MO Can Fire You For Being Gay, But Wants To Make Gun Owners A Protected Minority

[Seawytch]

What the hell is wrong with some of you people? Where does the government get off telling me who I may or may not fire?

I own guns, I love guns, but guess what? The second amendment applies to the GOVERNMENT, not private business. If I as a business owner wish to not hire gun "nuts', or gays for that matter, I should have that right.

We need to get back to the days where we actually lived by the COTUS.

As an overall principle, I agree with that... but I think workers should have some protection against capricious and evil bosses.

I think we should have a law that you should be able to show cause for firing someone. If you fired someone for something, you shold be able to show a good reason for doing so.

"At Will" Employment has been a disaster for the middle class in this country.

You have got to be kidding, i should also tell you, you are full of shit, because there is no way you can demonstrate at will employment has been disastrous. None Zip Nadda

Joe you are like are politicians, just throw something out there that sounds good.

 

[Liberty]

sounds like good legislation!

 

[Full-Auto]

As an overall principle, I agree with that... but I think workers should have some protection against capricious and evil bosses.

I think we should have a law that you should be able to show cause for firing someone. If you fired someone for something, you shold be able to show a good reason for doing so.

"At Will" Employment has been a disaster for the middle class in this country.

You have got to be kidding, i should also tell you, you are full of shit, because there is no way you can demonstrate at will employment has been disastrous. None Zip Nadda

Joe you are like are politicians, just throw something out there that sounds good.

That was from the left field bleachers. do you have something to actually say or is it straight to the fight.

Dont slink off now, I enjoy mixing it up.

 

[The Rabbi]

As an overall principle, I agree with that... but I think workers should have some protection against capricious and evil bosses.

I think we should have a law that you should be able to show cause for firing someone. If you fired someone for something, you shold be able to show a good reason for doing so.

"At Will" Employment has been a disaster for the middle class in this country.

You have got to be kidding, i should also tell you, you are full of shit, because there is no way you can demonstrate at will employment has been disastrous. None Zip Nadda

Joe you are like are politicians, just throw something out there that sounds good.

Correlation is not causation.
Keep repeating that until you understand it. I wont hold my breath.

 

[editec]

MO Can Fire You For Being Gay, But Wants To Make Gun Owners A Protected Minority

The solution is obvious.

Gays need to arm themselves and take no prisoners.

 

[Seawytch]

You have got to be kidding, i should also tell you, you are full of shit, because there is no way you can demonstrate at will employment has been disastrous. None Zip Nadda

Joe you are like are politicians, just throw something out there that sounds good.

That was from the left field bleachers. do you have something to actually say or is it straight to the fight.

Dont slink off now, I enjoy mixing it up.

How is it from left field? As union membership has declined, so has the middle class share of income.

!Right to Work, for Less

The middle class is being destroyed right before your eyes while you actually fight for lower wages and less benefits. I don't get it.

 

[Full-Auto]

MO Can Fire You For Being Gay, But Wants To Make Gun Owners A Protected Minority

The solution is obvious.

Gays need to arm themselves and take no prisoners.

THat could be lucrative. The training required just to point it in the right direction...

 

[Seawytch]

MO Can Fire You For Being Gay, But Wants To Make Gun Owners A Protected Minority

The solution is obvious.

Gays need to arm themselves and take no prisoners.

We are...

The Pink Pistols

 

[Full-Auto]

MO Can Fire You For Being Gay, But Wants To Make Gun Owners A Protected Minority

The solution is obvious.

Gays need to arm themselves and take no prisoners.

We are...

The Pink Pistols

Dont forget rifles dear...................

 

[The T]

Gun owners are already protected via the Second Amendment.

/Thread.

 

[Seawytch]

sounds like good legislation!

Spoken like a "true" libertarian...nothing like letting that big government decide who you can hire or fire.

 

[JoeB131]

WHy should anyone have to prove anything? I don't want you working here, should be good enough for anyone.
At will protects good workers. Unions protect shitty workers.

BUllshit. I've seen lots of good workers fired because they didn't kiss the boss's ass or because the Boss was insecure and didn't like employees who knew their job better than he did.

If business were a true meritocracy, you might have a point, but usually the people who rise to the top are the shit, not the cream.

