BDashe

That's a nifty little statement you make, but when management has to make cuts or do something that doesnt include giving extra privileges to non-salary employees, then management is incompetent and greedy. Unions may not manage companies directly, however they certainly manipulate the living sh*t out of em during contract years. Looks like they are starting to manipulate entire industries out of jobs by forcing work/consumers to look overseas. Congrats! The global economy is funny like that. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Yeah, exactly. What happens when managemnt is paid the same or less than the worker? Further, you don't seem to be able to handle the decisions management needs to make in order to keep a company profitable, especially right now. Workers tend to hide behind 'management is greedy and incompetent' while demanding to be paid MORE for the same or less work in the worst economy we've seen in decades. How is that justified? example: "Employers now pay the full cost for covering single employees, and workers can cover all their dependents by paying $10 a month." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/10/23/BUN81A9CEI.DTL http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/06/BUG81AFSLD.DTL http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/11/11/BU911AI303.DTL How is it justified if management has gone through layoffs, salary freezes, and pays upwards of $200 a month for healthcare all while the state is in double digit unemployment? FYI, the salary gap is non-existent between 50% of laborers and management... edit: who is greediest, management or laborer? So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

sounds about right. totally fair and acceptable. Only thing i find funny is that they would make everyone come in on the holidays for a different 30 minute shift (if i read that correct) or in general just making everyone come in for the same 30 minute shift but paying em all for a full days work. I feel like that is not only wasteful of your time but the employers money. Other than that, sounds like a logically run joint, and very fair. I'd volunteer for every holiday i could. free money!!! So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Let me know if I am reading this right: "working a holiday" would constitute 30-40 minutes walking the dogs and getting paid for 8 hours and 40 minutes of work? I was thinking you had to work a full shift on the holidays, while it may be an inconvenience and ruin travel plans, if that is correct it aint a bad deal. $75 for 30-40 minutes of work for an $8.50/hour job. 1 day off per week and work every other weekend. That sounds pretty fair, I drew out a 31 day month and found 8-10 days off per month depending on pattern, which is the same as just having weekends off. Are weekend shifts full shifts? or part time shifts like holidays? do you get paid overtime for more than 8 hours of work per day OR more than 40 hours of work per week? So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

you get vacation days? sick days? personal days? any days off during the week? or are you expected to work 365 days a year? if youre hourly, i believe on national holidays you can get paid either time and a half or double. additionally there are usually overtime laws for hourly if you are working over 40 a week, and/or 8 a day depending on where you live. If youre salary- tough luck, you signed a contract that should have been understood before you began work, and the employer should have made sure you understood exactly what is expected. i assume youre being compensated well if you are working 7/365, if not and you dont like it, leave.

1. buy a blue light 2. get drunk 3. turn off all lights 4. turn on blue light 5. Go nuts. Try it. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

why dont you or one of your co-workers try and get promoted to make the changes you want? or go to a new company you agree with in the same role? or try to get a management position at another company if you're concerned about politics in trying to get promoted in your current company? Not being a smart ass, honest questions. there are more options than just being mad at management and blaming em right? So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Here is what i get out of that article- you make it to the top in any organization and you get paid appropriately. So the top union guys dont make 10 mil on stock options or a real estate deal, their industry doesnt provide that opportunity but they still get paid high 6 and 7 figures. It isn't a crime to be wealthy, when did it become so taboo to get rich? Why does it make a person evil? That was the american dream, it has now been perverted into b*tching and moaning to try and get paid more to work less. How bout trying work more to get paid more, interesting concept... Union bosses and biz execs seemed to figure that out. I guarantee they didnt go on strike to get a promotion. Yeah, the media loves to show the super rich that swindled their way up there, but that is in the lowest standard deviation on the bell curve of execs. I feel like you guys would be celebrating madhoff's career since he gave it to the rich guys pretty good... So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

...and for the record I wasn't diverting sh*t, I was being a dick. You took the thread off topic you, you... you diverter!!! Clearly you missed the bulk of my post referring to billyv's which appeared to spawn some decent contributing info. I certainly learned some stuff. Just my opinion, but whatever. you can go ahead and continue to enjoy discussing/executing your currency jumps into filled stadiums for all I care. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

...or any DZ since you dont skydive? Billyv- i was gonna try and come up with a snot-nosed response about how you have way too much time on your hands, as that must have taken A WHILE to create, BUT i think that is a useful bit of info! Love the "NO!" lol, bias much? I've been very curious about which DZs accept the tix and overall how many ther are. Cool deal, interesting stuff. Brett So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

