On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:01:10 -0500, "Proto" wrote:

I am getting used
to the complaining and it was fun posting here to learn of others opinions.

What was actually amazing was the number of posts from those
that consisered employees easily disposable & replacable property
rather than the most valuable asset.

So what? You have several old employees that are smokers and
the first thing that came to mind to many (FAR too many) was
how easy it would be to fire them.

Naturally, these posts were, no doubt, from those that gripe
about the lack of employee loyalty, imports robbing them of
business (while grabbing their purported "tax cuts") and praising
efforts to eliminate Social Security & adding bogus retirement plans
(not that they probably assist in providing any for *their* disposable
employees that they cannot raid).

Started new thread "On the midden" with this one.
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote in
:

On Wed, 16 Mar 2005 16:01:10 -0500, "Proto" wrote:

I am getting used
to the complaining and it was fun posting here to learn of others
opinions.

What was actually amazing was the number of posts from those
that consisered employees easily disposable & replacable property
rather than the most valuable asset.

So what? You have several old employees that are smokers and
the first thing that came to mind to many (FAR too many) was
how easy it would be to fire them.

Naturally, these posts were, no doubt, from those that gripe
about the lack of employee loyalty, imports robbing them of
business (while grabbing their purported "tax cuts") and praising
efforts to eliminate Social Security & adding bogus retirement plans
(not that they probably assist in providing any for *their* disposable
employees that they cannot raid).

Started new thread "On the midden" with this one.

Midden eh? Roget would be proud. I actually agree with most of what you
have to say. I stayed out of the "smoking" thread, because smoking isn't
the real issue. My experience with people who worry about whether the guy
next to them is working as hard, is that they are petty a-holes, who will
find something else to bitch about once the smoking issue is resolved.
The guys for whom the best solution is to fire the smokers, are actually
doing them a favor. The smokers will end up working in a better place.
Shop owners with the F-'em attitude rarely succeed in the long run. There
was a large shop that we sold some equipment to, where the owner was one
of those tyrants that was always running around screaming or firing
someone for something trivial. He had one employee who for the most part
ran the shop floor. I always wondered how he could stand working for this
guy. One day they have a falling out and the owner fires the guy. The
employee tells the owner he's going to put him out of business someday.
That day came about three years later when they went bankrupt. The ex-
employees shop? Bigger than the place he was fired from. Took away most
every customer within two years. I know a guy who owns a distributorship
that had pretty much the same story. This guy is the top salesman at a
company, and the owner screws him over one too many times. They have a
blow up, and he quits. He tells the owner that he's going to put him out
of business. The owner laughs at him. Five years later, the salesman has
all of the lines, all of the good employees, and is at the bankruptcy
auction of his former employer buying inventory for pennies on the
dollar.
OTOH, I've worked with companies where they take the teamwork thing to
the other extreme. No one will make a decision, and no one will override
the team once they make a decision, no matter how bad the decision. The
successful places seem to find a balance. They usually have a strong
leader with some vision, and they treat the employees well and keep them
engaged in running the place. In return the employees actually care about
doing a good job, and are fairly loyal.
I don't know what any of this has to do with your twisted ideas on
welfare er Social Security. I suppose you think that the Boxer-Clinton-
Jones "No Felon Left Behind Act" will help solve the countries woes. Too
bad it's unconstitutional.

Dan

On 17 Mar 2005 04:39:58 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

I don't know what any of this has to do with your twisted ideas on
welfare er Social Security.

The neocons lied about WMDs & all the rest.
They were just getting warmed up.

I suppose you think that the Boxer-Clinton-
Jones "No Felon Left Behind Act" will help solve the countries woes. Too
bad it's unconstitutional.

??
--
Cliff

Cliff piddled around and finally wrote:

I practice felatio on cucumbers so I can please my man better.

Cliff wrote in news:vigi311jgu6fmn6acgaof24o5kbciopsqj@
4ax.com:

I suppose you think that the Boxer-Clinton-
Jones "No Felon Left Behind Act" will help solve the countries woes. Too
bad it's unconstitutional.

