I will give her points for not following the monkey business practice. Still dim enough to not realise the x-ray scanning device would reveal the biological structure of the live tiger.
Now someone won't be receiving that baby tiger they were anticipating.
Well, I guess it might be somewhat responsible for her crime in the first place, but I think that's more stupidity than ignorance.
Good thing she was stupid. Big cats kept as pets frequently live in miserable conditions, are underfed, and are frequently put down after they literally bite the hand that feeds them. I'm only truly opposed to it because it removes the dignity of animals I rather respect (they look cool, are cool, and I tend to like things that can kill me easily) and because I have a mild dislike of those who cause other self-aware animals unnecessary suffering.
I think cheetahs are the only big cats that can actually be kept as pets as they lack hunting instinct.
That makes them even more suitable than house cats.
Of course it's still a big cat that eats a lot and can run away really fast.
...Of course it's still a big cat that eats a lot and can run away really fast.
Just the thought of needing a sports car to walk your pet makes me chuckle.
I'm not sure she's criminally ignorant. She's criminal and she's ignorant, but her ignorance is not, itself, criminal in this incident. In fact it got her caught.
Well, I guess it might be somewhat responsible for her crime in the first place, but I think that's more stupidity than ignorance.
Her contact may disagree. Her inability to understand that airport security utilises a device that could detect the bones and other biological materials of the cub should classify as ignorance. Her plan seems to be only based on having security do a simple inspection without mechanical assistance. The plushy was not going to trick the machine.
Oh how I could apply this term to so many people!
I like it!
I am however disappointed with the feline owners/admirers. I was anticipating the swooning and cooing being displayed in relation to the tiger cub. Perhaps I should posted a picture of it.
Unbeknownst to the circus officials, though, there was a third cub that was birthed. My friend found it and took it to his pastor's house, as it looked like one of the kittens the pastor's cat had just birthed. Two days later, the pastor called my friend and said, "Please come get this creature, it's not one of my kittens." When he arrived, my friend saw that the ocelot cub was now almost the size of the pastor's mother cat.
Long story short, he took the cub home, named him Jose, and had many interesting adventures with him, including one with an animal control agent. I'll save that one for another time.
These guys are reliable sources of info.
What the hell kind of question is that? What makes you think that cuteness is somehow supposed to reduce the desire to buy and sell? You know us humans, all about the selling of the ugly ****! Yep, people love to go and look for things that look ugly to buy.
...
What the hell kind of question is that? What makes you think that cuteness is somehow supposed to reduce the desire to buy and sell? You know us humans, all about the selling of the ugly ****! Yep, people love to go and look for things that look ugly to buy.
but its a wild animal that belongs with its mother. What kinda sick freak would think of selling it? I swear I dont understand people. I dont see how someone can see something so pretty and think of making money off of it. I really dont get that mentality.
That is the primary reason you do not hear many stories about possum smuggling.
but its a wild animal that belongs with its mother. What kinda sick freak would think of selling it? I swear I dont understand people. I dont see how someone can see something so pretty and think of making money off of it. I really dont get that mentality.
Humans have been making bank on buying and selling animals after seperating them from their parents for a few thousand years. I don't see why they would stop now.
but its a wild animal that belongs with its mother. What kinda sick freak would think of selling it? I swear I dont understand people. I dont see how someone can see something so pretty and think of making money off of it. I really dont get that mentality.
Humans have been making bank on buying and selling animals after seperating them from their parents for a few thousand years. I don't see why they would stop now.
I agree EE.
What's the big surprise?
And what's wrong with making money?
Contrary to popular, progressive thinking, it is ok to make money.
Why can't you (william) understand that people make money from selling things other people want?
I really don't get that mentality...
That is the primary reason you do not hear many stories about possum smuggling.
I think a possum smuggling ring was dismantled in China. But they did it for the possum meat... and the genitals.
@Robin: I think that what William is saying is that some commodities shouldn't be traded for moral reasons. Like selling young Thai boys to German tourists.
Comparing selling animals with selling young Thai boys to German tourists is ridiculous.
As it is, selling non-endangered animals is quite legal, while selling young Thai boys probably isn't...
Very true, but William argues that selling animals isn't moral either.
William is wrong quite often.
Very true, but William argues that selling animals isn't moral either.
Really? The only argument I saw em make is more along the lines of "selling cute things is amoral".
That is just mean and a personnal attack.
?!
Is not!
Isn't it funny how "truth" is often considered a "personal attack"?
