Texsox

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 10:01 AM) Real mature. I'm sorry, did you say something? Seriously, the ignore function helps both people. I have 4 or 5 people on my ignore list and I am certain there are many more that wish I also ignored them

OMG those parents must be devastated. For some reason, I have a lot of patience with crying kids, especially at that age. It is always a legit reason to be crying at that age, food, diaper, illness, environmental factors, never a selfish reason likeWhite Sox not offering you a contract

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:25 AM) Consider it squashed.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:13 AM) BTW, what's the deal with your Bea Arthur thing? Are you related to her or something? Just curious... He wishes . . . Perhaps he'll post his favorite Bea pic . . .

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:13 AM) No it was pretty much the attempted murder rap that got my panties in a bunch. We should probably wait for the dust to settle. I guess since they are allies in this, and she just went through one of the most terrifying situations imaginable. Kidnapped -- I'm gonna die like all the rest Rescued -- I'm gonna live Shot at by the greatest killing machine the world has even seen -- Having someone die while laying on top of you -- I can understand making comments that days, weeks, and months from now, she may wish to reconsider. Hell, people get worked up over smaller issues here and post crap they want to take back later. And this is just a message board.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:12 AM) Damn straight!

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:04 AM) Did I ever say no one should criticize the military? She didn't criticize them she said they tried to kill her!!!! I have friends there...I have family there...she is basically saying they are murderers when I know dam well there was a good possibility those same guys would have died for her. She can f***in criticize all she wants...but to make a baseless accusation of murder is way past criticism. What did you mean when you wrote our soldiers would have risked their lives for her? I assumed you meant she should not criticize them.

QUOTE(winodj @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 09:02 AM) That's a scary thought. I would contend he is the best VP we have had in a long time.

QUOTE(Controlled Chaos @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 08:43 AM) Her boyfriend is a f***in jagoff!!!!!!!! She was the one over there, she is the one our soldiers would have risked their lives and possibly died to save, Not her specifically, but Are you saying that no one should criticize the military because they risk their lives for us? Does that work both ways? We should not criticize the Italian, English, etc. armies because they would risk their lives for us? I can think of a few cases where the military was criticized and rightly so Kent State Chinese Embassy My Lai Massacre Whether or not this turns out to be legit or not, is probably months away. I know if I was just mistakenly shot at, had a man die shielding my body and protecting me, I wouldn't be saying "cool! no problem, mistakes happen in a war zone, Hee Hee can you believe what boneheads we were?"

It is much easier to market Pepsi and Coke as totally different, than shades of the same. Same with Dems vs. GOP. Don't talk about the similarities, focus on the differences, and the more differences, the better. What has to happen IMHAOIO, are the rank and file in both parties to become more like Joe and John and less like Rush and Moore. I have my elected leaders loaded in my address book and I am certain they may have me on spam blocker But I am quick to applaud and jeer. I send the same email to my Senators (GOP) and my Congressman (DEM).

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 08:34 AM) You are correct that Haliburton may be suspended from bidding on government contracts, fined, etc. But individuals at Haliburton prior to 1998, such as Cheney, are free from prosecution for crimes committed by individuals at KBR. That was my point. I agree 100%.

QUOTE(ChiSoxyGirl @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 08:34 AM) Hm, worthless piece of crap vs. b****. There's just something a lot more biting, personal, and insulting about b****. Which is something that guys are not really sensitized to. In general, we can use slurs like that without a deeper connection and interchangeable. Putting on your Grad school cap, is that cultural? Is that accurate?

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 08:12 AM) We seem to be confusing companies with individuals. The individuals who worked at KBR and allegedly committed these crimes should be punished if they are found guilty. The people who worked at Haliburton prior to the purchase of KBR have nothing to do with it and, therefore, should not be prosecuted. You're assuming that bid rigging is easy to discover and that the individuals involved didn't go out of their way to destroy the evidence. I'm not so sure that's the case. You don't think that would be difficult to cover up? All they'd have to do is have the employees set up personal accounts. And what's wrong with purchasing a company that may have done something illegal in the past? Are we to demonize Verizon for purchasing MCI/WorldCom? Hell, Verizon was fully aware of the fraud going on there. The laws are in place to stop the shell game that happens when corporations, big and small, are caught. Get convicted of bid rigging, "sell" the company to your right hand, and continue as if nothing happened. There are corporate punishments for this activity, one of which is being suspended from bidding on government contracts. Any corporate punishments, will have to be dealt with by Halliburton as the owner. This type of crime is systematic, not individual, and corporations are help accountable. That corporate entity is now Halliburton. I am not assuming that they didn't make bid rigging difficult to detect, and Halliburton may have missed it. But they are still responsible because they are KBR.

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 08:14 AM) My, aren't we in a crappy mood today? I just think we have a few very nice ladies here and when they point out an inequity, we should maybe look at it and see if it is valid. We sometimes turn this into a bar, and not the jazz music, fern bar, where you can order a Rum Runner and conch fritters; more like a strip bar where on the way you stop at the convienent store, buy a pack of gum for .79, pay with a $50 and ask for your change in $1 bills.

QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 07:32 AM) Thanks for proving my point better than I ever could. You can't even handle someone critisizing you on a message board when you act like a fool, but you are ready to study abroad. Yeah I can see that :rolly. All though I must say your stunningly excellent use of the Eric Cartman defense "Whateva, you don't know me. Whateva", really almost had me swayed...

