EvilMonkey

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 7, 2014 -> 08:20 PM) Christianity in America is predominantly nonviolent. Yes, you can point to some wackos, but 99.9% are not. Religion promoting violence is a irrelevant argument here. And the benefit is not so much the belief in Christ, but a sense of group and community. You know your neighbors. You care about your neighbors. You grow up with the kids in the neighborhood. All positive things that are missing from the gang infested ghettos. They can just never forget the Crusades, as if it were yesterday...

Abreu

Connor G

Dunn

Eaton

QUOTE (chw42 @ Jul 4, 2014 -> 03:54 AM) That's not what I see when I see conservatives complaining about government handouts. I have absolutely no issues with getting rid of loopholes that enable people to abuse the welfare system. It's made for people who are legitimately in need of help, not free-loaders. I don't want to support drug addicts who spend their welfare checks on...well...more drugs. I don't want to support people who can work, but don't feel like it. However, it's my belief that those are in the minority of people who do receive welfare and that they're probably not getting enough money to live a great lifestyle. The problem I see is that conservative media likes to give extremely broad statements about government-aid. It's usually some anecdotal story about how so and so got this much government aid and we should all be pissed off about it and THANKS OBAMA! So of course, the base relays this type of sentiment and it leaves an impression that conservatives just hate welfare. Not just welfare for free-loaders, but welfare for everyone. To on-lookers who aren't conservative (a decent amount of the country, according to the previous two Presidential elections), this can leave an impression of conservatives being selfish and hypocritical. It's selfish because, well, imagine a guy making 6 figures a year (conservatives usually have more income) kicking a homeless person to the curb and telling them they can't have food stamps and that they should just stay poor, stay hungry, and deal with it. It's also hypocritical because a huge amount of the conservative base is Christian and one of the pillars of Christianity is charity and welfare. Talking about welfare in generic and politically-designed catch-phrases isn't going to help the overall debate and it's not helping the image of conservatives. While you may think no one is really saying we should get rid of welfare, almost everything the conservative media throws out there (*cough Fox News) says they don't want any welfare. I find the same problem with Liberterians arguing for smaller government. That's fine and all, but if you get rid of the entire government, who the hell is going to build the roads and teach your kids? There won't be a real discussion about any of these issues until people stop talking about them in such broad and generic ways. And how do you propose they do that? Catch the cheaters, that is? Because every time any kind of means testing or rules are suggested to do just that, they get labeled as racist, trying to keep food from babies and so on. My mother works in a fairly poor school district which had about 70% on free or reduced lunch programs (before this new crap program). The killer was that anyone could apply for it, and the school was forbidden to check the information on the form. Parent(s) would fill out that they didn't work, yet on the school information form there would be emergency work phone numbers. Kids would come to the office and have to call for a ride home would give work phone numbers to call, when the lunch apps said they didn't work. The school also used to make a small amount of money selling other things at lunch to the kids. Lets just say that more than 30% of them had enough money to buy snacks. If they could have afforded those, perhaps they could have afforded to buy lunch? You also managed to hit just about every talking point in your screed. Republicans usually make more, Republicans are Christians and should be for charity, Fox news calls to end welfare and food stamps, keep poor people poor. Have you ever even watched Fox News? While many conservatives are Christian and do believe in charity, they don't think that government is the vehicle for it. Conservatives donate more to private charity than progs. That is where charity belongs, from free will, not from confiscation by the state. Conservatives in general don't mind charity programs for those who need it, but there needs to be ways off of it, not encouragements to stay on. Needs to be checks to make sure those on it deserve it, not make it easier for cheats to get on it. As for being the party of the rich, you must be blind to all the Democratic millionaires that are out there, and how the Dems have been helping out big business more than Republicans ever have lately.

Eaton

QUOTE (ChiSox_Sonix @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 12:23 PM) Both of them were okay with what they were doing because "they deserved it since they've paid into the system for a while". The rationale that it was okay because of that and because she was now a student disgusted a few of us and unfortunately has driven a small wedge between us. We're still friends, but things aren't as close as they used to be. The feeling that it was "owed to them" I do think is more prevalent in society than it has been in the past The problem with that thinking is that THEY didn't pay s*** into the system. Their employers did, every year, whether they laid anyone off or not. That's not 'compensation' that they just don't see, it is a tax, called 'insurance' on businesses.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jul 3, 2014 -> 08:21 AM) Be prepared for the government and future employees to run the company for you. Their opinions matter more than yours. I'm told that's the way businesses should work. I wasn't going to go there, but you do need to be careful with your employees. Document EVERYTHING. Keep a hard copy file and an electronic file that is backed up off site. Never meet behind closed doors, especially if they are the opposite sex, unless you have 2 people on your side there. And even then, don't do it if you can help it. Don't laugh of complaints no matter how trivial. Again, document them, and what you did or didn't do, and why. If warranted, have the employee sign off on what you documented. make sure to document good things as well such as promotions or raises too. It's CYA all the way and can only help you. Unless you document yourself grabbing the intern's ass and getting a BJ. Then you are on your own.

