This story is a FACT. I work in an occupation where I see and have seen verifiable salaries of men and women for years. When one eyeballs data of this nature for over twenty years and talks to others who do the same thing, it is not necessary to read a story citing gender pay inequality to know that it exists.posted @ Wednesday, December 11, 2013 - 16:33
I have two questions regarding a civil suit--if anyone knows the answers to these questions. The first is whether or not Zimmerman could avoid such a suit by taking up residence in another country? The second is what someone would hope to gain in a civil suit? Here is what I mean with this question: It is my understanding that monetary damages are sought in a civil suit. At 29, most people do not have a lot of money. It seems to me that a court would have to leave a person with enough money to meet his/her basic living expenses. If someone had gotten a civil judgement against me at that age and could have attached my future earnings, I would have made sure that those earnings were no more than my basic living expenses (provided that I believed that judgement was unjust).posted @ Tuesday, July 16, 2013 - 09:19
[quote][b]RightIswrong[/b] - I'm a trash collector and I'm worth $ 3 billion, you see on the internet anyone can be anything they darn well please.[/quote]
You are correct; anyone can post anything on the internet that they darn well please. However, you have forgotten something. There is no way that a trash collector could be worth $3 billion unless he inherited the money. There is a way that a public servant could have $1 million.
The reader must decide what he believes. There are people who will believe nothing if the poster has a different political leaning. He is on this board to disagree with all who do not have his liberal or conservative leaning, whatever the case may be. His comment does not make the comment of the original poster false. I told the truth. You can believe it or not. I still have my assets AND the ability that enabled me to earn and keep those assets.
Have a good day now!posted @ Wednesday, May 1, 2013 - 07:28
[quote][b]fred astaire[/b] - methinks you don't know much about finances.[/quote]
Don't judge what someone knows by his/her analysis of a situation. I am a public servant who is worth $1 million, counting all my assets. Me thinks that I know something about finances; otherwise, I would not have managed to achieve this.posted @ Tuesday, April 30, 2013 - 14:58
@mcdawg: Excellent post. When the effects of the Fed's actions begin to be felt, it is not going to be pretty. Anyone who has money in the bank and is experiencing these Fed-driven interest rates, as opposed to market-driven rates, is already experiencing the effects.
What is happening now is not sustainable.posted @ Tuesday, April 30, 2013 - 08:28
[quote][b]E.J.[/b] - Why can't people think things through in detail to know all the consequences of any proposed laws? [/quote]
When lottery proceeds fall, something must be done immediately or a program will cease to exist. It is as simple as that.posted @ Thursday, April 25, 2013 - 07:36
[quote][b]nomnomnom[/b] - A person does not need straight A's to be a talented Cosmetologist or mechanic.[/quote]
You are correct; however, in my book, a "talented" cosmetologist or mechanic could earn a "B." I certainly do not want an average mechanic working on my car--not at the price that dealerships charge for labor these days.posted @ Thursday, April 25, 2013 - 07:31
Double post--sorry.posted @ Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - 09:04
@Logical: Excellent point. The birth citizenship goes back to the 14th amendment to the US constitution. Those who wrote this amendment never intended for it to be interpreted as it is being interpreted. It was written to give citizenship to the slaves. In the recorded discussions that I read, someone actually stated that a foreigner giving birth to a child in the US would not render that child a US citizen. The Supreme Court has not seen it that way; therefore, I do not think that anything short of an amendment to the 14th amendment would change this. But I think you are correct. Revoke birth citizenship, stop free services to non-citizens, and punish employers who hire non-citizens and the illegal alien problem would dry up fairly quickly.posted @ Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - 09:04
[quote][b]Tewise[/b] - @capecod: My reply still stands. You stated many are all too eager to jump on Christians and the church. I answered the reason why. It does not only point to Christians that was the one you were pleading for. As you example you should be more careful because if she had been Muslim she would have been crucified and if you have read enough of these post you know that. The so called christians are the worst offenders most of the time but according to you it is okay because he or she will be forgiven because they are trying to be christ like because they are not perfect. Funny how you are passing judgement on other religious groups since you are a christian. Thanks for making my point. Namaste
My reply stands as well along with a statement that you are doing a lot of assuming ( ass.u.me) and reading what you want to read into what I state. There most definitely are Christians who are hypocrites; however, they are not the only hypocrites in society and are by no means the worst ones.
Crucified as a Muslim--hardly? You should do some reading! Just yesterday, I read about a case that Obama's Justice Dept. took up involving a Muslim teacher that took off several weeks during the school year for religious purposes. She was fired. The Justice Dept. said that was religious discrimination. Do you think for one minute that a Christian teacher who had taken off two weeks for a mission trip and was fired because of it would have been defended by Obama's Justice Department? His Justice Department is the biggest group of hypocrites by far!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Also, I did NOT defend this woman and state that what she did is okay. I made an observation that non-Christians and the media look for reasons to jump on Christians and the church. You just made my point. If you want to disprove it, take up for a Christian on this blog sometime; I check it fairly frequently.