Saw a gal fired because she was a lesbian once. Had an excellent work record, but the minute they found out she was gay, she was out of there.

Saw other girls fired because they got pregnant.

The problem with our economic system is we've got it backwards. Labor is the superior of Capital. Do you know who said that? Abraham Lincoln, that pinko commie.

 

[JoeB131]

What the hell is wrong with some of you people? Where does the government get off telling me who I may or may not fire?

I own guns, I love guns, but guess what? The second amendment applies to the GOVERNMENT, not private business. If I as a business owner wish to not hire gun "nuts', or gays for that matter, I should have that right.

We need to get back to the days where we actually lived by the COTUS.

As an overall principle, I agree with that... but I think workers should have some protection against capricious and evil bosses.

I think we should have a law that you should be able to show cause for firing someone. If you fired someone for something, you shold be able to show a good reason for doing so.

"At Will" Employment has been a disaster for the middle class in this country.

You have got to be kidding, i should also tell you, you are full of shit, because there is no way you can demonstrate at will employment has been disastrous. None Zip Nadda

Joe you are like are politicians, just throw something out there that sounds good.

Between 1980 and 2012, middle class wages have increased 1% when adjusted for inflation. Comare that to the period of 1932-1980, when Unions became the rule and we had strong workers rights, Middle Class salaries increased 50%.

Fact is, strong worker rights make better bosses, and better bosses make better companies.

All you so called "conservatives" think it's a wonderful day when a boss can shit on his employees, but really, you are just pushing this country towards the kind of European socialism you dread.

 

[CaughtInTheMid]

who here is for limited government and for letting businesses decide who they want to employ without government interference?

 

[JoeB131]

who here is for limited government and for letting businesses decide who they want to employ without government interference?

If we had strong workers unions, I'd have no problem with less laws on the subject.

 

[The Rabbi]

WHy should anyone have to prove anything? I don't want you working here, should be good enough for anyone.
At will protects good workers. Unions protect shitty workers.

BUllshit. I've seen lots of good workers fired because they didn't kiss the boss's ass or because the Boss was insecure and didn't like employees who knew their job better than he did.

If business were a true meritocracy, you might have a point, but usually the people who rise to the top are the shit, not the cream.

Saw a gal fired because she was a lesbian once. Had an excellent work record, but the minute they found out she was gay, she was out of there.

Saw other girls fired because they got pregnant.

The problem with our economic system is we've got it backwards. Labor is the superior of Capital. Do you know who said that? Abraham Lincoln, that pinko commie.

The plural of anecdote is not proof.
I've seen state workers grossly incompetent who could not be fired.
Overall the system works better in an at will setting.
I am sorry if you are one of the incompetents who needs union protection to earn a salary. Maybe counseling?

 

[Seawytch]

who here is for limited government and for letting businesses decide who they want to employ without government interference?

Or who they can serve at lunch counters?

 

[Seawytch]

WHy should anyone have to prove anything? I don't want you working here, should be good enough for anyone.
At will protects good workers. Unions protect shitty workers.

BUllshit. I've seen lots of good workers fired because they didn't kiss the boss's ass or because the Boss was insecure and didn't like employees who knew their job better than he did.

If business were a true meritocracy, you might have a point, but usually the people who rise to the top are the shit, not the cream.

Saw a gal fired because she was a lesbian once. Had an excellent work record, but the minute they found out she was gay, she was out of there.

Saw other girls fired because they got pregnant.

The problem with our economic system is we've got it backwards. Labor is the superior of Capital. Do you know who said that? Abraham Lincoln, that pinko commie.

The plural of anecdote is not proof.
I've seen state workers grossly incompetent who could not be fired.
Overall the system works better in an at will setting.
I am sorry if you are one of the incompetents who needs union protection to earn a salary. Maybe counseling?

So you can provide evidence that workers in "at will" states are better paid and have better benefits?

 

[The Rabbi]

who here is for limited government and for letting businesses decide who they want to employ without government interference?

Or who they can serve at lunch counters?

Works for me.

 

[The T]

who here is for limited government and for letting businesses decide who they want to employ without government interference?

Or who they can serve at lunch counters?

Works for me.

Yep. Can we add smoking sections in bars/restaraunts?