Holy fuck dude.

You can file complaints with NLRB or civil suits about lots of things, but the details matter if you want to go anywhere with them. For the most part, unionizing and union related activities are protected actions, within reason as defined by law. If your action is union related, and they fire you, and you have some reason of evidence that it happened in that way, then you might want to look into following up on it.

As always, expect your bosses and HR to lie about what happened. It’s really good if you have video evidence, or at least multiple witnesses, and certainly take notes right after having any such incident.

Why wear a thong for your workout? … Err, what kind of training are you up to, anyway? :-o

Normal people don’t care about “the economy”. To hell with the yachts. We care about working conditions and pay/benefits vs. cost of living.

The doctor.

Yes.

As others mentioned, it’s been blocked. The judge up in Missouri continued the block.

The reasoning is the same as before, and none of it makes sense. It’s so bizarre that the courts are allowed to prioritize lenders over ordinary citizens. It’s not like the lenders are going to go bankrupt, so why should the injunction go in their favor? Meh. We know why. Politics.

I would rather have a person who I disagree with be honest about their views and goals, because at least then maybe we could talk about things openly, even if we couldn’t come to an agreement.

It’s so annoying dealing with chronic liars, because they keep bringing in falsehoods whenever it’s convenient, whenever they think they can get an edge.

Tell that to Amazon. If you can build a monopoly, you win in the medium run.

I don’t think Tim Walz was chosen to attract left-wing voters. He’s not center left or far left.

I agree with you that the Democrats tend to ignore the left, and it’s incredible annoying, but at the same time in my opinion Harris is a better candidate than Hillary was. It’s a small improvement, but it’s an improvement. (Obviously this depends on your views on various issues, so you could disagree reasonably enough.)

States have their own murder statutes. Federal law would be irrelevant.

If it’s an official act, yes. It’s not hard to tell a story where it becomes an official act. I I think he could still be impeached FWIW.

Because of Trump’s unhinged tactics, we know that top military leaders and (presumably) TLA bigwigs have discussed what they would do in situations like this. What you’re describing is very close to a coup d’etat, and in a situation where they get ordered to perform such an action, do they do it? What was framed as a question of SCOTUS rulings becomes, in reality, the question, “Am I willing to throw this entire democracy away on this President’s absurd orders?” Every high-up in government knows this… They signed up to serve the people, not a dictator.

Of course we have no idea how each person would act, but my point is that pure legality is only one challenge Biden would have to overcome if he wanted to do such a (horrible) thing.

Yeah but let’s keep things in perspective. You don’t have to delete Puff Daddy from your iPod, but you probably don’t want to play him at your political rally.

Your second question has a general answer. Most languages use tones, which means tones change in the course of a sentence. If the tone changes for all sentences, then it also changes for questions. I know that’s not what you were trying to ask, but that’s the answer to the question you did ask.

If you need a way to indicate that something is a question, you could do what English does… You could use question words at the beginning of the sentence. You could change word order. You could add extra words… Which is to say, you’re not dependent on intonation, though you could use it if you want to.

After the pandemic I think a lot of teachers changed our lines. The reality is that people have a lot of reasons to be late or absent. It’s the people who are chronically late who have issues, not because the tardy count is important, but because they didn’t learn the material that was covered when they weren’t in class.

All of which is to say, it doesn’t matter if you have a good excuse or a bad excuse. It matters if you’re learning what you’re supposed to learn.

How much effort does it take to pay your staff more? Almost none. You don’t even actually have to do anything except tell your accountant to raise their pay.

Perhaps you are asking a variation of the “genetics vs. environment” question. If so, there are many answers on the subject. Also, money is somewhat attractive to almost everyone, to some degree, for practical reasons.

That’s true but I think irrelevant. People are posting examples of things that used to be bad and have improved. If you want your science fiction framing, just consider the timeline where those things didn’t improve, and you have your answer.

Because so many of us didn’t interpret the question properly at first, maybe the question could have been written more clearly, and it wasn’t and that’s okay, but I hope people looking for answers would be willing to do a little bit of logical reasoning.

Many of us realized that the simplistic labels don’t apply. We have views on issues, some of those views are quite clear and others less so, but you can’t capture our positions in a few words.

Honestly, you just become more protective of your stuff and things you consider yours as you get older.

Isn’t that plainly false? When I was in college, and just after that, I had almost no money, so I was incredibly protective of my stuff and things I considered mine. Later my income went up, so I didn’t need to worry about it as much. Surely many other people have had similar experiences.