Quote:
Originally Posted by PyroStock
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimMorrison
Unfortunately, the majority of people who are helping the "needy" are also religious groups, that withhold most of their aid unless you enlist in their church.<3
|
Citation Needed. |
Wait, out of all of this bickering, you want to vet this statement?
The claim is anecdotal. That is to say, it is only an observation gleaned from my own trials. Don't believe me? I don't really care if you do or not. I'm the one that made the phone calls - the list was provided by my hospital. I am afraid that I did not record the phone calls, nor publish an article about my experience, that I can then reference here.
But, thank you for caring about veracity, hopefully at some point you can find something even more meaningful to contribute to the discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NTJedi
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimMorrison
Did this mean that your employer in each case was incompetent, and should not be allowed to manage workers? Maybe it just meant that not enough care or attention was put into minimizing the abusability of the workplace, and/or disincentivizing the abuse itself?
|
The difference here is that if my employer hires someone incompetent or messed up in some other way then its the company which suffers and may eventually die to competition. Now in regards to government we don't have any second, third, tenth, etc., option which will take over. You cannot compare companies to government... apples & rocks. |
I guess maybe what I was trying to say, is that perhaps our best option now is to create that second option - to give ourselves the choice between a barely functioning old workhorse, or a newer model, with more torque, that maybe has a few kinks to work out.