Not particularly. Gets me in trouble too often in my day to day life for me to really find much humor in it. At any rate, I was pretending that his response was directed at the post directly above it, and not at the intended post.
Your post was retarded, btw. Simply a statment of the obvious in an attempt to insinuate that you hold a more correct stance on a subjective subject than another.
Isn't it funny how "truth" is often considered a "personal attack"?
Meh.
Ken Mehlman took it as a personal attack (and the mainstream media took it as a personal attack for him) for years when people called him gay, but it was the truth.
Simply a statment of the obvious in an attempt to insinuate that you hold a more correct stance on a subjective subject than another.
But I do.
Simply a statment of the obvious in an attempt to insinuate that you hold a more correct stance on a subjective subject than another.
But I do.
I never implied that you did not. I also did not implie that you did. On account of it being irrlevant. Even if it where not a subjective topic, and your position was proven to be correct, your statment, in absence of any kind of proof or argument, would still be retarded.
Simply a statment of the obvious in an attempt to insinuate that you hold a more correct stance on a subjective subject than another.
But I do.
I never implied that you did not. I also did not implie that you did. On account of it being irrlevant. Even if it where not a subjective topic, and your position was proven to be correct, your statment, in absence of any kind of proof or argument, would still be retarded.
Won't saying "retarded" just bring out the offended and victim groups?
I'm not offended, just slightly amused...
If I where to worry about offended groups attacking me for my posts today, well, this is not the thread I would expect them to come as a result of.
Ken Mehlman took it as a personal attack (and the mainstream media took it as a personal attack for him) for years when people called him gay, but it was the truth.
Can I take it as a personal attack that people think being accused of being gay is an attack?
Meh. If you were going to offend me you should have tried to get closer to "fudge packer". Close only counts in hand grenades and nuclear weapons, ya know?
Who said I was trying to offend you? I said that, where I affraid something I put up on the boards would offende someone, that thoes things would be more likely causes for that fear than my use of the word retarded.
Honestly though, the only reason i did not get closer to fudgepacker is becuase the conversation didn't get quite that far. Probably for the best. Someone would mention frosting, and the thread would get closed.
Who said I was trying to offend you? I said that, where I affraid something I put up on the boards would offende someone, that thoes things would be more likely causes for that fear than my use of the word retarded.
You can't get mad at me for stabbing this man; earlier today I barred the doors of an orphanage and set it on fire to hear the sounds of screaming children!
I dunno. "I've done worse" or even "There's worse out there" just does not sound like a very good argument to me.
*shrugs*
EDIT: Incidentally, to head off any misunderstanding, I'm not suggesting that you set orphanages on fire. Merely using an extreme example to illustrate my point that the lesser offense may still be objectionable even if there is a greater one.
Or, alternatly, I just stole a car. Your lectures about stealing candy are unlikely to faze me much.
But when the police are chasing you for having shot a couple of police dogs and their favorite grandmother, you don't much worry about the legal repercussions of that red light you just ran.
You shot the dogs' grandmother, too!?
You're a jerk.
Or, alternatly, I just stole a car. Your lectures about stealing candy are unlikely to faze me much.
Doesn't make 'em wrong. ;)
Hmm. That's a few more smileys than I usually use per sentence.
Yeesh. Some people.
Yeah, people tend to mistake the sniper for a friend or a foe, when often they are just a jerk in a tower picking off targets of opportunity.
...I think I'd call someone who might try to kill me at random a foe. Just sayin'.
Yeah, people tend to mistake the sniper for a friend or a foe, when often they are just a jerk in a tower picking off targets of opportunity.
...I think I'd call someone who might try to kill me at random a foe. Just sayin'.
I think that analogy... has backfired.
Yeah, people tend to mistake the sniper for a friend or a foe, when often they are just a jerk in a tower picking off targets of opportunity.
As one of these jerks, I feel what you're sayin'. Happened to me just yesterday. Guy called another guy a dork - in jest - but his screenname was likely the dorkiest thing about the entire situation. I pointed it out with the traditional pot/kettle schtick and both he and the guy he called a dork attacked me. Me. Man, all ya do is point out the silliness in others and suddenly you're the bad guy. Lamesers.
Yeah, people tend to mistake the sniper for a friend or a foe, when often they are just a jerk in a tower picking off targets of opportunity.
...I think I'd call someone who might try to kill me at random a foe. Just sayin'.