If you will need to sign a lease for space or equipment, get incorporated and stay away from personal guarantees. Keep the terms as short as possible at first in case things don't work out. And don't buy equipment/space and hope the business will come to use it. Deal with over-crowding or longer hours until the business is built up enough to cover it. Not sure what kind of business it is, but doing printing for over 22 years, I have seen way to many owners just buy things that they don't need. Always upgrading to the newest printer, bigger monitor, ink jet printer because they think adding signs will help, and so on. But even when you HAVE the business to warrant purchase, be careful, it can leave just as fast. I signed a 3 year lease on a lightning fast color copier once to cover all the work I got from a new customer. For the previous 6 months I had been working super long hours to cover their job on our slower machine. The new one would save me 20 hours a month! Then 2 months later they went belly up and I was stuck with a lease for a machine that I no longer had production for. I increased the sales effort, but no where near enough to cover that beast came in. Partnerships are harder. You will need to get a business lawyer and take their advice on how to set it up regarding responsibilities and liabilities. Good luck with that. it is scary seeing your name on the signature line instead of the PAY TO line, and watching the check book balance go down. Jake also mentioned 2 very good things. Be willing to pull the plug if it doesn't work. Somewhere, there needs to be a line as to how much money you invest in it. And typos in your printed materials really suck. So when your printers ask you to proof read what they set for you, actually proof read it.

QUOTE (Soxbadger @ Jul 2, 2014 -> 05:29 PM) No Im not. I dont believe any religion deserves special exceptions. Whether I agree with it or not. If the new rule is that anyone can not follow the laws based on religious exception, i would be fine with it. But that isnt what we are doing here, we arent saying "Everyone has the right to opt out of govt regulations if it interferes with their beliefs." If that was the ruling, id support it 100%. Because then I could refuse to pay taxes, follow laws, and do whatever I want in the name of "religion". Fair is fair, but this ruling isnt about fairness, its about promoting 1 religion at the expense of everyone else. Maybe you dont believe it, but somewhere in your heart of hearts you must know that if a Muslim Company didnt want to pay taxes because the US was attacking Muslims, the Supreme Court wouldnt be okay with it. it's not a 'new' rule, it is a legal interpretation that the RFRA applies in this case. The RFRA that was supported by many of the same Democratic idiots that are now complaining that it is a travesty, such as Reid, Boxer and so on. Democrats praised the RFRA back then. Now it is the devil!

QUOTE (greg775 @ Jul 2, 2014 -> 02:56 AM) Oh this is a really nice story ... not. Pathetic treatment of our armed forces heroes. from cnn Veteran Finally Gets VA Doctor’s Appointment – 2 Years After He Died   Doug Chase, a Vietnam veteran who was diagnosed with a brain tumor in 2011. In 2012, his wife, Suzanne, tried to move his medical care to a nearby Veterans Affairs hospital. “It was so difficult for him to take the ambulance ride into Boston, we wanted to be closer.” They waited about four months and never heard anything -- Chase died later that year. But two weeks ago, he got a letter, from the VA in Bedford, saying he could now call to make an appointment to see a primary care doctor. “It was addressed to my husband and I opened it,” said Suzanne Chase. “I was in complete disbelief. You forgot to include where she was just floored because they had to have known he had died, as she tried applying for death benefits and was turned down.

No white race hustlers like Sharpton and Jackson to make noise and a buck or three.

Jenks, didn't you know that corporations exist at the whim of the State and that the money they make isn't theirs to keep and use but the government's to use for it's own purposes because THEY know how to spend (your) money better than you do, and that any bit of money they are allowed to keep they should be grateful for? Come on, get with the times!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jul 1, 2014 -> 11:27 AM) They have to abide by them though. That's not even a distinction without a difference. The employee can believe Hobby Lobby is fully incorrect, which they are, but that does not matter. The employee is forced to abide by incorrect decisions based on the religion of the employer. Why are you stuck on this? The employee doesn't have to abide by anything. They just have to pay for it themselves. You keep bringing this up as if Hobby Lobby is slapping chastity belts on women.

Alexei

Abreu

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 30, 2014 -> 03:54 PM) You realize that the former is exactly what this case involves and the latter was the "evil socialist evil evil evil public option"? the evil socialist evil public 'option' was never really an option, but the ONLY choice. if you had 8 million uninsured people, would have been easier to somehow subsidize them to get them insured rather than screwing the whole country so that the feds can have their fingers in medicine as well.

QUOTE (Jake @ Jun 30, 2014 -> 03:32 PM) More reasons for federally-run single payer. or more reasons for the Federal Guvmint to get the hell out. Would have been cheaper and less disruptive to have just done a means testing for an insurance rebate, or to let all the people they give subsidies to onto the governmental insurance programs with the rest of the Fed workers. They all suck at the same teat.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 30, 2014 -> 11:05 AM) Illinois has this home healthcare worker program wherein the primary caretakers for someone who is sick can get paid by the state (I think through Medicare?) for caring for someone. E.g. your mother is terminally ill and requires substantial in-home care which you're providing. These people are considered to be public employees, or "partial" public employees as this ruling differentiates. Because of their unique status, they cannot be required to join the public union. It doesn't apply to your case since you're a regular, full public employee. What this could be, though, is one step towards gutting previous SCOTUS rulings and essentially making the whole country Right-to-Work (a man to death) states wherein you can get all of the benefits of union representation (contract negotiations, termination hearings etc.) without having to pay into the union. It creates pretty obvious free rider problems and undermines the ability of unions to fund themselves. I think the next logical step would be to enable employers to stop collecting union dues for the unions. Make the unions do their own collections, and you will see how many people truly want to be a part of it.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 27, 2014 -> 02:39 PM) Jesus, what a waste of money: http://bigstory.ap.org/article/golden-gate...de-barrier-vote They could probably electrify the railing to shock people back before jumping for a lot less.

Gordon B

DeAza

Connor G

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Jun 26, 2014 -> 04:33 PM) Show your math. Also consider that if the people were using computers/drives of the same age and model, it's even more likely that they'd begin failing around the same time. So just coincidence that the EPA is now using the same excuse to not turn over emails? http://www.nationaljournal.com/energy/issa...ersary-20140625 Who would have ever guessed that the biggest cause of hard drive failure would be subpoenas.