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

[The T]

I assume that if it doesnt' effect you, you usually don't give a shit.

Affects every human on the planet. I happen to belive in good stewardship of the planet. YOU may take what you just wrote and place it in a warm dark place.

Its like saying Hunters dont care.

I have asked many times.

When has the left ever presented a issue honestly?

And yet the question still begs, doesn't it? Party and agenda over liberty and country everytime for perceived wrongs when very few can describe true liberty if thier lives depended on it...and as a matter of fact? it does as they applaud the whittling away of thier liberties for righting perceived wrongs by thier captors known as intrusive government.

Synopsis? They're tools and they don't know it.

 

[The Rabbi]

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?

Yes.
Where have overseas auto companies set up shop? What is the unemployment rate among auto workers in Michigan? Where did Boeing build its last factory?
Done. You've been pwned yet again.

 

[JoeB131]

What? You ha e that completely backwards. If i own a business and want to just fire someone out of the blue hey guess what? Its my property and should be my right. Now surely if someone operated like that word would get around and people would stopwanting to work there......

Or do you also favor forcing employees to document their reasons for wanting to quit a job and then having to prove they have cause?

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

 

[JoeB131]

Yes.
Where have overseas auto companies set up shop? What is the unemployment rate among auto workers in Michigan? Where did Boeing build its last factory?
Done. You've been pwned yet again.

Wow, so you set up shops and Clem and Cleetus get low paying jobs?

Frankly, not sure if I want to fly in a plane built by Clem and Cleetus because he worked cheaper than a paid professional aerospace worker who went through a lifetime of training before they let him put planes together.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

What? You ha e that completely backwards. If i own a business and want to just fire someone out of the blue hey guess what? Its my property and should be my right. Now surely if someone operated like that word would get around and people would stopwanting to work there......

Or do you also favor forcing employees to document their reasons for wanting to quit a job and then having to prove they have cause?

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Umm I pay for those "benefits" meaning once purchased they are MINE. My water, my electricity, my well you get the idea........

My logic is perfectly within the constraints of the COTUS, you know that whole pesky right to liberty thing? Now that doesn't apply to government entities at all, but if some jack hole wants to open a restaurant and hang a "no *******" sign out front, he should have that right. Of course normal sane people would boycott his/her ass and put him out of business in a hurry, but that should be his right if he wishes.

 

[JoeB131]

What? You ha e that completely backwards. If i own a business and want to just fire someone out of the blue hey guess what? Its my property and should be my right. Now surely if someone operated like that word would get around and people would stopwanting to work there......

Or do you also favor forcing employees to document their reasons for wanting to quit a job and then having to prove they have cause?

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Umm I pay for those "benefits" meaning once purchased they are MINE. My water, my electricity, my well you get the idea........

My logic is perfectly within the constraints of the COTUS, you know that whole pesky right to liberty thing? Now that doesn't apply to government entities at all, but if some jack hole wants to open a restaurant and hang a "no *******" sign out front, he should have that right. Of course normal sane people would boycott his/her ass and put him out of business in a hurry, but that should be his right if he wishes.

Oh, I'm talking to one of you idiots who thinks that if a bunch of dead slave-rapers didn't anticipate a problem, we shouldn't address it? Is that whom I'm talking to.

I'd love to take all you fugnuts, and put you in a community where you can't have any technology invented after 1800.

That'd shut you all up.

We advance, we move on. Your logic is bizarre and kind of stupid.

Let's take the water. YOu aren't paying for it. The community paid for it by creating a vast array of pipes a purification systems that were in place long before you got there. Same with the Roads or the Police Protection or the Electrical Grid. (Keep in mind, if left to the "Strict Constructionists" who have the mindset of a 18th century slave owner, half the country would be without electricity.) You pay a rate for using what other people paid for as a community.

Which is fine, I have no problem with that part of it. But there's also an expectation of playing fair with your employees.

Which means you'd better be able to DOCUMENT what they did wrong before you fire them and make them the rest of our problem.

 

[The Rabbi]

What? You ha e that completely backwards. If i own a business and want to just fire someone out of the blue hey guess what? Its my property and should be my right. Now surely if someone operated like that word would get around and people would stopwanting to work there......

Or do you also favor forcing employees to document their reasons for wanting to quit a job and then having to prove they have cause?

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Businesses pay for water and electricity. They pay taxes on everything involved. There is no quid pro quo here.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Umm I pay for those "benefits" meaning once purchased they are MINE. My water, my electricity, my well you get the idea........

My logic is perfectly within the constraints of the COTUS, you know that whole pesky right to liberty thing? Now that doesn't apply to government entities at all, but if some jack hole wants to open a restaurant and hang a "no *******" sign out front, he should have that right. Of course normal sane people would boycott his/her ass and put him out of business in a hurry, but that should be his right if he wishes.