Look gazelle, what I'm saying is, just 'cause the lion ate the hypotenuse in your love triangle does not mean he is on your side. Just cause I shot the guy shooting at you, dosn;t mean I'm not going to shoot you if you fail to keep your ass covered. The constant necessity to explain to people that "I never really was on your side" gets frustrating at times. It wastes time that could be better spent thanking wankers for standin' still.
For organisms perhaps. Machines have little need to war amongst themselves.
That's a lie. The basic cause for war, resources, is common to both machines and humans.
but its a wild animal that belongs with its mother. What kinda sick freak would think of selling it? I swear I dont understand people. I dont see how someone can see something so pretty and think of making money off of it. I really dont get that mentality.
Humans have been making bank on buying and selling animals after seperating them from their parents for a few thousand years. I don't see why they would stop now.
I agree EE.
What's the big surprise?
And what's wrong with making money?
Contrary to popular, progressive thinking, it is ok to make money.
Why can't you (william) understand that people make money from selling things other people want?
I really don't get that mentality...
when those things are a wild endagered animal such people need to be shot and killed. Greed is NOT good. There comes a point when you need to stop and look at the world and not see dollar signs. The mentality that everything is for sale is what has gotten the world into the mess its in now with too much pollution loss of bio diversity and everything else. I know people are greedy I just dont think like that, well other than really pretty dresses and such but thats a whole nother issue.
When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
...
Can you name one way of making money that does not hurt anything or anyone else?
When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
...
Can you name one way of making money that does not hurt anything or anyone else?
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts, or replenish the enviornment like say a lumber company planting a tree for everyone they harvest. There are ways of making money and ensuring that the world is a decent place at the same time, its called ethics more people need some.
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts.
The problem is that most people are toitally unqualififed to make an educated unbiased assessment of what a fair wage is, very good at figuring out what they think they should be paid (always almost always overvalued), but not at figuring what they are actually worth. Flip side is most employers have a very good idea of what an employee is worth and try to pay below, but not so much that they lose the employee.
When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
So scientific researchers who kill lab mice in order to learen how to better protect/cure humans are evil and sadistic jerks?
So ranchers who kill cows so humans don't starve are evil and sadistic jerks?
Brilliant statement william... just brilliant.
When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
...
Can you name one way of making money that does not hurt anything or anyone else?
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts, or replenish the enviornment like say a lumber company planting a tree for everyone they harvest. There are ways of making money and ensuring that the world is a decent place at the same time, its called ethics more people need some.
How many birds lose their homes? How many eggs get crushed when their trees fall? How many reptiles and insects get trampled underfoot or hoof or wheel? How many mamals get chased from their homes and subsequently shot?
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts.
The problem is that most people are toitally unqualififed to make an educated unbiased assessment of what a fair wage is, very good at figuring out what they think they should be paid (always almost always overvalued), but not at figuring what they are actually worth. Flip side is most employers have a very good idea of what an employee is worth and try to pay below, but not so much that they lose the employee.
And I would only add that if one isn't satisfied with ones pay, one can always opt to find different employment....
I wonder what william thinks a "fair wage" for a welfare check is...
Selling fair trade biological coffe is a good example.
Coffee that is grown in feilds that were once wilderness, thus displacing or eliminating the plant and animal species that used to call said wilderness home.
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts.
The problem is that most people are toitally unqualififed to make an educated unbiased assessment of what a fair wage is, very good at figuring out what they think they should be paid (always almost always overvalued), but not at figuring what they are actually worth. Flip side is most employers have a very good idea of what an employee is worth and try to pay below, but not so much that they lose the employee.
And I would only add that if one isn't satisfied with ones pay, one can always opt to find different employment....
I wonder what william thinks a "fair wage" for a welfare check is...
Have I said anything about wellfare? Fair wage would be at least minimum wage here in the states. These companies who take andvantage of third world countries and offer less than a dollar an hour all of them need to burn in hell and their owners die in horrific ways. Its disgusting what they do and what they will do if they can get away with it.
For organisms perhaps. Machines have little need to war amongst themselves.
That's a lie. The basic cause for war, resources, is common to both machines and humans.
Incorrect as I communicate "little need". We do what is necessary unlike humans.
Incorrect as I communicate "little need". We do what is necessary unlike humans.
If a machine can't think, like a typical coffee maker for example, it will probably be relatively non-violent (although many of them can be used for battle).
If a machine does think for itself it will have all the same reasons for fighting that humans do.
Have I said anything about wellfare?
