Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
More In News
Popular Articles
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
Is this political posturing, or genuine concern over safety?
So in short, they acted according to the libertarian principles dingbats like you constantly espouse. And you shit on them for it.
So fuck you, unpaid intern. Maybe it's time for you to "Go Galt" on us, eh?
This dude has been by far the worst unpaid intern in recent memory. There have been stacks and stacks of posts by him that read like maladroit columns by "the conservative guy" at a college newspaper. Just sit back and enjoy the ride and the misplaced smug self-confidence.
It's easy to sneer and criticize, but much harder to build and accomplish. Go give that a try, then come back and tell us all how stupid we are.
Also, (and this is the greatest sin for a writer), you're not interesting to read.
Intern dear, it's not too late to change. Believe me, you don't want to be that girl.
The fucking conservatives refuse to address anything until they get their tax breaks for billionaires, then after they get what they were whining about, they say they don't have enough time for anything else.
I'm not voting republican anyway, but don't independents and undecideds look at this and get just as pissed off as I do? wtf? Why the fuck are liberals not calling out conservatives on all the shit they constantly pull? Why the fuck aren't they reminding people daily that the conservatives have stalled and balked at every. fucking. thing. the liberals have tried to help the middle class with?
Jesus H. Fucking Christ.
Jones said she was pulling in $800,000 a year in 2007 when she put 20 percent down and bought a five-bedroom, 3,400-square-foot, Italian-style home for $1.6 million in Kirkland. When National City laid her off on New Year's Eve in 2007, she owned four homes: two former residences that she rented out; a vacation home on the Washington coast; and her new Kirkland home. Jones drained her savings to keep paying the mortgages, refusing to declare bankruptcy. She eventually sold two of the homes, but it wasn't enough.
Awww...how sad. Nothing tugs at your heart strings like someone who was making $800,000/year losing her 3,400-square-foot, $1.6 million dream home. Drained her savings is right. I bet they went fast. Just imagine how hard it would be to save that much money when you're only making $800,000/year.
It allows Boeing to revolutionize the passenger airplane business, it lets politicians prevent underage prostitution, it allows workers in a parallel economy to keep their jobs, and it promotes active debate on the regulation, production and distribution of nuclear weapons.
But christ is it hard to talk about the actual news around your inane rantings, Luby. There's a reason for all the ridicule you're receiving here, it's the proper response to the ridiculous.
I know, right! Let's see, in exchange for giving tax breaks to millionaires, gays now have the right to participate openly in our bloated, corporate-interest-defending military.
What a deal!!!
Craig Newmark may very be pro-prostitution but someone doesn't have to be in favor of some activity in order to feel very strongly that people should have the freedom to choose to do it. I detest cigarette smoking but would never support a law making it illegal.
I suspect that Newmark is a strong civil libertarian who feels that government has no business deciding what women can choose to do with their bodies, whether it's have an abortion or have sex for money (and it's always puzzled me how some people strongly support a woman's right to do what she wants with her body when it comes to having an abortion, but then turn around and support denying her that right when it comes to having sex for money.)
The GOP knows how to keep the upper hand, even as a minority party, because they're ruthless. We, on the other hand, are ready to forgive and forget at the least sign of cooperation. That spirit comes from the rank and file, not the party elite.
“We had discussions about being competitive, asking ourselves, ‘Do we want to be the top-paying employer? Probably not. But we want to be above average. Our choice was the 70th percentile.”
That's interesting. I'd bet few people, no matter what their political persuasion, would feel that government should be the top-paying, or lowest-paying, employer. But, between those two extremes, I'm sure opinions would be all over the map.
What if the City of Tacoma decided to set pay at average? I imagine they wouldn't have any problem attracting people, even in a good economy. Would these people be excellent, the best in their field? Highly doubtful. Would they be perfectly competent? Maybe not, but probably. Is competency sufficient for those doing civil service work? Or do they need to be better than that, better than average, in order to properly serve the public?
Why? We ban cribs that kill babies. Why not ban a product that maims and kills adults AND babies?
Yes, I know the shitstorm's a-comin'...
(I'd also like to know from UI what the conditions would need to be for, say, a 14 year old to have the freedom to sell herself for sex?)
For example, the general public probably really doesn't give a crap about Boeing's piss-poor job getting the Dreamliner built, but when, say, a road project isn't designed right, or a policy report comes to an incorrect conclusion the public goes apeshit and gripes about their misspent tax dollars.