??

The "Count Every Vote Act". Read it. A lot of feel good hoo-ha covering up
the real intent of this act. Giving convicted criminals the right to vote.
Yup, they want to give the guy that snatches a ten year-old girl out of her
bedroom, tortures, rapes, kills her, and leaves her in a ditch the right to
vote for Hillary for president. Nice huh? They ought to read the fourteenth
ammendment sometime. Really you should read it. A lot of the hoo-ha is so
offensive to minorities I can't imagine why they would ever vote for these
three morons again.

Dan

On 18 Mar 2005 00:58:26 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

Cliff wrote in news:vigi311jgu6fmn6acgaof24o5kbciopsqj@
4ax.com:

I suppose you think that the Boxer-Clinton-
Jones "No Felon Left Behind Act" will help solve the countries woes. Too
bad it's unconstitutional.

??

The "Count Every Vote Act". Read it. A lot of feel good hoo-ha covering up
the real intent of this act.

http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr5191.html
What's YOUR specific problem? In detail ....

Giving convicted criminals the right to vote.

Sounds like a VERY good idea to me. What part of "We the people"
was unclear?
But where is that in that act? You seem confused .... been listening
to wingers again?

Yup, they want to give the guy that snatches a ten year-old girl out of her
bedroom, tortures, rapes, kills her, and leaves her in a ditch the right to
vote for Hillary for president.

Or the neocons. Or even to make things legal.

Nice huh? They ought to read the fourteenth
ammendment sometime. Really you should read it.

What bits do you object to? Why?
All of it? Why?

A lot of the hoo-ha is so
offensive to minorities I can't imagine why they would ever vote for these
three morons again.

??
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote in
:


http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr5191.html
What's YOUR specific problem? In detail ....

It's the wrong bill. Is that enough detail for you? Which part of Boxer-
Clinton-Jones didn't you understand?

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_493.pdf

Dan

On 18 Mar 2005 18:24:38 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

Cliff wrote in
:


http://www.theorator.com/bills108/hr5191.html
What's YOUR specific problem? In detail ....

It's the wrong bill.

You got to pick the name G.

Is that enough detail for you? Which part of Boxer-
Clinton-Jones didn't you understand?

http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/dfiles/file_493.pdf

What part of that 60+ page PDF file is your
specific problem?
Being able to count actual ballots?
--
Cliff

On 19 Mar 2005 00:03:23 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

Cliff wrote in news:toem31djujst6l59a05v0borcukqku0ohk@
4ax.com:

What part of that 60+ page PDF file is your
specific problem?

I already told you.

I'm thinking that now that you've read it you see that it's
unconstitutional and offensive to minorities.

Dan,
I'm not about to downlad & read a 60+ page PDF to guess
what you are upset about this time.
Monica?
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote in news:f64o3159569fb5j0l1soebnukfj2kpj2hj@
4ax.com:

Dan,
I'm not about to downlad & read a 60+ page PDF

Then you can keep on entertaining us with your unenlightened opinions.

Dan

On 19 Mar 2005 16:11:02 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

Cliff wrote in news:f64o3159569fb5j0l1soebnukfj2kpj2hj@
4ax.com:

Dan,
I'm not about to downlad & read a 60+ page PDF

Then you can keep on entertaining us with your unenlightened opinions.

Clearly you had nothing specific in mind; even got the wrong title
the first time IIRC.

Neocons good, Clinton bad, right? All Monica's fault again?
--
Cliff

Cliff wrote in
:

On 19 Mar 2005 16:11:02 GMT, Dan Murphy wrote:

Cliff wrote in
news:f64o3159569fb5j0l1soebnukfj2kpj2hj@ 4ax.com:

Dan,
I'm not about to downlad & read a 60+ page PDF

Then you can keep on entertaining us with your unenlightened opinions.

Clearly you had nothing specific in mind; even got the wrong title
the first time IIRC.

Neocons good, Clinton bad, right? All Monica's fault again?

Here you go. http://tinyurl.com/4xtoe

Let me know how you make out.

Dan