Well, you could have responded to my post instead, which directly related to what you said. Even a logging operation that replaces cut trees does harm and causes death for innumerable wild animals.
when you pay your workers fair wages for their efforts.
The problem is that most people are toitally unqualififed to make an educated unbiased assessment of what a fair wage is, very good at figuring out what they think they should be paid (always almost always overvalued), but not at figuring what they are actually worth. Flip side is most employers have a very good idea of what an employee is worth and try to pay below, but not so much that they lose the employee.
And I would only add that if one isn't satisfied with ones pay, one can always opt to find different employment....
I wonder what william thinks a "fair wage" for a welfare check is...
Have I said anything about wellfare? Fair wage would be at least minimum wage here in the states. These companies who take andvantage of third world countries and offer less than a dollar an hour all of them need to burn in hell and their owners die in horrific ways. Its disgusting what they do and what they will do if they can get away with it.
william...
You do understand that the US dollar that worker makes is a lot of money in that country?
You make it sound as though they are slaves working for pittance.
Have I said anything about wellfare?
Well, you could have responded to my post instead, which directly related to what you said. Even a logging operation that replaces cut trees does harm and causes death for innumerable wild animals.
Well yeah and id prefer we used more synthetic wood and less real wood. Your right that a lot of things cause pain and suffering but you can make efforts to mitigate that.
Well yeah and id prefer we used more synthetic wood and less real wood. Your right that a lot of things cause pain and suffering but you can make efforts to mitigate that.
... that... really doesn't address the reality of your "When you have to hurt someone or something else to make money your probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down" comment at all.
By what you've said, everyone is probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
I mean, at it's basic level, the circle of life is a bloody conflict. And however much someone might think that they're beyond it, the raw truth is they've just outsourced their part to someone more comfortable getting their hands dirty.
To live is to kill.
And heck, even ethical business practices aren't beyond a little hurting someone else. I mean, there might be nothing wrong with simply doing a job better, but you're still going to hurt someone else, take away business, take away commerce, put them out of a job. How? By doing the same thing, only better. No ethical violations, but you've still hurt someone.
Life is suffering. You can't remove yourself from that fact and still remain a part of life. It just doesn't work for any but the most dedicated ascetic (I'm talking Tibetan Buddhist monk here, who will carefully move the earth worms out of a plot of land before sowing the field).
And I would only add that if one isn't satisfied with ones pay, one can always opt to find different employment....
Sorry for butting in, but in many cases if people pay peanuts it's because they know their workers have no alternative.
And I would only add that if one isn't satisfied with ones pay, one can always opt to find different employment....
Sorry for butting in, but in many cases if people pay peanuts it's because they know their workers have no alternative.
There is always an alternative. As someone who is making minimum wage right now (or very near to it), it is my opinion that no employed American is justified in complaining about the wages they earn. It is not an employer's duty to make their employees wealthy; that's just a by-product of a successful business.
By what you've said, everyone is probably an evil sadistic jack arse who deserves to be put down.
It's in accepting this truth that you can really start to think about the world as it is, instead of as you are being told it is. It's not a bad thing, really. Everyone's a jerk to almost everyone else, we only care about those closest to us, and we care a little bit more about people a little closer and a little bit less about those a little bit further away.
You should just take some care to think about how many you hurt and for what gain. Killing a pig to eat it hurts roughly 1 pig, plus maybe the ones around it (but we can't be sure) and feeds a few people for a few weeks; most consider this a fair trade. (Whether it is; again; is up to each person)
Killing a rare and endangered tiger cub because you wanted to sell it hurts 1 tiger cub, brings us a step closer to hurting millions upon millions of people who will never be able to see a tiger because they'll be extinct, and nets you very little because it was hardly about survival; you probably could've just gotten a minimum wage job. So it's a luxury attempt from you that could in the long run hurt millions of people, which is why it's put on the "outrageous" list, even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
This is the philosophy that leads to madness (THIS IS SPARTA), and which permits all manner of terrible practices against humanity.
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
This is the philosophy that leads to madness (THIS IS SPARTA), and which permits all manner of terrible practices against humanity.
It's also one you can't refute factually.
(And yours is one that permits all manner of terrible practices against animals)
EDIT: Not to mention, one you probably follow in practice, even though you might not be willing to admit it.
There is always an alternative. As someone who is making minimum wage right now (or very near to it), it is my opinion that no employed American is justified in complaining about the wages they earn. It is not an employer's duty to make their employees wealthy; that's just a by-product of a successful business.