I couldn't disagree with you more. I will say, top execs get paid a lot in some situations where they do not deserve it. Ultimately, a guy creating or leading a company with 100,000 jobs certainly deserves considerably more than a glorified janitor. UAW is absolutely a great example of how the unions have f*cked up our placement in the market. our sh*t is flat out over priced. It is happening in SFO with the hotels right now- the hotels are barely holding on to keep their doors open, and the union has authroizaed a strike for MORE benefits and MORE wages while management has been on a salary freeze for 2 years and pay nearly $200 a month for healthcare, while labor gets it for $10. The simple truth is corporations used to take full advantage of labor, then labor started to organize, now labor is taking full advantage of corporations where ever possible. There needs to be a balance. Edit: w/r/t the OP- pretty much everyone everywhere tries to buy votes. I dont agree with it but sadly, that's how it works a lot of the time. I hate all politicians. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Lots of info missing still. first off- I like the list of your inner dialogue, cute! Holy alter ego, ha ha ha! ok seriously though- the biggest indicator: met dude at a bar, hooked up that night while intoxicated. wtf does she expect? That said, HOW LONG HAS IT BEEN??? Is this the next day we're talking about and she is already asking these questions? If it is still within a week she most certainly hopped off the train she took to bonetown, then immediately transferred first class to psychoville. 2 scenarios- 1. Dude woke up and no longer had beer goggles- mission success on a slump buster. 'Yeah babe, I'll call you soon' 'When?' 'Soon...' 2. He didnt find her repulsive physically, or by the fact she gave it up after an hour of wasted interaction and $20 of drinks... and will call her for more action next time he is/plans to be wasted and wants to smash. So depending on timeline here, 95% probability points to: your friend either served her purpose or will become one of a selection of slampieces for the guy. edit: sorry if that sounded mean @ all, just providing knowledge. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

careful divot, you just walked into a liberal circle jerk. .. make sure youre wearing goggles. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

A. As I said, it isnt all his fault, it's idiot america for racking up debt. he aint helping much though B. By his administation so he could pass the stimulus C. How the hell do you think we are going to pay for all this? magic wand? Fairy dust? He is a dem and a far left one at that. Look at his proposed tax bill, he already is re-eveluating lowering middle class taxes. Taxes WILL increase, I'll bet my life on it. D. It's our mess, morons for running up credit card debt, morons for signing bad loans, morons for issuing loans to people who obviously were dumb enough to sign em. E. Anyone with half a brain could see we would go well past 10%, that's not what we were sold from the admin, however. Bottom line: we'll be told anything to get an agenda passed. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Despite those on the left that think because Obama is in office and he said he can change things, doesn't mean he knows what to do or can fix/has fixed everything... we're in a real mess here. Not that this is all his fault, he aint fixing it. He's trying, I'll give him that. An amateur running things aint gonna do a whole lot of good, maybe a little, but not much... Truth be told, no one individual can single handedly fix what we all screwed up... hang on. ...though I believe I was told we'd level at 8% unemployment by throwing rich people's and china's money at all the problems... http://money.cnn.com/2009/11/06/news/economy/jobs_october/index.htm?postversion=2009110608 Opening sentence says enough, it goes downhill from there. "The nation's unemployment rate rose above 10% for the first time since 1983 in October, a much worse jump than expected as employers continued to trim jobs from payrolls." So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

I mostly agree with your first statement, except i think he added unnecessary stimulus that is just going to go to waste. Second, i think we are going to waffle for a long while, potentially fall back down again. There are so many factors at stake here, some of which take a while for an effect to be felt, i dont think anyone has a clear picture of what is really happening. Hopefully youre right ont his point and I'm wrong. the facts of all the 'crashing' over the last 12 months can't be ignored, we could just be in an economic state of shock. I'm not an economist so this is just my opinion, I'd just be VERY careful right now to claim any economic successes. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Wow, REALLY? REALLY? GDP for Q3 isn't even finalized, and one quarter of growth after a couple years of falling is not fixed in my book. Let's see how retail does after Q4 (their busiest time due to the holidays) compared to the last 5 years. tour and travel industry is WAY down, which 1/8th of jobs are tied to. the dow has barely been flirting with 10,000 for a couple weeks, all it means is some markets are temporarily stable, and we're far cry from over 14 where it was not too long ago. This thing can go either way- housing is still shot, subsequently ruining the home furnishings market. We've had over 100 banks close THIS YEAR, CIT group just filed... Out here unemp is still on the rise at over 12%, and nationally it aint a much more pretty picture. Yeah, a lot of this stuff began when Bush was in office, agreed. I think a lot has to do with factors outside politics, however Obama is in over his head in my opinion and the moves he can make are going to have a solid impact on how this plays out. I think you are drastically overstating the situation when you claim ANYTHING is "fixed." we may stablize for a while AT BEST, this thing is not going to magically turn around because Obama spent a trillion dollars. We f*cked ourselves and I think when we look back in a few years, the overall picture will be close to or even worse than the 30's... So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Man! I thought we were taxing the top 1% to get soda in the water fountains too! So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

