141–150 of 150 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you do something at work with a subordinate, it’s no longer personal.
Dating in the workplace is usually a bad idea, especially if it's a manager and an underling because the power dynamics get fucked up. But in the case of the Clinton affair, it was effectively personal (Bill, Monica, Hillary) -- their business. Please explain how this impacted Clinton's ability to execute his job, or how that dynamic hurt Lewinsky in such a way that it needed to be a national affair? This is the same…
I purposely avoided comparing Clinton to anyone else, so whatever horrible things Trump has done is just changing the subject. I personally believe that neither of them has committed (anything approximating) the most abhorrent acts by a POTUS, but that's a different conversation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> trump-approval-tracker Keep in mind that Trump was hired by the slate of electors you chose to hire. You did not choose him yourself. While ultimately all employees in your business are your responsibility, it is best for you to focus on the high ranking individuals, not the low-rung peons that are doing the busywork. First step is to call up the middle manager electors you hired directly and ask "What the hell?" T…
> If all this still is beyond your grasp, community colleges typically have management courses you can enrol in You're taking this analogy too far. Managing an employee is not like electing a representative. We're not describing a boss-employee relationship here. This motivational talk of "you have a superpower" and "you're the boss" all boiled down to one piece of concrete advice you gave: "call your representative"…
Quite literally we are. I know it may not feel like it if you are accustomed to sitting back and letting the world crumble around you, but you are electing someone to work for you. What would the voting process be for if you didn't need anyone to do your bidding? Most importantly, why are you putting the elected on the payroll if you don't need them to work for you? Were you under the impression that they work for free?
> I think we have enough evidence at this point to know that this is just not going to do it.
If you don't like being called the boss, there's another word we use to describe participating in democracy: Lobbying. I think we can reasonably conclude that it does work because those who push a dictatorial agenda always cry about how the lobbyists (i.e. those who take time to talk to the workers) actually get things done — just not the things they imagine would get done if there was one all knowing, all powerful supreme dictator. Plus we know it works because we can see it in every other walk of life. The people don't become space aliens when the word government is thrown into the mix. People are people are people.
I get this desire for magic, but magic doesn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What Clinton did was absolutely wrong, but that was a personal affair. In life and the law, intentions are foundational for evaluating people's actions. The scandalizing of Clinton's behavior was only about political slander, mud slinging. Your pearl clutching is performative and partisan. There's so much to not like about the Dems, and it's primarily in the fact that DNC leadership is corrupt and they are only inter…
If you do something at work with a subordinate, it’s no longer personal.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If all this still is beyond your grasp, community colleges typically have management courses you can enrol in You're taking this analogy too far. Managing an employee is not like electing a representative. We're not describing a boss-employee relationship here. This motivational talk of "you have a superpower" and "you're the boss" all boiled down to one piece of concrete advice you gave: "call your representative"…
> Managing an employee is not like electing a representative. We're not describing a boss-employee relationship here. Quite literally we are. I know it may not feel like it if you are accustomed to sitting back and letting the world crumble around you, but you are electing someone to work for you. What would the voting process be for if you didn't need anyone to do your bidding? Most importantly, why are you putting…
And there's another word we can use to describe Lobbying: Bribery.
Lobbying is a (corrupt) industry and I'm not a participant in it, so unfortunately I'm still down to "call your representative".
The system really doesn't work as you say. Representatives don't respond to what their constituents want. They respond to money and and power. That's not democracy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Managing an employee is not like electing a representative. We're not describing a boss-employee relationship here. Quite literally we are. I know it may not feel like it if you are accustomed to sitting back and letting the world crumble around you, but you are electing someone to work for you. What would the voting process be for if you didn't need anyone to do your bidding? Most importantly, why are you putting…
> there's another word we use to describe participating in democracy: Lobbying And there's another word we can use to describe Lobbying: Bribery. Lobbying is a (corrupt) industry and I'm not a participant in it, so unfortunately I'm still down to "call your representative". The system really doesn't work as you say. Representatives don't respond to what their constituents want. They respond to money and and power. Th…
Which is literally lobbying, which you refuse to participate in, so that leaves accepting that all your great thoughts will be forever stuck in your head. The person you hired to work with your thoughts is most definitely not a mind reader.
