time for no reason and the employee is able to leave at any time for no reason.  There may be some exceptions with some jobs but an employment agreement would state the terms such as garden leaves.

Seasonal jobs are obvious.  For example, retail stores usually staff up for the Christmas holiday.  Then, in early January staff is let go.  No matter how often you tell them that their job is temporary, they still get emotional when you tell them it's time to leave.  Maybe you're one of the 1% that never had to be fired so you don't know the emotional rollercoaster you go on so you don't understand why people cry during that event.  It's not about being a bad manager.

Your example of fruit pickers was a good one.  They do not offer contracts for those people.  Many try that job and fail.  If you get a chance, you should see the entire documentary about H2a visas for those jobs and why we hire Mexicans and very few Americans.  Here's a small 3 minute sampler: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg3WFt72RM8   Nothing would be worse as an employer to give someone a long-term contract for that job and find out they are one of the many that cannot handle the job.  Notice in the video, Morgan actually earns $2.85 an hour for 10 hours beause he didn't fill many buckets.  But the law is clear that you must have at least minimum wage.  So now the employer must pay a higher wage than what he actually should have earned so those oranges that he picked will cost more than the ones picked by the Mexicans.  He would be one of those people terminated.

"Dismissal should not be a surprise" It isn't a surprise but that doesn't stop some people from getting emotional about it.

I have worked for companies where we terminate you immediately if you gave a two-week notice that you were planning on leaving the company.   There are many reasons for that but I'll only mention a couple.  The employee can cause sabotage or take sensitive information with them to their new company.  Once notice is given, their access is terminated immediately to prevent those.  It is still considered a voluntary quit so they do not qualify for unemployment benefits or severance pay.

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto 46% Posted May 2017

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto

Comment: 9 days ago

I'm sure most Uber drivers do it to supplement their income instead of having that as their only source of revenue.  Should they become corporate employees, then they should also be provided with corporate tools to do the job such as a car.  That's not going to happen.

If I sell something on eBay and I pay eBay a commission for selling my product on their site, then the eBay company becomes my employer and I have to pay taxes for them now?  See how crazy this philosphy can get?

"If you screw every last penny out of them, they will constantly be looking to find a better job."  Okay, so let them find another job.  If Uber is not paying enough to compensate for their time and other expenses then people will stop driving and cab drivers will get their fares back again.  But we all know that's not going to happen soon.

"I do hope you're attempting irony here" . Not really.  I've had to fire people and it's not a pleasant thing to have to go through as the employer or the employee.  I doubt too many people get enjoyment out of having to fire someone but it's necessary sometimes when reducing seasonal workforce or underperforming associates.

 

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto 46% Posted May 2017

Jimmy Dore takes a look at Labour's manisfesto

Comment: 9 days ago

Who needs to put 20% down when buying a house?  Maybe if you're buying a house for more than it's appraised value but you shouldn't do that anyway.

Not all jobs qualify for overtime pay.  The CEO of a Fortune 500 company, for example, doesn’t get overtime pay.  Not all jobs require that you clock in and out and they are usually professional jobs.  Those are called exempt employees.

Zero hour contracts are important for some jobs.  A limo driver can have a contract like that.  Depending on the season, they may not have any work for that driver.  Many limo drivers are part-time workers so they have another job elsewhere and drive the limo for extra money.  I’ve never given anyone zero hours but for disciplinary action, I have reduced employees hours while increasing other employees hours who have better performance.  Sometimes reducing the hours below a point causes the employee to quit which makes it easier than having to fire someone.  It’s an at-will employment so it’s easy to fire someone but then you don’t have to watch them cry.

Regarding gig employees, does that mean Uber drivers will now become official employees of the Uber company so Uber will then have to pay medicare and social security taxes for them?

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 9 days ago

So you're saying that the people who did the land grabs were 2nd and 3rd generation British.  So what.  It is still the fault of the British.  The majority of the land taken after 1776 was purchased during the Louisiana Purchase from the French.  Other land such as West Florida got independence from Spain.   This means the British, Spanish, and French took most of the land.  

Maybe you can educate me by telling me which land you think we wrongfully took from native american Indians after 1776.  The Indian removal act relocated some tribes to Indian lands within existing state boarders.  Many tribes went peacefully but not all.  The act had no intention of killing any.  From my research of that act, we gave them land with a patent forever.  If there were improvements on the land, we paid them for those.  We helped with them with moving and provided protection. 

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 9 days ago

"Did the Native Americans get a " fair market value for the property taken ?" I don't think so."  Why don't you ask your own country that question.  It was the British who landed on Plymouth Rock and the British settlers fought the natives.  I don't believe those particular natives were compensated for the stolen land. 

Britan was a large empire at one time and conquered many countries.  And now you want to blame that on the people who are still living here several hundred of years later.

