blady_blah

joined 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That sucks man. Religion ruins childhoods.

[–] [email protected] 47 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (2 children)

I'm sorry, but let's be realistic... if she came out in support of trump she would get a lot of negative responses also. We're a pretty divided country.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 days ago

I think Elon musk's case, the drugs came first.... After that came social media and mental illnesses.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 days ago

That's another way to say metric. Fuck the English system. Especially when cooking.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 5 days ago (1 children)

Wow... Maybe for you, but it was everything and more for me. Fuck childhood. Give me freedom, independence, and not having to follow the rules of my parents.

No curfew, no bedtime... You can figure out what you want and do it. Living with a girlfriend. Making and spending money. Driving your own car. I get that maybe adulthood may not be for everyone, but I'll take it any day over childhood!

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 days ago

Technology has moved from nitch nerdy thing to general public usage and as it did so it became usable without knowing what's going on. Gen Z doesn't know shit about technology, they just know how to use it.

When I was a kid, if you wanted to get a computer working you had to screw with the RAM settings or build the computer yourself from components. If you didn't know how to do this you talked with someone who did. I've forced my kids to learn at least some of this, but the idea that they're more tech savvy is ridiculous. They're users of tech, but it's become too complicated (and more user friendly), so they don't know what's happening behind their screen.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 days ago

The US tends to suck for many things worker related, I wasn't arguing about all the different policies. However, I double checked, all our Scottish employees have a "use it or lose it" rule on vacation days. They must use all their vacation days per calendar year. They get their vacation days on Jan 1st and if they don't use them by Dec 31st, they lose them. This is also the model the other employees have in the US, with the exception of the two of use who live in California where that type of policy is illegal.

Since you must know, I get 20 days of vacation a year plus all federal holidays (11 days). I don't get sick days, they come out of my vacation days. However I'm a high value employee and you're comparing me against the blue collar workers in Scotland. I believe they get either 15 or 20 vacation days per year and I don't really know about their sick day program. I hate the calendar "use it or lose it" vacation day plan and I think the California rules are much better.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (3 children)

I would make the written English language 100% phonetic.

I would make SI mandatory in the US.

I would make one night a week a "have dinner with the neighbors" day.

Edit: I would make bidet toilets mandatory. Dry toilets would be phased out like cars without back-up cameras or asbestos insulation.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 week ago (2 children)

It's absolutely a company policy, but in California it's not legal to have a policy like that. The whole idea that you must use all your holidays every calendar year is stupid. Having a policy where if you haven't used all your vacation days by December 31st, you lose it, is stupid.

[–] [email protected] -1 points 1 week ago (4 children)

The main difference from a vacation standpoint is that the vacation days are allocated per calendar year, and must all be used in that calendar year. You're given x amount on January 1st and they must all be used by December 31st.

In California, vacation days are treated as an accruing asset. They can't reset my vacation days at the turnover of a calendar year . The vacation hours build up over time. This means there's not an end of the year rush to use vacation days, there is no use it or lose it, and if I'm ever laid off the company has to pay me for all the vacation days I've accrued. The California system is a much better system than the one the employees have in Scotland.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 week ago (6 children)

With the US is it the vacation rules are mostly not required. Many states have different rules, and the more conservative the state, the more anti worker the rules are.

And all the jobs I've worked, I've never seen any pushback for taking vacation. But that's because I work in a white collar industry that is competitive and I can find another job if I wanted to. The less skilled you are, and the lower the opportunities are in the industries around you, the more opportunity exists for shitty employers.

The interesting thing is, that I currently work for a Scottish company, and their vacation rules are worse than mine because I am guided by California labor laws, and they're under shitty UK labor laws.

[–] [email protected] 11 points 1 week ago

It's like living in Minnesota, except the months of the year where you don't go outside are swapped. Winter is very nice, in summer you don't go outside. In the colder places, it's the opposite.

 

I see CEO's as the last working person in the system. They are at least putting in the time and effort to make money. The are "the last working man/woman" in the chain up to the owners. The real travesty is the owners who get all the money without doing any actual work.

If the CEO makes less money, do you think you'd get more? The answer is no. A company will control costs and not pay employees more than they have to. Your salary has nothing to do with the CEOs salary and at least in theory you have a chance to become CEO... more of a chance than you have of becoming an owner.

The inherited wealth, the hedge funds, the owners... they get all the return. They get all the rewords. Even my boss, who started the company I work at, he makes his money by being an owner. His salary as a CEO is pennies vs his salary owning the company. The success of the company should be shared amongst the employees who made it happen, and the truth is they aren't. That's the real kick to the nuts, not the salary of the CEO.

view more: next ›