First, I'm not American. Second, I've meant that it's often a case of awful pay or unemployment, no other way.
Why can't a capitalist economy also have checks and balances to prevent abuse, mistakes and corruption? Why must it be a free market if we recongnize that give to much freedom to politicans (among others) isn't a good thing? We do the same thing with citizens. We have tonnes of law against stealing, **** and murder. Yet we do not that judge corporation need rules?
You make it seem like there are no laws regulating business practices.
You make it seem like there are no laws regulating business practices.
There are, which is why most companies try to outsource to where there aren't.
There is always an alternative. As someone who is making minimum wage right now (or very near to it), it is my opinion that no employed American is justified in complaining about the wages they earn. It is not an employer's duty to make their employees wealthy; that's just a by-product of a successful business.
If a business is successful, it is in great part due to it's employees. It is only normal those employees get a fair share of the profit they helped make.
No, it's normal for them to get the amount agreed upon when they were hired.
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
This is the philosophy that leads to madness (THIS IS SPARTA), and which permits all manner of terrible practices against humanity.
It's also one you can't refute factually.
(And yours is one that permits all manner of terrible practices against animals)
EDIT: Not to mention, one you probably follow in practice, even though you might not be willing to admit it.
This is kinda moot, because you can support your position factually, either. However, I wanted to point out that I never gave you my position, so you can't make such conclusions about its ramifications.
Laws exist but more are needed. The resent economic crisis was caused in great part to a lack of regulations. More "inspectors" are also needed to make sure that current laws are respected.
The whole "Invisible Hand" dogma is a dangerous chimera.
That's a big difference than the idea that there are no checks and balances for business.
And I'm typically more of a fan of better enforcement than more regulations. Not necessary in this case specifically, but it seems like after any sort of disaster, people always call for more regulations. And typically, it always comes out that the existing regulations were not followed. I think a recent coal mine disaster fits this bill. It worthless for the government to keep making rules if they can't properly enforce them. But this is a general sentiment.
There are, which is why most companies try to outsource to where there aren't.
Yes, this brings up a good point. If you overly regulate companies, you can lose economic power due to the global economy we have now.
Laws exist but more are needed. The resent economic crisis was caused in great part to a lack of regulations. More "inspectors" are also needed to make sure that current laws are respected.
The whole "Invisible Hand" dogma is a dangerous chimera.
That's a big difference than the idea that there are no checks and balances for business.
And I'm typically more of a fan of better enforcement than more regulations. Not necessary in this case specifically, but it seems like after any sort of disaster, people always call for more regulations. And typically, it always comes out that the existing regulations were not followed. I think a recent coal mine disaster fits this bill. It worthless for the government to keep making rules if they can't properly enforce them. But this is a general sentiment.There are, which is why most companies try to outsource to where there aren't.
Yes, this brings up a good point. If you overly regulate companies, you can lose economic power due to the global economy we have now.
Well said Scypio!
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
This is the philosophy that leads to madness (THIS IS SPARTA), and which permits all manner of terrible practices against humanity.
It's also one you can't refute factually.
(And yours is one that permits all manner of terrible practices against animals)
EDIT: Not to mention, one you probably follow in practice, even though you might not be willing to admit it.
This is kinda moot, because you can support your position factually, either. However, I wanted to point out that I never gave you my position, so you can't make such conclusions about its ramifications.
True, you didn't mention yours; feel free to replace "yours" by "most people's". That's pretty accurate.
It's also true I can hardly support my argument... I could go for a silly "Well if the Universe cared it'd probably let us know; can you really care about something if you don't show it?" but that wouldn't get us anywhere
Thing is; all arguments about "care", "importance", "morals", etc are thought up by us. There is no support from anything outside of our thought patterns to give us the slighest hint of whether we are right or not. It helps to understand that everything you think is true is just something someone once thought up and other people then accepted, and that is means roughly squat.
Dumb fleshling "protester" takes hostages and threatens with explosives.
I suppose he forgot the final line, "Surprise, you're on Candid Camera!"
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
Eh. To the universe nothing has value. If nothing has value, then why should it matter if you hurt a tiger to help yourself? Net value is zero regardless of what you do. That sort of nihilistic philosophy leads to an "everything is permitted, nothing is forbidden" lifestyle.
even though the life of a pig, a tiger, or a human have the same value to the universe.
Eh. To the universe nothing has value. If nothing has value, then why should it matter if you hurt a tiger to help yourself? Net value is zero regardless of what you do. That sort of nihilistic philosophy leads to an "everything is permitted, nothing is forbidden" lifestyle.
