Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Salon)   This Is Why We Hate Corporations | Season #156 | Episode #26,813   (salon.com) divider line 62
    More: PSA, Family Dollar  
•       •       •

4645 clicks; posted to Business » on 04 Apr 2013 at 8:52 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



62 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-04-04 01:42:03 PM  

CheatCommando: Debeo Summa Credo: this list informs potential employers about previous thefts

So would a search for a criminal record, with the important difference that a criminal conviction has a much higher chance of indicating an actual thief, instead of a petty manager looking to ruin someone.

How about this? If you are denied employment due to this database and the employer who entered you into it lacks proof that will convince a jury that the theft occurred, then that employer is liable for libel and defamation of character, with all damages trebled as this treads into antitrust territory. Those who make only truthful entries would have nothing to fear by this system.


An arrest record doesn't implicitly indicate that  there was sufficient proof to convince a jury of a theft.  However, few courts would rule against an employer who denied employment on the basis of an arrest record.
 
2013-04-04 02:37:57 PM  

MugzyBrown: Tommy Moo: Problem is, for obvious reasons, there is certainly no way to find out if you are on the list, other than possibly sleeping with someone who knows.

When you file your lawsuit you'll findout.


Cost to file a lawsuits average
filing fee (From $35 to $150) per caseservice fees (from $15 to $350) per partydepositions (from $100 to $1,000 each)expert witness fees (from $ 125 per hour to $350 per hour)misc. fees (copying, postage, travel, report fees, etc.) That's a lot of money for an unemployed minimum wage earner.
 
2013-04-04 05:02:32 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Tommy Moo: Philip Francis Queeg: Tommy Moo: Philip Francis Queeg: Tommy Moo:  Make it more expensive to have children, and more children will grow up suffering in crushing poverty.

FTFY

That might also happen if we do it haphazardly. But if you understand anything about economics, you know that many people would have fewer children, and it's worth it. Absolutely nothing is more important to the sustainability of our society and environment that lowering human population right now. It is the only problem of the 21st century, to which all other socioeconomic/sociopolitical problems can be trivially linked.

There are ways of carefully engineering solutions that limit the damage to poor children. I recommended one above, which you ignored: give credits to families that have two children or fewer. Families that have more than two children will still be in the same situation they are currently in.

Poverty does not lead to people having fewer children. It never has, and it never will.

Unless "carefully engineered" means "dracionian restrictions" it simply will not have an effect. Even if it does mean "draconian restrictions" it will not have an effect.

Birthrates have fallen since the recession started. Look it up. People absolutely do choose to have fewer children if they perceive they cannot afford it.

[www.geogonline.org.uk image 600x312]


You can't do that, moron. Now I'm getting annoyed. Compare apples to apples. Within a given society, controlling for all other factors, people will have more kids when their personal finances are in better shape with respect to that decision.
 
2013-04-04 05:10:38 PM  

Tommy Moo: You can't do that, moron. Now I'm getting annoyed. Compare apples to apples. Within a given society, controlling for all other factors, people will have more kids when their personal finances are in better shape with respect to that decision


You have that exactly backward.

http://www.econ.yale.edu/~pschultz/cdp925.pdf
 
2013-04-04 05:39:26 PM  

Philip Francis Queeg: Tommy Moo: You can't do that, moron. Now I'm getting annoyed. Compare apples to apples. Within a given society, controlling for all other factors, people will have more kids when their personal finances are in better shape with respect to that decision

You have that exactly backward.

http://www.econ.yale.edu/~pschultz/cdp925.pdf


If you subsidize something, you get more of it. If you tax something, you get less of it. If you don't believe this statement to be true, then we have nothing more to discuss.
 
2013-04-04 05:52:42 PM  

Tommy Moo: Philip Francis Queeg: Tommy Moo: You can't do that, moron. Now I'm getting annoyed. Compare apples to apples. Within a given society, controlling for all other factors, people will have more kids when their personal finances are in better shape with respect to that decision

You have that exactly backward.

http://www.econ.yale.edu/~pschultz/cdp925.pdf

If you subsidize something, you get more of it. If you tax something, you get less of it. If you don't believe this statement to be true, then we have nothing more to discuss.


Yes we do have nothing to discuss if you are going to ignore actual facts and academic studies in favor of a trite platitude.
 
2013-04-04 06:26:19 PM  

meanmutton: MithrandirBooga: Yeah why not. There's far more workers than jobs now, it was only a matter if time before this shiat started happening. Industry can afford to blacklist tons of people and not have to worry about a worker shortage increasing wages anymore.

Even a McDonalds franchise is requiring a degree for cashiers now. This is what you can get away with when there is an overabundant supply of labour now that machines have taken up a significant amount of work.

