Who is advocating for the elimination of part time employment? Again. Being a contractor is not the thing that allows you to work less than full time. Literally nothing stops a person from working less than full time if the employer is okay with it.
Who is advocating for the elimination of part time employment? Again. Being a contractor is not the thing that allows you to work less than full time. Literally nothing stops a person from working less than full time if the employer is okay with it.
THAT'S NOT THE DISTINCTION BETWEEN EMPLOYEE AND CONTRACTOR. And yes, if you work 2 hours a week, you should still have access to the rights that being an employee gets you if your employment meets the legal definition. The thing that allows you to work 2 hours isn't contractor status.
In what world would being a full employee require you to work a minimum number of hours? Have you not heard of part time employment?
I wonder if they're counting on Google not being able to pay them to not develop their own search tool anymore...
You didn't want access to health insurance that costs less than what is available on the marketplace? You didn't want any of the other benefits that come with actual employment,... such as access to unemployment benefits if you are laid off?
They already wrote this article...
COMMENTARY: If this was happening in another nation, we'd call it by name. It's authoritarianism.
Damn... I always forget about the Alamo. Someone should make some sort of saying to help me with that.
I don't expect him to play any games. If there is a primary challenger that aligns with his beliefs, he'll endorse.
We both know that the next logical joke to make is about their consultant approved coitus initiatives... but I'm not gonna make it because that would be uncouth.
Sounds like they're not pessimistic enough about how inept the managerial class is in this country... In my mind, they're ALL capable of following the leader off a cliff. It's happened before.
Yeah... It can be hard to recognize that MAGA weaponizes legitimate issues that the working class has with the current economic order in addition to latent prejudice to mobilize people.
I'm sure a chatbot is capable of bullshitting followers as well as any spiritual influencer can...
I can imagine... Seeing something you worked on that had the potential to make things better get perverted into a purely profit seeking endeavor would bum me out as well. Have you listened to the Better Offline series on Prabhakar Raghavan and all that?
The sad thing about the old taxi system in NYC is that part of the reason it got as bad as it did is that medallions were turned into speculative assets instead of business licenses... So investment bros screwed that up too.
It used to be "do your best and we'll provide you with surprisingly helpful answers most of the time. Now it is "we want to keep you here for as long as possible so we can monetize your attention."
And you accuse others of being "full of themselves"...
Oh yeah. It's my secondary reason for muting and blocking liberally. For a person with publicity it is even more important to try to separate your network as best you can to prevent some of the annoying people from ever even showing up in the future.
In their position, I would also be kinda happy about the hegemon repeatedly shooting themselves in the dick in every conceivable way...
I feel like the problem isn't specifically the person who annoys you a little. It's the people who follow that persona and follow them who are exponentially more annoying. We don't have the same algorithm problems but if you're notable, you may pop up on a discover feed and catch hell.
You say that like it is a ridiculous idea... but what if one of the passengers is a Kennedy??? Actually, I just looked into it... Don't let a Kennedy fly your plane. Historically it hasn't ended well.
OUR collective piss stream is eternal, comrade.
At some point you just have to stop inviting them on. Noem isn't saying anything newsworthy herself.
Well geez... What else would happen if way more institutions forced people to use this product offered by this company? Surely nothing that could bias its creator's opinions about its importance...
It's like that they think our commodity agricultural exports are special and cannot be substituted with products from countries that are not run by insane people...
lol.
If you can't tell the difference between what you're "allowed" to do and what you can do without catching a rash of shit, then you're in the wrong party. "I get to say whatever I want and you can't criticize me" is MAGA shit. You're not the victim here so stop looking for pity.
You can do whatever you want, just read the fucking room. Not every situation is full of people who want to hear your concerns. Instead of shitting on someone else's joke, keep it to yourself or at least take the reaction you're bound to get with some grace. This is a YOU problem.
Not everyone has the strength of will to be a fucking downer for decades in end. I commend your commitment to not enjoying anything as long as there is something wrong.
I don't know if he's capable of coming back from the dead but I'm willing to take that risk.
It is 100% verifiably a rumor that is going around... I can say that for certain.
I mean, he's RFK's son not some random cousin. He is a fail son though. I think we should generally be more suspicious than we are of people who trade on their family name and try to get into politics. It's dangerous.
Yes. Shit is bad. You need to spend some time getting out of your own head. Perhaps some drugs would help.
Yeah, but he'd do almost anything to get people to stop talking about the Epstein files...
People are saying it's the deepest blackest void ever.
How could they go to a party at a time like this????????????
Whatever Trump has, Vance doesn't. He's also got a lot more years to deal with dodging justice and not nearly as much money. I don't know what that will mean specifically but at least Trump would be dead, so we'd have that going for us.