And by the way, I did not tell you that I was a Christian. I do know what Christians believe and I am not ignorant enough that I do not know the difference between a real Christian and someone who spouts religion (ie. a religious person). This woman was either a religious person or had some severe anger issue that were untreated.posted @ Friday, March 22, 2013 - 08:01
[quote][b]Tewise[/b] - The reason is because of the hypocrisy that is never ending. It will remain to be,
so for it to end it would take the religious people to actual behave as they preach, seven days a week. If you preach it practice it.[/quote]
I might buy this explanation except for the fact that it implies that ONLY Christians are guilty of hypocrisy. I know that is false and if you are totally honest with yourself, you know it is false. If this woman had been a Muslim and had become irate in a restaurant, I will bet you a paycheck that not one word would have been said about it. ABH would not have printed an article about it. While it is hypocritical for Muslims to behave as she behaved, it is not politically correct to call Muslims out on their hypocrisy and failure to behave according to their holy scriptures; therefore, they are given a pass. Christians are never given a pass.
And by the way, I stated Christians and not "religious people," as you did. There is a world of difference. A true Christian will not claim to be perfect. All that Christian is going to tell you is that he or she is forgiven and is seeking to be like Christ. Religious people make a game out of judging others. The world and the media are basically either too ignorant, or do not want to take the time, to tell the difference.posted @ Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 12:39
[quote][b]CharlotteLadyGardner[/b] - Would there have been 38 comments if ABH had left out the phrase "who was in the restaurant with a church group" ??? Would ABH have reported who she was with if it had been her bridge group or tennis group?[/quote]
I seriously doubt there would have been an article in ABH PERIOD had the woman not been "with a church group." And no, there would not have been this many comments. In today's society's, many are all too eager to jump on Christians and the church and the media feeds the tendency at every turn.
I am not defending this woman's behavior; however, there is quite a bit of missing information in this article regarding the manager's behavior.posted @ Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 09:24
[quote][b]Brittanicus[/b] - There should be no excuse for not revising the hundred billion dollar annual cost of Birthright Citizenship for babies smuggled unknowingly passing agents of the government to gain citizenship. It’s become a very lucrative business for people in foreign countries, sending pregnant women to America, to intentional gain citizenship for their children. The 14th amendment was included for slaves and there decedents, not for illegal aliens and it should be visited by the Supreme Court to clear up thi[/quote]
You are SO right. And if the Supreme Court does not know the background behind the 14th amendment, a constitutional amendment is needed. This amendment was never, ever intended to grant birthright citizenship to illegal aliens!!posted @ Thursday, March 21, 2013 - 07:29
A VP for Student Affairs is a critical position. Eliminating it would be just like deciding to eliminate the VP for Sales position in a business. Some of you only know the language in the field in which you work.
I am all for eliminating useless positions, including the federal government; however, here is an example of what happens when "across the board" hiring freezes occur and a segment of the economy is demonized: my dad passed away in 2010 and was a federal employee. He was due a final federal check. I filed for that check immediately. Do you know when I received that check? 27 months later. When I called to check on it, they told me that they were being processed in the date order in which the requests were received. That would have made some people mad, but I understood. What can one expect when hiring is frozen? People can only do so much in one day.posted @ Wednesday, March 20, 2013 - 07:21
This one truly is beyond my comprehension. Why would anyone want those who are not citizens of the United States voting in US elections???? You better believe that I am willing to prove that I am a US citizen in order to register!!posted @ Monday, March 18, 2013 - 08:43
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - The lottery is not welfare and this thread isn't about Social Security or Medicare. You, evidently, think they are and support welfare for all. Well, OK, we'll see how that works.[/quote]
This will be my closing comment to you after I answer your lunacy, because it has become clear to me that you will say anything to win a debate. No, this thread clearly is not about Social Security or Medicare; however, the parallels are very obvious to any thinking person. Assume for a moment that both of us have paid into Social Security and Medicare. You earned $200,000 a year for most of your working life and I earned $35,000. Both of us paid into this fund, because we had no choice. The fund gets financially unstable when it comes time for the two of us to retire. The almighty government decides that since you are better off than me that you don't deserve any Social Security. I will bet a paycheck that will make you mad as fire, because you paid into that fund and earned a benefit just like I did and you deserve to draw a check.
Or let us consider Medicare. Both of us paid into that. I managed my money and saved a lot of money. Interest income shows up on my taxes, so the feds decide that they will charge me a higher medicare premium for being thrifty. How many people do you think are going to keep that money in their name at age 65 and after when word of that gets around?
No, the thread is about HOPE, but the principal involved is the same principal that would be involved if the government decided to means tests Social Security and Medicare. That is why I brought them up.
Lastly, I do not think that either HOPE, Social Security, or Medicare is welfare. Medicaid, food stamps, and Section 8 housing are things that I classify as welfare. Students get HOPE because they earned it. People get Social Security and Medicare because they paid a part of their check into the fund for years.
