hydrospanner @ hydrospanner @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

886

Joined

2 yr. ago

I'd bet that at many points in the supply chain, Dunkin runs on exploitation.

Wouldn't want to catch a head cold.

Sanders, while I love the guy, is a more polarizing figure than Biden.

Biden was pretty much always going to be the nominee in 2020 for that reason: he was never anybody's favorite, but he was the one face in that field with the important distinction that while nobody really super liked him, nobody really hated him either. Cast a wide net, big tent, and all that.

While the people who like Sanders really like him, there are also a lot of people who would vote Biden to block Trump for whom being asked to vote for Sanders would be a bridge too far. Not that they'd vote for Trump instead...but they just wouldn't cast a vote for either main party candidate.

...which of course also segues neatly to the fact that Sanders isn't a Democrat, and asking the DNC to nominate someone who's not even a party member is a big ask anyway.

You shut your whore mouth.

That happened to me many moons ago.

"Hey so I've been here a few years and I've learned a lot more and I'm much more productive in my role. I've also learned the business enough that I've applied the skills I brought with me to the point that that's now less than 10% of my workload, having become so efficient with it that you haven't had to fill the other opening you had for my role because I'm handling it all. What do you think my prospects would be for a raise or promotion?"

"Sorry, no budget for a raise this year beyond your 1.3% annual raise (in a year with 4% inflation). And sorry but we can't promote you either. You don't have the skills for the position above yours, and besides, if we promote you out of your role we'll be too under staffed in it."

"So hire someone, let me train them for my role while you train me for the role I could promote to?"

"Nah that's too expensive and we wouldn't likely get the performance from them that we get out of you. Great job by the way. But no, no promotion, no raise."

"Do you think that might change next year? Or like...where do you see my role here in the future?"

"We're really happy with the roles you're in and feel you're well suited to it. And we feel that your pay is in line with the work you're doing, so just keep up the good work."

...so they basically told me that they'd keep overworking me and that I could expect to never get a significant raise or promotion ever again.

Two months later I got a job offer doing less work, work that was much more in line with my skills and preferred work...and a 38% raise. When I gave my notice, immediately they wanted to make a counter offer. I said I'd hear them out but based on our last conversation I doubted they were going to be willing to retain me...but sure I'll listen.

Their offer:

No raise.

I could work a shift of mandatory 9 hour days to make more money (OT was always unlimited and freely available so this was literally just taking away my choice to work OT and forcing me into it).

No promotion.

But they would also start training me to assist another guy in the office with his work. Basically I could work longer hours and have more responsibilities for the same pay.

...and they were surprised when I refused.

They even had the gall to tell me how they felt betrayed that I only gave them 2 weeks notice, rather than agreeing to stay on until they could find my replacement and I could train them. When I pointed out that they literally told me they weren't hiring my replacement as long as I stayed their only response was that they would have if they knew I was going to leave.

If while acting in your own self-interest you knowingly, through action or inaction, allow others to come to harm, even indirectly, that is evil.

I think most Americans buy products made via unethical labor practices, and which damage the environment, harming everyone.

Are you really making the argument that the vast majority of Americans are evil?

Right?

One of the biggest changes with the advent of the Internet was that no matter what your interests, the Internet was always there with that most comforting of messages: "You are not alone.

Now that we can see that notion taken to it's inevitable and absurd conclusion, I think we can safely say that for lots and lots of people, it's for the best that they're left to believe they are, actually, alone.

I cannot wrap my brain around the mental path that leads any woman to support Donald Trump.

Like...why? What on earth does this candidate offer you?

I could 100% imagine DeSantis going down that road.

Right?

Like... When she was governor, I didn't necessarily like her, but I felt like she...was not as bad as the average Republican, at least. Which is honestly high praise for a Republican.

When she got the UN job I thought that was a great pick by the Trump transition team, that she'd at least be a bit of outwardly facing sanity to the world, to hide the shit that was going to no doubt hit the fan domestically.

2017 me had no idea how naive I was about how eagerly the entire GOP would drink from the Trump punch bowl.

IDK why you think that "4 equal sides" is the same as "sideways square".

You can (and frequently do) have equal sided diamonds that aren't "sideways squares".

Seems like your main issue is geometry.

People would definitely want to elongate the top and bottom sides

Which is fine. As long as they elongate symmetrically (which most would do), they're still four equal sides.

There's no way a human is going to draw 4 equal lines

Yes they would. In fact most would, I'd wager.

Sounds like your concepts struggle is comprehending that "four equal sides" isn't the same as "four equal vertices".

If you give someone paper and a pencil and ask them, "Please draw a diamond shape."

Most will draw a 4 sided shape with 4 equal sides.

Once more, with feeling...

I'm not saying it's not more rewarding, better quality, etc.

But it's not easier than just buying a damn jar of pickles when you're at the store.

I make them and buy them, I garden my own cucumbers specifically to make them. I've made quick ones, slow ones, garlic ones, spicy ones...it's not hard...

...but I'm not going to pretend it's faster or easier than buying a jar from the fucking supermarket.

Because it's not.

You missed the "a quick and dirty [wet] shave is just as good as an electric one" part, didn't you.

I didn't miss it, I just didn't feel it was worth it to point out how obviously wrong it was.

Sure they might give equivalent results, but one is significantly faster, easier, and less hassle than the other.

I've done both kinds of shave and there's no arguing that a wet shave gives the superior results...but pretending that it's not a lot more fuss and effort is just ridiculous.

Honestly, the only evidence I've ever seen to support the idea of vaccines causing brain damage are all these idiots now who got vaccines as kids, never died from the illnesses they were vaccinated against, and now somehow come to the conclusion that they're bad.

That shape in 2D has five sides though.

I think most people would say a 2D shape that they'd call a diamond would have 4 equal sides.

I don't think very many at all would call an elongated parallelogram a "diamond".

Right?

The cherry on top is that this whole ritual is to save someone the hassle of "having to deal with batteries". The horror!

I'm not doubting that it's a more rewarding experience, but it always cracks me up when proponents of an obviously more laborious process in anything also feel the need to act like it's easier too.

It's like baking your own bread, making your own pickles, building your own wooden furniture, or making any number of dishes "from scratch". Sure it's probably better in the end, but that's after buying a bunch of stuff, going through a significantly longer and more tricky process, and often after making mistakes and building an entire new skill set.

For most people, all it will become is a lesson in why they preferred the original path of convenience in the first place.

I mean, in this case it's what works for her then, but it's literally the exact sort of thing the article is dealing with.

Worse in this case because she's owning the home, not living in it, and using it to generate passive income, specifically preventing what might have been a younger generation of homeowners from making that investment and instead forcing them into the very rental market she's profiting from.

And I'm not saying she's a bad person or a bad landlord or anything, just that this is an example supporting the piece, not an exception to it.

I don't mean to sound insensitive, but I'm genuinely curious: your MIL is in expensive assisted living yet still owns a home she's no longer living in? Wouldn't the move here be to sell the home now with housing prices so high, and use the profits from it to fund the assisted living expenses?