Oh, I'm talking to one of you idiots who thinks that if a bunch of dead slave-rapers didn't anticipate a problem, we shouldn't address it? Is that whom I'm talking to.

I'd love to take all you fugnuts, and put you in a community where you can't have any technology invented after 1800.

That'd shut you all up.

We advance, we move on. Your logic is bizarre and kind of stupid.

Let's take the water. YOu aren't paying for it. The community paid for it by creating a vast array of pipes a purification systems that were in place long before you got there. Same with the Roads or the Police Protection or the Electrical Grid. (Keep in mind, if left to the "Strict Constructionists" who have the mindset of a 18th century slave owner, half the country would be without electricity.) You pay a rate for using what other people paid for as a community.

Which is fine, I have no problem with that part of it. But there's also an expectation of playing fair with your employees.

Which means you'd better be able to DOCUMENT what they did wrong before you fire them and make them the rest of our problem.

so you also advocate making employees document what an employer did wrong and why they are quitting ?

The rest of your post was just tripe.

 

[The Rabbi]

Yes.
Where have overseas auto companies set up shop? What is the unemployment rate among auto workers in Michigan? Where did Boeing build its last factory?
Done. You've been pwned yet again.

Wow, so you set up shops and Clem and Cleetus get low paying jobs?

Frankly, not sure if I want to fly in a plane built by Clem and Cleetus because he worked cheaper than a paid professional aerospace worker who went through a lifetime of training before they let him put planes together.

You think SC doesn't have paid professionals working there? You think union membership guarantees paid professionals? The Pinto and a bunch of crappy dangerous cars were built by organized labor.
But you deflect because you know I am right and cannot answer.
I think you're stereotyping is hysterical, btw. You are an enormous hypocrite.

 

[JoeB131]

What? You ha e that completely backwards. If i own a business and want to just fire someone out of the blue hey guess what? Its my property and should be my right. Now surely if someone operated like that word would get around and people would stopwanting to work there......

Or do you also favor forcing employees to document their reasons for wanting to quit a job and then having to prove they have cause?

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Businesses pay for water and electricity. They pay taxes on everything involved. There is no quid pro quo here.

And so do the rest of us to provide those things.

Take the water. When you move into a new business location, there's probably water and electricity already set up. Someone just has to stop by and turn it on. Usually either a company with a government franchise or the government itself. Well, you didn't pay to have that water line put in there unless you are buying a new building. More than likely, you are just getting water someone else aready paid for.

And this is what you fetishists don't seem to get. We really are in this together. Conservatives used to kind of understand this, but somewhere, they got hijacked by the Gordon Gecco wing of the party. (Which are probably the biggest welfare queens of the lot.)

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Businesses pay for water and electricity. They pay taxes on everything involved. There is no quid pro quo here.

And so do the rest of us to provide those things.

Take the water. When you move into a new business location, there's probably water and electricity already set up. Someone just has to stop by and turn it on. Usually either a company with a government franchise or the government itself. Well, you didn't pay to have that water line put in there unless you are buying a new building. More than likely, you are just getting water someone else aready paid for.

And this is what you fetishists don't seem to get. We really are in this together. Conservatives used to kind of understand this, but somewhere, they got hijacked by the Gordon Gecco wing of the party. (Which are probably the biggest welfare queens of the lot.)

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

 

[JoeB131]

You think SC doesn't have paid professionals working there? You think union membership guarantees paid professionals? The Pinto and a bunch of crappy dangerous cars were built by organized labor.But you deflect because you know I am right and cannot answer.
I think you're stereotyping is hysterical, btw. You are an enormous hypocrite.

Wow, the Pinto? Do you even know the history behind the Pinto.

Wasn't because of the Auto Workers. It was because engineers came up with a BAD DESIGN, not that they were put together wrong.

And then some assholes in suits found out that there was a design flaw, but figured instead of doing an $11.00 refit on millions of units, it was just cheaper to pay out claims to the few dozen people who would burn to death in accidents. That's capitalism at it very worst.

Not deflecting at all, guy. If I'm flying in a machine , I want it built, maintained and flown by people who are well compensated for their work. I'm kind of surprised you'd want Clem and Cleetus putting it together for half the wage his union counterpart in Seattle was getting paid to do it.

 

[The T]

Businesses pay for water and electricity. They pay taxes on everything involved. There is no quid pro quo here.

And so do the rest of us to provide those things.

Take the water. When you move into a new business location, there's probably water and electricity already set up. Someone just has to stop by and turn it on. Usually either a company with a government franchise or the government itself. Well, you didn't pay to have that water line put in there unless you are buying a new building. More than likely, you are just getting water someone else aready paid for.