He's on the patio having some drinks...
We don't have a system where things are constrained by the simple INTENT of laws. If that were the case, many things would be simpler. If we could depend on businesses to use good faith to interpret the intent of laws, we wouldn't have an issue at all. That's not how it works.
I don't think that you declaring that to be true with no actual support means anything at all. You're underestimating the power and creativity of the firearms industry. It isn't just a lack of will. Part of the problem is that people like you assume that it is a simple problem for some reason.
Privatization and deregulation is an older idea than Reagan and the whole "government services are bad" thing sort of started under Carter.
It will happen like clockwork. I don't think people, in general, are pessimistic enough about how far SCOTUS is willing to go to empower a Republican president. Would they wreck the economy to do it? I certainly think that they would.
It looks like you're trying to give your life to Jesus Christ. Would you like some help with that?
Why does it have to be a secret?
We're talking about theoretical laws that would have to be passed by elected leaders who are at least partially constrained by popular opinion. We're not just talking about interpretation of current laws...
People sometimes wonder why I have an aversion to fandom directed a politicians and the concept of political dynasties... The Kennedys are the reason. Whatever you think about JFK and RFK, them being mythologized contributed to this situation in a meaningful way.
I think that the more likely situation is that neoliberals would advocate that we subsidize a for profit business to meet the need which is stupid because they can usually just do the thing themselves at a lower cost to the taxpayer. Normalize the government doing things again,...
I need to go listen to it again, but Mamdani has some great rhetoric around this exact issue. He's extremely good at presenting this issue (and many others) in a way that is impossible for a reasonable person to deny.
I think all of the red state Democrats should come out in support of the suppressor deregulation bill. We should stop regulating gun related products based on how pop culture makes people feel about them.
Yeah,... I'm in Texas and I really wish that Democrats would stop pushing the "assault weapons ban" issue. People know that workarounds would happen, so it ends up being a loser. I would rather see them disavow it and push their other items harder. I don't see a blue Texas without that...
Until such a time that they start feeling real consequences, it is empirically reasonable for them to operate under that assumption. I've come to terms with the fact that many people aren't bound by the kind of self doubt that keeps me from acting that way. I'd love to see a lawsuit from this.
I wish it was as simple as they seem to think it is,... I wish we could go back to the conversation around guns as it was in the early 70s when the NRA was a sportsman's organization advocating for responsible gun ownership. That's not where we are.
As a result, you really can't use "this ammo was designed to serve a military purpose" as a distinction. I would have very little problem with something similar to where countries restrict sporting in order to reduce gun death, but it would be very hard to implement here.
I don't think that trying to make distinctions like this are without merit. "Destructive device" regulations are good. I don't think it is reasonable to imply that it will be simple to make that distinction in the range where military and sporting applications overlap heavily.
So THIS TIME its gonna be different?
*makes not of how Peter feels about "sportsball" jokes*
#BuiltDifferent
Aren't they? .308 Win is interchangeable with 7.62x51mm NATO. Sniper rifles. Battle rifles. Machine guns. All of them fire a round that is interchangeable with .308 Winchester. It is one of the most common military rounds in the world. How could it NOT get banned by your definition?
It is easy to throw the line in where you're giving them help while still being profoundly cruel to them.
So he's not going to do the photo-op where he throws away their possessions after clearing the encampments again? Will the substance abuse services require them to attend church services? Do they get to keep their pets if they have them? Are they making sure to save important documents?
What criteria do you use to separate a sporting cartridge meant to do damage to the body of an animal to a cartridge meant to do damage to a human being? Declaring something "not that big of an ask" doesn't make that reality...
In what way are legal definitions not related to politics? Aren't legal definitions created by legislatures? Aren't judges at least theoretically required to enforce laws? Don't those laws have to contain technical definitions of the things they intend to regulate? Politics are part of governance.
Fetterman's portrayal as a real life progressive was a little bit of wish casting, a little bit of comparison to his opponent and a little bit of leaning in by his campaign. The signs that he was a POS were always there. We haven't seen that yet (a load bearing "yet") from this guy.
I've been hurt before, but he actually seems to believe what he's saying and at this point in time, that's a big plus. If I believe that another person is acting in good faith and trying to do good things, I can deal with disagreements around strategy and prioritization.
And also lots of people who aren't trans but don't conform to gender norms are going to get hurt. It is already happening.
¿Por qué no los dos?
The people pushing AI hate that they have to pay people to do the things that allow them to accumulate wealth. Slavery is frowned upon so they can't make the people work for free. As a result they're trying to fabricate an acceptable alternative.
Don't ever let anyone tell you that bullying can't be effective. People have put in huge amounts of effort to try to make AIPAC as toxic as it should be to those seeking election under the Democratic banner.