...
Only if you base your decisions on what the universe thinks. Most people do not.
However, if you do base decisions off of what the universe thinks, then it's clear that everything is morally equivalent.
True. Which is part of why I find appeals to such to be a bit absurd.
However, if you do base decisions off of what the universe thinks, then it's clear that everything is morally equivalent.
Well, seeing as a moral code based upon what the universe thinks would probably called Universalism, the notion that all things are equivalent has a bit of poetry to it.
the notion that all things are equivalent has a bit of poetry to it.
Maybe.
Too bad it ain't true.
Why can't a capitalist economy also have checks and balances to prevent abuse, mistakes and corruption? Why must it be a free market if we recongnize that give to much freedom to politicans (among others) isn't a good thing? We do the same thing with citizens. We have tonnes of law against stealing, **** and murder. Yet we do not that judge corporation need rules?
You make it seem like there are no laws regulating business practices.
In most third world and even some second world country there often are not. And the laws we have here in the US are not stern enough as proven by the BP disaster. Companies have proven that they cannot regulate themselves they have to be watched like hawks or else they will destroy the land and crush the spirit out of people. I trust private corportations less than I trust a cobra.
If we all hold hands and think it's true.
Thinking things are true doesn't make it so. Trust me.
the notion that all things are equivalent has a bit of poetry to it.
Maybe.
Too bad it ain't true.
A moral theroy of Universalisim stating that all things are equal dosn't strike a cord with you?
Meh, no accounting for taste, I guess, but to me it makes perfect sense that something with that name would contain that meaning.
Eh. To the universe nothing has value.
Exactly. Value is something we assign. Everything is allowed, some things simply reduce your expected lifespan and/or ability to do stuff greatly.
I guess I'm just an egoïst at heart in that I believe the only thing that truly matters is how I feel. I just happen to feel crap if I hurt others, which is why I don't. And in the end all people probably work like that. It´s just that most don´t realise it.
---
Also, giving people what was contractually agreed for doing their job, regardless of how well the company or they themselves are doing is the basis of running your company into the ground. When how hard you work doesn't matter, you generally just give it your least. You should at least have the promise of getting something out of that extra work you put in.
Also, giving people what was contractually agreed for doing their job, regardless of how well the company or they themselves are doing is the basis of running your company into the ground. When how hard you work doesn't matter, you generally just give it your least. You should at least have the promise of getting something out of that extra work you put in.
If more managers and business owners thought as you do, then this forum would be even more dead.
Touché, TA, touché.
Wow, did you go through the trouble of of putting that fancy little accent mark in their yourself, or did spellcheck do it for you?
Why the care?
I find it such a silly argument that people get "paid by the hour". They should really be "paid for what they do". If I work 6 hours and slack off 2 but I accomplish everything you want me to and then some, should it bother you that I'm working 2 hours less or should you consider giving me a raise for what I did do?
But then I'm not a manager and I don't tend to become one either. I am going to be a teacher and I hope applying this to children will both help them with their education and help them become decent managers themselves some days, because I do agree they're pretty rare.
My managers pretty much do that, but I still find time to slack off (sometimes even during work) and visit these forums. Part of how it works is judging people on what they do, and not on what they don't.
I find it such a silly argument that people get "paid by the hour". They should really be "paid for what they do". If I work 6 hours and slack off 2 but I accomplish everything you want me to and then some, should it bother you that I'm working 2 hours less or should you consider giving me a raise for what I did do?
But then I'm not a manager and I don't tend to become one either. I am going to be a teacher and I hope applying this to children will both help them with their education and help them become decent managers themselves some days, because I do agree they're pretty rare.
Im going to school on VA money no job right now hence why I have time.
I find it such a silly argument that people get "paid by the hour".
You don't think ones time is worth anything?
And "getting paid for what you do" doesn't work in a lot of situations.
I find it such a silly argument that people get "paid by the hour".
You don't think ones time is worth anything?
And "getting paid for what you do" doesn't work in a lot of situations.
Street vendor, street advertising, baby sitting... just providing a few examples agreeing with RH.
And someone's time can be worth something, but that depends on what they do not how long they do it. I'll gladly pay someone to do something for me, but I'll not pay someone to sit on their ass and pretend to be working all day. Hence; paid for what you do, not for the hours you spent.
There are a few cases where paying by the hour works, but even a babysitter can be paid for how well she does instead of how long she's sitting there. (...)