And this is what you fetishists don't seem to get. We really are in this together. Conservatives used to kind of understand this, but somewhere, they got hijacked by the Gordon Gecco wing of the party. (Which are probably the biggest welfare queens of the lot.)

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

And by the same token? Why can't someone use your power if you have external outlets outside your home?

 

[JoeB131]

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

Not even close, Fetish-boy. Although, honestly, I'm usually nice enough to let people use the bathroom.

Businesses are public accommedations and they get privilages the rest of us don't get.

That's why we hold them to a higher standard than Joe HOmeowner.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

Not even close, Fetish-boy. Although, honestly, I'm usually nice enough to let people use the bathroom.

Businesses are public accommedations and they get privilages the rest of us don't get.

That's why we hold them to a higher standard than Joe HOmeowner.

Businesses are NOT public accommodations, and in fact that is easily proven by the fact that businesses likewise are not required to let you use their restrooms.

Pray tell what privileges do you think private businesses get. as a small business owner I'd be interested to here your theories.

 

[The T]

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

Not even close, Fetish-boy. Although, honestly, I'm usually nice enough to let people use the bathroom.

Businesses are public accommedations and they get privilages the rest of us don't get.

That's why we hold them to a higher standard than Joe HOmeowner.

Businesses are NOT public accommodations, and in fact that is easily proven by the fact that businesses likewise are not required to let you use their restrooms.

Pray tell what privileges do you think private businesses get. as a small business owner I'd be interested to here your theories.

Unfortunately folks like Joey tend to blur the line between public/private.

 

[The Rabbi]

YOu logic would be fine if your property was self-sustaining. WHich it isn't.

Their is a whole slew of laws that are intended to protect both your employees and your customers from your bad behavior as a business owner. In return, you get a bunch of benefits from government. Everything from water supplies, electrical service, police protection, access to highways.

Businesses pay for water and electricity. They pay taxes on everything involved. There is no quid pro quo here.

And so do the rest of us to provide those things.

Take the water. When you move into a new business location, there's probably water and electricity already set up. Someone just has to stop by and turn it on. Usually either a company with a government franchise or the government itself. Well, you didn't pay to have that water line put in there unless you are buying a new building. More than likely, you are just getting water someone else aready paid for.

And this is what you fetishists don't seem to get. We really are in this together. Conservatives used to kind of understand this, but somewhere, they got hijacked by the Gordon Gecco wing of the party. (Which are probably the biggest welfare queens of the lot.)

The gov't did not pay for any of the water. Every bit of it was taxed or charged, including to businesses.
The "someone else" who put the water line was the previous owner, not the government. Part of the cost of the building is that water line.
You don't understand much about business and the economy, do you? That's what happens when you've spent your life insulated from reality by a protected union job.

 

[The Rabbi]

You could say the same thing about your house. Could someone just show up at your door and demand that you let them in to use the toilet? I mean the plumbing is paid for by all isn't it? Why not?

Not even close, Fetish-boy. Although, honestly, I'm usually nice enough to let people use the bathroom.

Businesses are public accommedations and they get privilages the rest of us don't get.

That's why we hold them to a higher standard than Joe HOmeowner.

Businesses are NOT public accommodations, and in fact that is easily proven by the fact that businesses likewise are not required to let you use their restrooms.

Pray tell what privileges do you think private businesses get. as a small business owner I'd be interested to here your theories.

Actually they are "public accomodations." THis was the ruling of many Supreme Court cases.
But I'm waiting to hear what privileges businesses get that private homeowners dont. I guess like the privilege to pay a business tax. The privilege to be subject to additional regulations etc.
Excuse Joe. He's been insulated from reality by his union masters so has no idea what he's talking about.

 

[Unknown_Soldier]

Not even close, Fetish-boy. Although, honestly, I'm usually nice enough to let people use the bathroom.

Businesses are public accommedations and they get privilages the rest of us don't get.

That's why we hold them to a higher standard than Joe HOmeowner.

Businesses are NOT public accommodations, and in fact that is easily proven by the fact that businesses likewise are not required to let you use their restrooms.

Pray tell what privileges do you think private businesses get. as a small business owner I'd be interested to here your theories.

Actually they are "public accomodations." THis was the ruling of many Supreme Court cases.
But I'm waiting to hear what privileges businesses get that private homeowners dont. I guess like the privilege to pay a business tax. The privilege to be subject to additional regulations etc.
Excuse Joe. He's been insulated from reality by his union masters so has no idea what he's talking about.

Fair enough, when I think of a public accommodation I think of something like a government office that is accessible by all. A private business is no such thing.

 

[The Rabbi]

It was this case:
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States (1964)

Personally I think the whole case and what it established sucked and was terribly misguided. It destroyed about 200 years of private property law. The upside of ending discrimination would have been accomplished in time anyway. Can anyone imagine a small business today refusing to deal with people because they are black or Asians or something?