Ummm NO! Bush was reigned in after the 2006 elections and ageed to put his secret unConstitutional warrantless wiretap program under FISA supervision. The 2007 Protect America Act et seq put safeguards in place which have been upheld as Constitutional by the courts. There is NO evidence in this article that Obama is acting outside of the current rules that have been held to be Constitutional. potayto-potahto. There won't be evidence either because he is utilizing the state secrets privilege. I'm sure you're familiar with the phrase 'where there's smoke, there's fire?' There must be a subclause in there when it pertains to Obama that smoke means a blue watery oasis. I dont think this is worth digging into and wasting money to prove that Obama is doing what any self respecting leader would do. I still think it is funny that A. He is doing exectly what he criticised to get liberal voter brownie points a year ago, and B. that the left is OK with it. I don't blame the guy, the stuff needs to be done sometimes for national security, and needs to be kept secret to save face. Sure it is all speculative right now, but i mean if it walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it's not a f*ckin elephant. Edit: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j9n5u8khGqNQT6DTlcKGV6ouKqfQD9BLULIG2 Last paragraph: ""The Obama administration has essentially adopted the position of the Bush administration in these cases, even though candidate Obama was incredibly critical of both the warrantless wiretapping program and the Bush administration's abuse of the state secrets privilege," said Bankston." So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

There isn't yet, may never be. However the article mentions he is using Bush's exact same policies which according to the left were undeniably unconstitutional. If Obama uses em I'm sure it doesn't count though. My guess is from a national security stand point, things like this have to happen under every administration. Whether we find out about it or not is often up to those who think it is worth spending enough effort to dig and expose it, and the media deciding if it is worth reporting. One way or the other I don't really care as I have nothing to hide. I just think he is a hypocrite, meaning he is a politician and no better than any other politician. He is no different from the guys on the right denouncing homosexuals while looking for hand jobs in airport bathrooms. Obama just solicits his BJ's from another figurative source. Ultimately, as long as it's for national security and not someone on the telescreen making sure I'm doing my morning sit ups, go for it. Just don't sell me on change and high ethics if you're not gonna practice em. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

You're such a solid bro that you must be made of bromantium, or brotanium, whichever is more brotastic. Edit: www.broslikethissite.com this the site that inspired the thread? So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

That;s not what I'm saying at all. Maybe you missed the part of my post that I made bold where I said I'm fine with him doing this. My point is that, though I dont have anything to cite, he/ many of you were part of the anti-wire tapping train, yet here he is 'doing it on a necessary basis.' Your interpretation is 'diligent law-enforcement officials sometimes have to use clandestine surveillance.' No sh*t, well, at least when they agree with you politically. Translate the article how you want, my guess is that he does break the constitution to do it 'when necessary.' I'm a glass is half empty guy w/r/t politics. Obama supporters are half full in this case, so he couldn't possibly be doing anything unconstitutional, right? He's just protecting us? In this scenario I'll say it again, I'm ok with his actions/decisions. The point of the post is that all politicians are the same, they're all hypocrites, even Obama the untouchable. I vote for those that choose to have a hypocritical involvement over the fewest aspects of my/our lives, even if i disagree with them on a lot of social policy. So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/10/31/state.secrets/index.html "The Obama administration invoked the state secrets privilege on Friday in a lawsuit pertaining to government eavesdropping intended to intercept terrorist communications... ...the Department of Justice had used a new process designed to ensure that the privilege is used only when absolutely necessary..." Now don't get me wrong, I actually agree with what he is doing, as I did when Bush started doing it. Though I don't trust the government with much, I'm forced to with national security. I find this article hysterical from a hypocrisy standpoint. A politician is a politician no matter which side of the aisle they sit. They all will say whatever is necessary to get elected, even the great Obama. Is that the change you all were sold on? Transparency and such? I'm going to bed, have a good Monday!!! So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

2001 [see avatar] So there I was... Making friends and playing nice since 1983

I found myself sitting in a corner with a gaggle of mindless squawking geese. Though cute, my head began to hurt. I stood up, took some Advil to relieve my throbbing headache, and went to sit by the fire to rest my brain. Yup, some more time wasted on DZ.com. Edit- FYI not directed at anyone, or you quade, you were just last on the thread