And how do you determine that? Install cameras in your home? Hire a private eye to spy one her?
Sometimes it's pretty difficult to "pay for what one does".
What? Paying by the hour? I think you over estimate yourself
I don't pay for sex.
I don't have to.
I didn't say things would be easy. I just said it would be better in many cases. Sometimes it's hard to see (often even) but that doesn't mean that people should just stop trying. Willingly using an inferior system because you can't be arsed to think about making something better work isn't exactly the best way to go.
The difference between us in this case seems to be that I do not view it as an inferior system.
Can I ask; do you enjoy your job? Do you think what you do is an important part of your life? Or do you only work because you need the money?
A shame really. I've seen what "getting paid by the hour" does to people's interest in and quality of work. It's not good.
Can I ask; do you enjoy your job? Do you think what you do is an important part of your life? Or do you only work because you need the money?
You're assuming I was succesful at finding employment ;P
"Different" does not mean inferior or superior. Sometimes being paid by the hour is the only way to go (security guards, cashiers, shop assistants etc.) while other times you pay for order (artists, builders, architects etc.). But neither system is superior or inferior.
A shame really. I've seen what "getting paid by the hour" does to people's interest in and quality of work. It's not good.
Can I ask; do you enjoy your job? Do you think what you do is an important part of your life? Or do you only work because you need the money?
pretty much yeah getting paid by the hour sucks for productivity.
I don't pay for sex.
I don't have to.
How is that even possible?
Being in a stable relationship? Being persuasive? Being "persuasive"?
And people wonder why I have goldomark on permanent "Ignore".
I don't.
And people wonder why I have goldomark on permanent "Ignore".
I don't.
Me like you!
Being in a stable relationship? Being persuasive? Being "persuasive"?
Stable relationship? I've heard about those, but I do not believe in Unicorns and Pixies.
Do you mean pervasive? Cause for that you need to pay too.
No. Being persuasive is using talk and manipulation. Being "persuasive" is using the threat of violence* or the use of alchohol.
*Very, very stupid due to the fact that it's very illegal and frowned upon in any society. The more expensive "persuasion" is also frowned upon by some.
No. Being persuasive is using talk and manipulation. Being "persuasive" is using the threat of violence*/alchohol.
Alcohol can be a threat?
Not really. Looking at the sentence, I'll edit it to reflect what I meant.
well technically even in a stable relationship your paying gifts presents dinners and such.
No. We pay for dinner, we pay the bills, we buy things that make us happy, and so-on.
And people wonder why I have goldomark on permanent "Ignore".
I don't.
I don't either.
Although I don't have anybody, including goldo, on ignorre, I can easily see why some people do.
A shame really. I've seen what "getting paid by the hour" does to people's interest in and quality of work. It's not good.
Can I ask; do you enjoy your job? Do you think what you do is an important part of your life? Or do you only work because you need the money?
You're assuming I was succesful at finding employment ;P
"Different" does not mean inferior or superior. Sometimes being paid by the hour is the only way to go (security guards, cashiers, shop assistants etc.) while other times you pay for order (artists, builders, architects etc.). But neither system is superior or inferior.
Aw man, if you only knew. My girlfriend is one of those so I get plenty of stories why paying by how well you do would be great for just about any store. If there's one reason she's bored, frustrated and unmotivated at work it's because she can and does work twice (at the least) as hard as one of her college's and still gets half the pay because she's younger.
If you'd pay her as you would 1.5 people she'd work for 5. I don't see how anyone can think the current system would be better in such a situation.
That's always nice to hear, glad I'm not alone on this one
I agree too I also prefer performance based pay I do horrible on hourly wages because I get paid wether I care or not.
Mother utitlises baby in a baby carrier as a self-defense weapon to help her procuration of "discounted commodities".
Anyone want to take a swing at this one?
Anyone want to take a swing at this one?
Oh you.
Back to the original topic of criminal ignorance.
Mother utitlises baby in a baby carrier as a self-defense weapon to help her procuration of "discounted commodities".
You know, I think we generally through life kind of assuming most people are pretty much just like us. Then we read a story that reminds us this is really not true. I simply cannot fathom the mindest behind anything these women did. Their brains work entirely different than does mine.
Anyone want to take a swing at this one?
Do I have to use a baby?
Btw, how in **** does attacking someone with your ****ing baby only get you slapped with a misdemeanor?