You're trolling, right?  You honestly don't think that "machines have taken up a significant amount of work" is the problem, do you?


It is a problem if you think our current paradigm for securing food, shelter, and minimal luxuries is the most optimal one.

In my opinion, it's not - but people have it dead set that if you don't work, you're a moocher, or lazy, or incompetent, or any number of things - and we're approaching where there are fewer and fewer jobs to be done, because productivity vs manhours is rising steadily without a major corresponding uptick in demand.

If there's only demand for 10 widgets a week, and a factory makes 1 widget per person a week, they're going to employ 10 people. But then they get new mahchinery, and now they make 2 widgets a week per worker. There's no extra demand for 10 more widgets a week...
 
2013-04-04 07:10:25 PM  

v2micca: CheatCommando: Debeo Summa Credo: this list informs potential employers about previous thefts

So would a search for a criminal record, with the important difference that a criminal conviction has a much higher chance of indicating an actual thief, instead of a petty manager looking to ruin someone.

How about this? If you are denied employment due to this database and the employer who entered you into it lacks proof that will convince a jury that the theft occurred, then that employer is liable for libel and defamation of character, with all damages trebled as this treads into antitrust territory. Those who make only truthful entries would have nothing to fear by this system.

An arrest record doesn't implicitly indicate that  there was sufficient proof to convince a jury of a theft.  However, few courts would rule against an employer who denied employment on the basis of an arrest record.


I'll take an arrest record as at least a warning, but this database does not require even that.
 
2013-04-05 06:03:59 AM  
with the broader effect of creating an underclass of underpaid, constantly surveilled employees

3.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-04-05 11:44:10 AM  

CheatCommando: v2micca: CheatCommando: Debeo Summa Credo: this list informs potential employers about previous thefts

So would a search for a criminal record, with the important difference that a criminal conviction has a much higher chance of indicating an actual thief, instead of a petty manager looking to ruin someone.

How about this? If you are denied employment due to this database and the employer who entered you into it lacks proof that will convince a jury that the theft occurred, then that employer is liable for libel and defamation of character, with all damages trebled as this treads into antitrust territory. Those who make only truthful entries would have nothing to fear by this system.

An arrest record doesn't implicitly indicate that  there was sufficient proof to convince a jury of a theft.  However, few courts would rule against an employer who denied employment on the basis of an arrest record.

I'll take an arrest record as at least a warning, but this database does not require even that.


From the description of this database, it is still pretty nascent, and informal.  Its sounds like a group of retailers pooling their employment data.  Very quickly the legal departments will advise them of how to lawfully leverage it while minimizing their exposure, and I imagine it will quickly evolve into something similar to your Credit score i.e. a report everyone will be able to access and view, with prescribed recourse for correcting erroneous information, and an age out process that weights a firing from 10 years significantly less than one from 3 months ago.

Now, if this is what it eventually evolves into, I find it to be rather benign.  I will acknowledge that there is potential for it to become something much more sinister.
 
2013-04-05 12:52:39 PM  
The FBI wishes they had access to half the information on the citizenry that is contained in Lexis-Nexis databases.
Even J Edgar himself would wonder if things have gone a bit too far.
 
2013-04-06 12:04:00 PM  

v2micca: CheatCommando: v2micca: CheatCommando: Debeo Summa Credo: this list informs potential employers about previous thefts

So would a search for a criminal record, with the important difference that a criminal conviction has a much higher chance of indicating an actual thief, instead of a petty manager looking to ruin someone.

How about this? If you are denied employment due to this database and the employer who entered you into it lacks proof that will convince a jury that the theft occurred, then that employer is liable for libel and defamation of character, with all damages trebled as this treads into antitrust territory. Those who make only truthful entries would have nothing to fear by this system.

An arrest record doesn't implicitly indicate that  there was sufficient proof to convince a jury of a theft.  However, few courts would rule against an employer who denied employment on the basis of an arrest record.

I'll take an arrest record as at least a warning, but this database does not require even that.

From the description of this database, it is still pretty nascent, and informal.  Its sounds like a group of retailers pooling their employment data.  Very quickly the legal departments will advise them of how to lawfully leverage it while minimizing their exposure, and I imagine it will quickly evolve into something similar to your Credit score i.e. a report everyone will be able to access and view, with prescribed recourse for correcting erroneous information, and an age out process that weights a firing from 10 years significantly less than one from 3 months ago.

Now, if this is what it eventually evolves into, I find it to be rather benign.  I will acknowledge that there is potential for it to become something much more sinister.


Meanwhile, honest people are blacklisted for no valid reason.

Why do idiots like you continue to give these jokers the benefit of the doubt then they prove time and again their actions are detrimental to society?
 
Displayed 12 of 62 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report