SkyDekker

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    21,691

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    96

  • Feedback

    0%

  • Country

    Canada

Everything posted by SkyDekker

  1. SkyDekker
    No No, we can't all be turtles.
  2. SkyDekker
    Kind of like that lady waiting fer her gun permit in stead of finding other means to protect herself you mean?
  3. SkyDekker
    You ain't kiddin' there. How'd you meet her? She used to work for me....
  4. SkyDekker
    My wife's brother got married on the weekend, which meant a great evening with my beautiful bride.
  5. SkyDekker
    What a great description of the defence industry, and the car industry and the financial industry.
  6. SkyDekker
    Mostly that the company he works for should have a plan to deal with an employee ingesting the bodily fluid of another person. This is a potentially deadly incident. In Canada his employer would be breaking the law for not allowing him to deal with that properly.
  7. SkyDekker
    Its a start I guess.
  8. SkyDekker
    In this case.....Jerry is talking in absolutes.
  9. SkyDekker
    Your memory might be failing you, but the US didn't get involved until after Pearl Harbour and they had war declared against them. Fair to say at that point they were your agressors as well.
  10. SkyDekker
    I appreciate the immediate action, the issue is on the follow up. Let me puty it this way, if you had been shot and injured, would you have been able to stop and get help at that point? Both are potential deadly incidents, both really need the same level of action. Not doing so is a violation on your employers side.
  11. SkyDekker
    No it isn't. If I define overwhelming as anything over 95% succes rate and it is clear what success is, then overwhelming success isn't an opinion, it is fact.
  12. SkyDekker
    Uhmm no, that is not a fact. If overwhelming succes is defined then it is very much a factual statement. See above. Are you trying to frame your opinion as fact here?
  13. SkyDekker
    Pretty sure there are some health and safety violations taking place on the employer side here. There are avenues for you to report health and safety violations by the employer. (Pure free market adherents would further suggest you should quit your job and find a better employer, since that would be the only way change would be effected)
  14. SkyDekker
    You and Brent bitched about it with Tesla, now you are all upset people bitch about it. This feels very similar to the time you defined "Alarmist".......differently every time.
  15. SkyDekker
    You seem to be arguing in favour of social engineering with tax dollars here. You just get upset when this social engineering is done on subjects you don't agree with?
  16. SkyDekker
    Really, where have I done that? You asked when I thought Exxon had reached the level of "paying enough". Assuming you mean enough in absolute dollars, the answer is never, since taxation is generally based on a percentage of revenue. When do you think they pay enough?
  17. SkyDekker
    I didn't make an argument, I answered a question.
  18. SkyDekker
    Not at all. You can get "penalized" based on age, sex, education, location, type of car purchased etc. Right, just like making murdering people illegal doesn't stop some people from murdering. Yet there isn't a large group of people who believe murder should be legal, since well, murder still happens so clearly the law is ineffective.
  19. SkyDekker
    How much did Exxon pay during the same period? $600 million less than they would have without these nice tax breaks set up for them. Is your argument that they should get a volume discount? So, in your mind, when is the ,they are paying enough, level reached? Enough? Weird measurement to base taxation on. I guess they have paid enough taxes at the exact point they have made enough profit. Maybe ask Exxon's shareholders at what amount they think the company has made enough profit? Here I thought you were against maximums relating to remuneration. Didn't realize you have this communist streak in you.
  20. SkyDekker
    Actually, the goal would be so a few people coudl define for everyone else what being responcible, is. Like a few people would like to have a nice limited definition of what exactly a marriage is.
  21. SkyDekker
    How much did Exxon pay during the same period? $600 million less than they would have without these nice tax breaks set up for them. Is your argument that they should get a volume discount?
  22. SkyDekker
    I am sure the management team at the company will come out of the bankruptcy just fine. Indeed. They don't set up golden parachutes for nothing. Quite frequently, bankruptcy judges will dishonor golden parachutes, and will cut top executive compensation, contracts or not. They will even do so retroactively, requiring give-backs. In my experience that does not happen at least for the restructuring that occurred in several companies I worked for or had stock in. The Preferred stock the managemanet had did very well... us peons..... with common stock.... not so much. A restructuring and a bankruptcy are two different things.
  23. SkyDekker
    You are right, it has zero to do with skydiving, but as Andy described in one potential version of the argument it most certainly does speak to character. (Plus in essence the two situations are similar)
  24. SkyDekker
    Not really. The Highway Traffic Act doesn't apply on private property. Hence most accidents in parking lots have no person at fault under that act. Only at fault options are criminal or civil. However the Insurance companies still have to assign blame, which typically is done at 50/50 in those cases.
  25. SkyDekker
    Not sure how things are in the US, but in Canada fault determination with regards to insurance is seperate from legal fault determination. For instance with regards to car insurance, just because you didn't get a ticket, or only the other party got a ticket, doesn't mean your insurance company will not assign blame or partial blame to your policy. As an example, parking lot accident tend to be adjucated at 50/50 between both parties, regardless of how the actual accident happened. (yes there are exceptions)