QUOTE(IlliniKrush @ Mar 8, 2005 -> 11:37 PM) Telling southsider to f*** off is going to get you real far on here... LMAO, Southsider and ChiSoxFn have the thickest skin around. Beat them like the neighbor's mule

#1 was referring to companies, not individuals. It is big business enticing industry to relocate. Right now the fight is tax abatements, infrastructure, free land, etc. I'm not certain that throwing minimum wage in there helps the vast majority of the country. Big business moves to Mexico and other dots on the globe for lower wages, when small and medium size companies can move four states away, that may not help the workers. Overall, I do think there should be regional adjustments to minimum wage. #2 Good point, there needs to be some protection on the extremes. Maybe a min/max system each week. Perhaps a 30/50, or any week over 55 hours is OT. We are starting to make this complicated, but isn't that was Congress does best? #4 I'm not sold on a net loss of jobs. I don't see too many businesses hiring extra people to stand around. That went out in the 1970s. Most companies are "lean". And I'm still trying to resolve the "we lost some workers at $4.50 per hour" argument. No matter where we draw the line, the argument can be made that people lost jobs. Would a market driven, no minimum wage situation be best for job creation? At $2.57 per hour, businesses would, in theory, have twice as many available jobs for the same payroll*. *numbers not adjusted to reflect employer match on FICA, SS, payroll expenses, etc. :rolly

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 07:58 AM) "If the shoe fits..." Very adult attitude :headshake

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 8, 2005 -> 08:37 PM) So, how would have Haliburton known that KBR violated those laws? The SEC didn't know until just recently and it was allegedly going on since the mid-80's. The people who voilated the laws at KBR should be held accountable. Unless these laws were violated after the Haliburton purchase, Haliburton has nothing to do with it. And what would this "investigative work" shown? For all we know, Arthur Anderson was cooking KBR's books. Until someone can show me some concrete evidence that Haliburton actually DID SOMETHING ILLEGAL, this is just a partisan witch hunt. KBR doesn't exist as a separate entity anymore! KBR = Halliburton. To hold KBR, you have to hold Halliburton. They are one in the same. Legally, when you buy them, they are now you. The KBR that may have violated the law doesn't exist. Further, when you buy something for billions of dollars you spend millions of dollars on forensic accounting to track every penny going back a long time. That is why these mergers take months and months to complete. The SEC didn't investigate them, but Halliburton sure as hell did. Would you spend a billion dollars without investigating? Corporate responsibility does not stop somewhere below the top. Parent companies are help responsible for the actions of their subsidiaries. When they bought the company, they bought the problems as well. I love the logic of your last line. Until there is a "witch hunt" or investigation, there is no evidence. DUHH

QUOTE(TheBigHurt35 @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 06:17 AM) OK, he's an asshole and a commie idiot as well. Happy? The ladies are complaing that she had to be identified as a b****, yet we do not tag an extra identifier on guys in similar situations. It seems like fair criticism to me. You bastard

I wonder if more people watched Martha Stewart or owned shares of World Com?

southsider, just a couple of thoughts to see what you think. 1. I agree, local control would make sense for retail, and most service industries. And allow for cost of living in Manhattan, NY vs. Stickney issues. However, manufacturers who need to compete on a regional or global basis would have problems. The Economic Development groups in towns with lower min wages would be poaching employers from higher min wage areas. Leave Indiana, enjoy the lower minimum wages in Texas. 2. One thing I liked about the GOP initiative is allowing a 2 week window for overtime. This reflects better what many workers prefer, and how most small businesses operate. Hey we are really busy this week, would you mind a 4 day weekend next week in exchange for working this weekend? Most guys jump at it. 3. I also would like to see some relaxation of overtime laws. Interesting that most salaried workers are putting in 50 and 60 hour weeks to make up for smaller staffs and greater responsibilities, but the guys working on an hourly basis are nailing the OT. I'd like to see more hours exempted from OT rules. If you are working a min or near min job, you should want to work more hours and better your condition. 4. Your comment about businesses that are barely breaking even opens up an interesting argument. There are some businesses that could survive if the minimum wage was $4.00. They failed at $5.15. No matter where we draw the line businesses may fail. However, I would counter, on a even playing field, if you and I are competitors and we both have to pay our employees the same minimum wage, may the best man win. I do not see an entire business segment failing.

QUOTE(YASNY @ Mar 9, 2005 -> 06:43 AM) It may be difficult to argue, but I'll take a shot at it. First, we don't seem to get much out of them for our money except a bunch of partisan politics and rhetoric. Second, after one term in office they are on a lifetime pension, which is basically 100% of their congressional salary, iirc. Damn right they are overpaid. You are hitting a few urban legends here. Congress is in Social Security, they have been making payments for 20 years. Their pension is determined by the number of years of service and never equals more than 80% and that is for the real old timers. 1 termers receive very little. (and that may be too much)

The gap between minimum wage and the pverty line is the biggest corporate benefit we give to some businesses as a country. Lets look at $5.15/hour. $10,721 per year, working full time at a job that is probably not "fulfilling", but worked for sustenance. That is still well below the poverty level and qualifies many of these workers for various public assistance programs. In fact WalMart and other big employers have been heavily criticized for pointing their employees towards these tax payer supported programs. Any increases in minimum wage is partially balanced by a decrease in public assistance. So one question we need to ask is should tax payers be subsidizing these workers for businesses? Asked a different way, if the poverty level is $7.25 per hour, should an employer pick up $5.15 and let the government pay the rest? Of course arguing from the other side of the aisle, is it government's responsibility to assure all it's citizens have food, clothing, and shelter? Like every public policy issue, push here and something pops out over there. In a near perfect world we would have something like this public assistance now we have minimum wage dead end jobs There are very few minimum wage jobs that lead anywhere else.