> They respond to money and and power.
Money and power is not some fundamental property of the universe. It is only social. It is given to whom the people want to give it to. So, if the money and power isn't directed where you want to see it, give money and power to someone else.
> That's not democracy.
Right. Democracy takes place when you make yourself heard, by actually talking to people, not computers, about what you feel needs to be heard, while holding the representatives accountable if they do not do their job. So far you appear to be doing neither. If democracy isn't your thing, that's fine. The neat thing about democracy is if you don't like it and choose not to participate, it naturally turns into the only alternative, so everyone wins — except those who cling to the idea of magic. Unfortunately, magic doesn't exist.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> there's another word we use to describe participating in democracy: Lobbying And there's another word we can use to describe Lobbying: Bribery. Lobbying is a (corrupt) industry and I'm not a participant in it, so unfortunately I'm still down to "call your representative". The system really doesn't work as you say. Representatives don't respond to what their constituents want. They respond to money and and power. Th…
> I'm still down to "call your representative". Which is literally lobbying, which you refuse to participate in, so that leaves accepting that all your great thoughts will be forever stuck in your head. The person you hired to work with your thoughts is most definitely not a mind reader. > They respond to money and and power. Money and power is not some fundamental property of the universe. It is only social. It is g…
It's literally not possible to fix a corrupt system by asking a participant in it to change the system that benefits them.
> Unfortunately, magic doesn't exist.
You are under the illusion that we operate under a functional democracy that responds to the will of the people. It's you that believes in magic, not me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I'm still down to "call your representative". Which is literally lobbying, which you refuse to participate in, so that leaves accepting that all your great thoughts will be forever stuck in your head. The person you hired to work with your thoughts is most definitely not a mind reader. > They respond to money and and power. Money and power is not some fundamental property of the universe. It is only social. It is g…
> Which is literally lobbying, which you refuse to participate in, so that leaves accepting that all your great thoughts will be forever stuck in your head It's literally not possible to fix a corrupt system by asking a participant in it to change the system that benefits them. > Unfortunately, magic doesn't exist. You are under the illusion that we operate under a functional democracy that responds to the will of th…
If that were the case we wouldn't have spent time talking about how it is broken, nor would we have spent time talking about what needs to be done to fix it. However, like you said, when you benefit from the system there is no incentive to change.
To those reading this who are not winners under the status quo, know that you can change. The power is in your hands. Don't let the propagandists try to convince you that it is hopeless. As they suggest themselves, only those who want to keep things the same seek preservation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Which is literally lobbying, which you refuse to participate in, so that leaves accepting that all your great thoughts will be forever stuck in your head It's literally not possible to fix a corrupt system by asking a participant in it to change the system that benefits them. > Unfortunately, magic doesn't exist. You are under the illusion that we operate under a functional democracy that responds to the will of th…
> You are under the illusion that we operate under a functional democracy that responds to the will of the people If that were the case we wouldn't have spent time talking about how it is broken, nor would we have spent time talking about what needs to be done to fix it. However, like you said, when you benefit from the system there is no incentive to change. To those reading this who are not winners under the status…
You've done exactly the opposite. All you've done is defend the system and cast blame at the "bosses" for not doing their job.
> The power is in your hands.
There you go again.
Please update this thread when you put your money where your mouth is and make a real difference. Then all those reading this can be inspired by your actions rather than your empty words.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A literal toddler for president. Swings his dick around and manages to fuck up global supply chains. Now he is back online talking about invading Iran and taking all of its oil infrastructure.
No. A figurative toddler. A literal toddler would be one to two years old. I have five figures of karma with which to fight this battle.