Yeah. She should be slapped by a 30 pound hammer instead. This women is not worth the air she's breathing.
ehh its not worth the death penalty unless the child was permanently harmed. But yeah WTF was she thinking?
Because honestly, you cannot possibly think this child will turn out well if it's being used as a club at three weeks old. And if she grows up, and sees this article, how do you think that's going to affect their mother-child relationship?
If it´s not worth the death penalty (didn't say the hammer slap should be fatal) she should at very least have her baby taken away until she completes a massively massive amount of courses on "being a decent parent".
Because honestly, you cannot possibly think this child will turn out well if it's being used as a club at three weeks old. And if she grows up, and sees this article, how do you think that's going to affect their mother-child relationship?
Well yeah thats obvious and I wouldnt give her the chance to have her child back ever.
Y'know, I think my ideal job would be getting highly paid to to travel around the country, beating people like them over the head with a stick...
Y'know, I think my ideal job would be getting highly paid to to travel around the country, beating people like them over the head with a stick...
I'd do that for minimum wage, so long as someone else pays for the plane tickets.
.*smashes Goldy in the head with a mace* I love this job
Do it again!
Do it again!
*smashes Goldy in the head with a mace* I love this job
Do it again!
Do it again!
*feigns annoyance* Fine... *smashes repeatedly until streaked with gore* *to battered Goldy corpse* Nothing that personal, it's just a job.
No, I gave it to him with the agreement that I own any of the souls of anyone he happens to kill with it.
So now I am your bitch? I always thought I would end up with satan, since he was the first consciencious objector that ever "lived".
What in the hell is wrong with you?
For those who have done study, Satan was NOT the first "conteintous" objector; he was the first one to rebel against legitimate authority. He is also the one who is responsible for the first lie (For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Genesis 3:5).
Goldy thinks that he's being clever and funny.
As much as I believe the first two words in that sentence constitute and oxymoron, the overall sentiment is spot-on.
RH quoted you.
and I responded to RH, not to Goldy.
Anyone want to take a swing at this one?
Oh you.
Back to the original topic of criminal ignorance.
Mother utitlises baby in a baby carrier as a self-defense weapon to help her procuration of "discounted commodities".
You know, I think we generally through life kind of assuming most people are pretty much just like us. Then we read a story that reminds us this is really not true. I simply cannot fathom the mindest behind anything these women did. Their brains work entirely different than does mine.
Anyone want to take a swing at this one?
Do I have to use a baby?
Btw, how in **** does attacking someone with your ****ing baby only get you slapped with a misdemeanor?
Yeah. She should be slapped by a 30 pound hammer instead. This women is not worth the air she's breathing.
ehh its not worth the death penalty unless the child was permanently harmed. But yeah WTF was she thinking?
Because honestly, you cannot possibly think this child will turn out well if it's being used as a club at three weeks old. And if she grows up, and sees this article, how do you think that's going to affect their mother-child relationship?
If it´s not worth the death penalty (didn't say the hammer slap should be fatal) she should at very least have her baby taken away until she completes a massively massive amount of courses on "being a decent parent".
Because honestly, you cannot possibly think this child will turn out well if it's being used as a club at three weeks old. And if she grows up, and sees this article, how do you think that's going to affect their mother-child relationship?
Well yeah thats obvious and I wouldnt give her the chance to have her child back ever.
Y'know, I think my ideal job would be getting highly paid to to travel around the country, beating people like them over the head with a stick...
Y'know, I think my ideal job would be getting highly paid to to travel around the country, beating people like them over the head with a stick...
I'd do that for minimum wage, so long as someone else pays for the plane tickets.
.*smashes Goldy in the head with a mace* I love this job
Do it again!
Do it again!
*smashes Goldy in the head with a mace* I love this job
Do it again!
Do it again!
*feigns annoyance* Fine... *smashes repeatedly until streaked with gore* *to battered Goldy corpse* Nothing that personal, it's just a job.
No, I gave it to him with the agreement that I own any of the souls of anyone he happens to kill with it.
So now I am your bitch? I always thought I would end up with satan, since he was the first consciencious objector that ever "lived".
What in the hell is wrong with you?
For those who have done study, Satan was NOT the first "conteintous" objector; he was the first one to rebel against legitimate authority. He is also the one who is responsible for the first lie (For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. Genesis 3:5).
Goldy thinks that he's being clever and funny.
As much as I believe the first two words in that sentence constitute and oxymoron, the overall sentiment is spot-on.
RH quoted you.
and I responded to RH, not to Goldy.