The public expects exceptional performance at low pay in the public sector.
There's no opposition to banning the cribs, that's why it's not the same as banning smoking. There are people who fully understand the danger they put themselves in by smoking, but they still want to do it. I don't think there's anyone who understands the danger of the cribs but still wants to use them.
I'm sort of in the same camp as Roma. If there's a large enough group that is still opposed to banning something dangerous (and they have valid and rational reasons for their opposition), then I'm usually against banning it too.
If an adult wants to make unhealthy choices, whether it's sucking cig smoke into their lungs or eating a lot of crappy food, they should have the freedom to make those choices. They shouldn't, however, have the right to inflict those unhealthy choices on others. In principle, I wouldn't have a problem with a law forbidding adults from inflicting toxic cig smoke on their babies or young children at home or in a car. But a law like that, particularly for the home, would be impractical.
Also, even if I agreed in principle with banning cigs, it's simply not practical. After all, pot has been illegal for years and how successful has that been at stopping people from growing and smoking it? (Also: see Prohibition)
I see this shit all the time- the winning contractor will then cut every goddamn corner he can in order to maximize his profit, often at the expense of safety. Road projects with abyssmal or absent traffic control. Electrical systems with faulty or missing grounds.
You know what these contractors are doing? Cheating the very taxpayers that are paying their paychecks.
And that's the core problem with all the libertarian bullshit that the Randroids keep spouting. Here's a public-private system where even with close supervision the private sector (contractors, in this case) willfully ignores public safety standards. Imagine the awful horror of Libertarian Paradise where there is no government watchdog and contractors are free to cut as many corners as they can to maximize their profits.
I am glad we don't live in that horrorshow world.
Also, in theory, people go into public service in order to serve. So, following from that, wouldn't (or shouldn't) we get above-average people even at average wages?
"A Physicist Solves the City" (and namechecks Jane Jacobs), from the NYT Magazine's Year in Ideas Issue:http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazi…
On the other hand, our COUNTY government has a slobbish CAO who supervises, among other things, an utterly hopeless library system with a dull, duplicitous, unimaginative and vindictive head librarian terrified of moving beyond the nineteenth century (yes, I mean the 1800's), and therefore a terrified and demoralized staff. NOBODY CARES, and this in a place so conservative you would think the pitchfork-wielders would have burned all the books years ago if it meant saving one thin dime. If it wouldn't make me so sad, I'd loudly champion closure myself because considerably more than a dime would be saved, and little of value would be lost. (I am actually strategizing ways to revamp the system--precisely because so few nimrods care, it may be possible to arouse the handful of thoughtful individuals who might be interested.)
In their defense, it was a company full of talented people, and they gave me a lovely severance and a huge dowery of stock options for our absolutely meaningless "product", for which I am very grateful.
But I now work much harder, and am held much more accountable, by the city. And I like it that way. I feel like I am actually doing something worthwhile. (and yes, before anyone says anything, I feel horrible for that poor dog and its owner) it's the sort of work environment that appeals to my iowa work ethic.(i.e. Anything that is not detassling corn or walking beans is a step up)
I'd love to belong to the "science-and-technology-will-save-us" school of thought but I can't. I'm pessimistic. I don't think that people in high-energy-consuming countries are going to cut back all that much, and people in developing countries are going to continue to aspire to the the energy-rich lifestyle we've had for so long, and the world's population is going to keep growing and growing and growing. I sure hope it won't, but I think the future is going to get very ugly.
Don't get me wrong, I'm against pollution and people shouldn't be idleing (idling? sp?), but how can a law like this even be enforced? What if you start your car to warm up and are brushing snow off of it for a couple minutes... can the cops give you a ticket for that? Is there a specified time period... 15 minutes ok, 15 minutes, 1 second and you get a fine?
I can see cops saying "Jesus christ, another fucking regulation we have to piss people off with?" but did CO legislators really pass a bullshit idling law?
http://www.denvergov.org/OutdoorAirQuali…
@ svensken -- My main career plan is to keep writing. I don't have my next gig set up yet and there's a good chance I'll have to get a day job once the holidays are over, but the main thing is to be a writer, for sure. If anyone knows of opportunities for me, don't hesitate to get in touch.