If HOPE is going to be called a scholarship, then ALL students who meet that GPA requirement should receive HOPE; otherwise, it is not a scholarship. It is a welfare entitlement not unlike the Pell Grant. Let us call it what it is.posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 19:13
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - Means testing does not make the HOPE scholarship an entitlement because the students have to work for it. The lottery was sold to us on that basis, as you know, but morphed into something else.[/quote]
I beg your pardon. Means testing does make the HOPE scholarship an entitlement if one student has a 4.0 and gets the scholarship because his parents are poor and the other student has a 4.0 and does not get the scholarship because his parents have money. To quote you, both students had to work for it. If one got it and the other one did not, what it is to the one who received it except an entitlement???posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 18:51
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - Help implies need. More cleverness at the expense of those who can't afford it. It is true that outstanding pupils come from all income backgrounds, but not all of them are in need of help.[/quote]
According to those who want this scholarship to be a welfare give-away, you are correct; help must always imply need. In a similar vein, social security would be denied to those whom the almighty government decides do not need it. Those who have saved and have interest income would pay a higher medicare premium, thereby removing all incentive to better oneself. It depends on how one looks at life, I suppose. I believe that all who meet the GPA and other eligibility requirements for that scholarship should be rewarded and receive it.posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 16:51
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - The redistribution is from those who play the lottery to those who have no need to[/quote]
That is one way of looking at it except that I have never seen anyone hold a gun to someone's head and make him/her play that lottery, have you? Each person is responsible for his/her own actions.
And the redistribution is NOT from those who play the lottery to those who have no need for the scholarship. Again, outstanding students come from all income backgrounds. Most who get it need it very badly. Of course, those who want it to be a welfare entitlement program get their feathers ruffled if one person gets it on the basis of merit whose parents happen to have money. They cannot stand that thought.
Some of the best and brightest do have offers from Ivy League schools; however, all of them do not go. Many stay here. And by the way, Georgia Tech and UGA do disburse the HOPE Scholarship to qualifying students.posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 16:44
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - The reason it was called HOPE was because it actually was designed to give HOPE and encouragement to low income students to study hard and qualify for college entrance.
HOPE = Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally. Outstanding pupils come from all income backgrounds.posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 15:29
[quote][b]curiouscat[/b] - The original Hope Scholarship program had a family income cap of about 66,000 per year. It is funded by lower income people using the lottery, and I'm sure there are some statistics on that. That was the basis for passing the lottery to begin with.[/quote]
I am very well aware of that. I also am aware of the original mission of the scholarship program (which was to keep the best and brightest in Georgia). I do not have to go back and look for that mission statement, because given what I do, I know more about the HOPE regulations than 99.8% of Georgians. You do not keep the best and brightest in a state by penalizing those who make good grades but whose parents make too much money. That is called the re-distribution of wealth. It is rather popular today. That cap was removed because people realized that a scholarship does not operate by penalizing merit. Now, if you want to rename the program a welfare entitlement program, you can feel free to put income caps on it.posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 15:26
I absolutely am opposed to putting an income cap on the HOPE scholarship. The HOPE scholarship is not an entitlement; it is a scholarship and its purpose is to keep the best and brightest in Georgia. Why should a student who has worked hard in high school and achieved be deprived of a scholarship simply because his/her parents are deemed to make too much money? Why does somebody always want to do away with merit and penalize those who have worked for what they have??posted @ Monday, March 11, 2013 - 13:53
The title of this article is all wrong. The article states that, "The tougher loan standards led to the rejection rate doubling at all schools...."
I disagree on the measures that the financial aid expert stated that he would use to measure whether someone would default on a loan in the future. My mom managed a loan department in a bank and never lost a loan. She told me that the best way to measure whether or not someone would pay a bill in the future was to see whether he/she had pay their bills in the past.posted @ Tuesday, February 26, 2013 - 13:26
[quote][b]grove600[/b] - When Joe Biden, the POTUS and every Congresscritter has their protection detail carrying nothing stronger than a 12 guage, I might consider it. Till then.....lock and load. [/quote]
My sentiments exactly. Once they agree that the Secret Service can have ONLY the weapons and number of shells that they are limiting the public to will I believe that they are not total hypocrites.posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 - 08:21
[quote][b]TeeWee[/b] - Firstly, a state cannot tell you where to live[/quote]
And in neither of my comments did I infer that a state could keep a person in its boundaries against his/her will.
I, like 99.9% of peple, know that cash is not traceable. Computer transactions are traceable. Travel into other states cost money. Some find that the money required to buy the gas to travel to these other states would not offset the savings generated by their tax friendly practices. Blanket statements which judge the intelligence of others cannot be made until you know the circumstances with which others are coping.
For your info, I do not live in the state that I referenced above in which I am required to file a tax return. Many have to file returns in states in which they do not live. Again, financial circumstances and transactions dictate this.posted @ Saturday, February 16, 2013 - 17:36
Summary: I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. I'm not saying it's lonely to be a movie critic, but we often find ourselves seated alone in an empty theatre when we're watching new stuff. I know people who say they won't go see anything unless they have at least one other person to go with, but I've always enjoyed having the place to myself. read more