One of Pete Hegseth's shitty books HAS a supposedly real character in it who was an interpreter for his unit that ended up settling in Houston. He puts this person up as an example of a "good immigrant"... Its feeling like that was a bit disingenuous nowadays.
They thought they really had it under control in NYC with *checks notes* Andrew Cuomo running for the mayorship... How can a reasonable person look at Dem leadership and see anything other than Keystone Cops?
I'm gonna be happy when he dies. Not like Kissinger happy,... but maybe like Colin Powell happy.
I fucking despise Chuck Schumer
On the other hand,... I hope that John Oliver sees this and we get an episode on AI generated misinformation.
It was a hard earned lesson that came from the iPhone/Android wars of the late 2000s. YOU can be enthusiastic about a thing. You can't force someone else to be enthusiastic about the same thing no matter how logical your argument is or how often you yell it at people.
I enjoy figuring out how to do techy computer stuff. As a result, one of my hobbies is figuring out how to self host services and use open source alternatives for things,... I recognize that most people don't enjoy that, so I don't try to get them to join me in my time wasting.
Who else remembers the terrorism threat levels? Equally meaningless.
It would probably leave the collective consciousness just as quickly...
LOL. lmao.
It becomes a privilege issue. With enough money you can build a home that is effectively hardened against all but the lowest probability events. Your home might cost 2-10x the typical home though. Low income people are the tall tentpole for the problem. They can't afford self insurance.
Once you have state provided insurers, in extreme cases they can refuse to insure and at that point the home won't be rebuilt. This happens with NFIP. Hopefully it will also allow lower premiums to be used to incentivize resilient construction methods that are less vulnerable to natural disasters.
I think that homeowner's insurance is going to end up federalized at some point. "Insurer of last resort" schemes don't work because it leaves the highest risk areas to the collective and allows private companies to maximize their profit.
Maybe we need some sort of overarching organization that the different municipalities form into so that resources can be pooled and then distributed effectively across a wide geographical area... Shit I just invented a government again. This always happens.
Seems like they learned the lesson that their strategy on SA/Yemen worked fine so they deployed it again in this case. Were there consequences for having been on the wrong side of that issue?
Its a roundabout form of justice necessitated by fact that we take financial fraud against wealthy people much more seriously than almost any other kind of fraud. So, I do agree with the overall point about national priorities.
I think that it is reasonable to argue that the harm brought on the reporting which brought on the business downfall... and that led to the consequences. She SHOULD be in prison for a long time for what she did to people seeking medical care. I'll settle for the business fraud though.
DC prosecutors once again fail to indict a ham sandwich (throwing man).
Theranos was far overvalued because the product it was selling did not and could not exist. They told people they had diseases and disorders that they did not have. She caused real damage. It is extremely comparable.
Theranos failed because eventually she got called out in the media and that mattered and as a result the money stopped coming in. THAT'S when she lost rich people's money. Nowadays the accountability would never happen because rich people wouldn't have lost money.
I've had to stop myself from being that kind of buzzkill more than once. I think the last time I let loose on a public/historical figure was at my last birthday party. It was my party to ruin and I was a little drunk so all bets were off.
Elizabeth Holmes' mistake was being slightly ahead of the curve,... and a woman. She could have kept her scam going indefinitely in the current environment.
the people who made this thing should be treated like dealers who mix fent into drugs.
Add it to the list "accusations that are actually confessions" for conservatives. They've made that particular farse part of their party identity. "We believe that you are free to have any opinion you like, as long as you live under a regime that is in alignment with MY opinion on the issue."
Eh, my city offers way more services than the average person is interested in using. Curbside recycling, drop off areas if you have more than a can worth, large trash pickup monthly, hazardous disposal... I probably place a higher value on not having to make a decision than a normal person though.
I cannot fathom having an opinion about what company picks up my trash.
Having always lived in a city with municipal trash pickup, it blew my mind that some cities have a patchwork of multiple contractors serving the same area. Its so inefficient. Even having the city contract with ONE company would be better. We're allergic to collectivism...
On a positive note, no amount of pomp and circumstance that they can perform in her name can make her stupid ass any less dead.
Your political Gods couldn't even beat Trump. Think about that for a while. Democratic leadership actually had agency in that situation too. They weren't required to do everything that they chose to do. They could have done different things.
You know what else is sexy? Anthropomorphic female fighter jet anime. *seductive sidewinder growls* On a serious note, this is a thing that I'm legitimately surprised exists but also not surprised at all in a weird way.
Have they tried actually proposing them as a party? Here's the problem with "the republicans won't pass progressive legislation"... THE DEMOCRATS WON'T PUSH THE ISSUES. They surrender before the fight because they are terrified of anything that isn't "market based".
Another Black person. Curious.