Regarding regulation, I agree with some regulation as long as it is being done to prevent victims.  For example, I think some laws should be removed such as those for prostitution and those against marajuana.  Theyare both victimless crimes.  

Citizens should have the right to do whatever they want as long as it doesn't prevent anyone else from having liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  That means you should not be allowed to steal from other people, burn someone's house down, damage their car, or kill their dog.  But if you want to damage your own car, you should have the right to do that.

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 10 days ago

"If you go back in history, there was a time when there was no private ownership of land (or gold mines). The resources were available to the community "  Today, it's not like that so it's called progress.

"land which used to be the common wealth."  There is land like that and those are roads, bridges, parks, schools, and government buildings.  The governemnt, with eminent domain laws, can even take private property for the good of the community but they must pay the owner fair market value for the property taken.

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 10 days ago

I was stating that stealing is illegal and shouldn't be allowed.  You somehow translated that into annexe resources (which I don't know what you mean by using annexe which has nothing to do with resources but I'll assume you mean acquire).  

If I buy a gold mine and extract all the gold from it, I should be allowed to keep all that gold or sell it.  It would be mine to do with as I please.  That is the benefit for me investing in the property as well as paying people to mine it.  It is not a common wealth commodity.  It only becomes common wealth if the government does it.

Sweden's plan to 'decouple' its economy 87% Posted May 2017

Sweden's plan to 'decouple' its economy

Comment: 10 days ago

By 2030, they are going to shut down the Stockholm Arlanda Airport.

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 10 days ago

Making money the legal way.

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay 87% Posted May 2017

The Circular Economy: Making environmentalism pay

Comment: 10 days ago

Most major cities in the USA have recycling places you can go to drop off a load of separated waste material and claim money for it.  You can return copper, aluminium, steel, bottles and cans, ink cartridges, and car batteries.  If you can get a bunch of it, you can also sell recycled paper and cardboard too.

This actually become a problem with scrap metals because the amount you get is so high that people steal it from abandoned buildings.  Some people have had their completely functional air conditioner stolen so the copper and aluminium in the condensor can be recycled for money.

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers 86% Posted May 2017

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers

Comment: 13 days ago

Good, that being the case, I should get more upvotes and fewer people arguing with me.

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers 86% Posted May 2017

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers

Comment: 13 days ago

"We have a housing shortage in the UK - so I would complain about policies that tend to make that problem worse rather than better."  The solution isn't to restrict who can purchase housing, it is to create more housing.  That can make the developer money as well as put people to work.  Adding more supply will make the housing costs lower.   People might even get angry when they see their housing prices drop after paying a premium for it years ago.

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers 86% Posted May 2017

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers

Comment: 13 days ago

It appears my views are unique when you compare it to everyone else's on this site.

Too bad you chased another user away.  I'd like to hear from someone in the 1% and why luxury would be a miserable life.  I would love to have a life of luxury and thought that's what everyone stived for.

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers 86% Posted May 2017

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers

Comment: 14 days ago

I'm part of the boreme crowd but I'm unique compared to the rest of you.

If you can make money by building houses, you should do it.  Doesn't matter if they stay empty or not.  If there's a demand for it, then you should supply it.  If you start running out of land, you can do what Dubai does and create islands to create the new houses on.  You can also build higher like the skyscrapers of New York and other major US cities.

If I could build a house for $150,000 and sell it for $200,000 to an investor, I'd do that all day long.  I don't care what that investor does with it after the sale is completed.  He can burn it down to the ground for all I care.  I already made my $50,000 profit.

If the property values are going up like you think they are, then it should be easy to get a business loan and buy a couple million dollars worth of properties and hold them to make money.  You would get rich.  Instead of complaining about others getting rich, why don't you do what they do and get rich too?

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers 86% Posted May 2017

Faiza Shaheen: Restrict UK housing sales to UK taxpayers

Comment: 14 days ago

Using the boreme crowd's philosophy, you should pay everyone a living wage.  The companies are obviously not paying enough to allow a single mother of 5 to own a house and put all her kids through the most expensive universities.  Such a shame your government doesn't step in and force increase the wages of those teaching jobs in london.

You are already aware that the prices are going up in London.  Don't you think that is a good time to buy then?  Why don't you go out and buy those properties instead of letting the Chinese buy them instead?  Sounds like a good investment opportunity for you.

"or by paying tax on your property."  I imagine any Chinese buyer that purchases property will have to pay tax on that property just like a UK citizen.  So what's the problem again?

Trump did not inherit his wealth.   According to Trump, "I started off with $1 million. I built a company that's worth more than $10 billion. And I say it not in a bragging way, but that's the kind of thinking we need."  But even if you did believe he's lying and did inherit his Father's wealth, that was estimated to be only between $100 million and $300 million.  Trump is worth billions which is several magnitutes greater.

PROFILE

COncernedCitizen

COncernedCitizen