🙅 THE BAD IDEAS THREAD
-
improved negotiating ability
At the expense of everyone else, of course, as witnessed by the fallout from Wisconsin Act 10, where, once the teacher's weren't required to pay union dues and use the union's captive insurance company, every school district that hadn't rushed in new union-frienndly contracts found themselves switching from being in the red to being flush with cash.
-
-
At the expense of everyone else, of course, as witnessed by the fallout from Wisconsin Act 10 [...]
I'm not advocating closed shops. I'm instead saying that if a law requires an actual majority of a union's (relevant) members to strike, and not merely a majority of those voting, that law should also require that a majority of the shareholders (as weighted by holding) vote in favour of measures in a similar way, and that those who don't vote should not have their votes used by the chairman of the board. If you're going to have a law regulating the decision-making process of one private entity, you should not have an entirely separate set of rules for another private entity.
In many ways, the only real major difference between a union and a corporation is that a union is not a profit-making body. But there are many other sorts of non-profits too. The point where the law should intervene is when either side starts trying to use violence to coerce the other, and history tells us that that's a distinct possibility in labour disputes (both ways) so the law can't stay entirely silent.
-
At the expense of everyone else, of course, as witnessed by the fallout from Wisconsin Act 10, where, once the teacher's weren't required to pay union dues and use the union's captive insurance company, every school district that hadn't rushed in new union-frienndly contracts found themselves switching from being in the red to being flush with cash.
Oh, you mean these teachers?
The ones who protested it because it ruined their bargaining power? The ones who retired that year because they had no way of earning enough money to live on without being on welfare and social security? Yeah, I'm sure they were "flush with money".
-
I'm sure [the teachers] were "flush with money".
Um, @FrostCat said the school districts were "flush with cash."
-
Oh right. Well, you could say the same for Oracle or Microsoft if it became illegal to be a programmer and they no longer had to pay those people.
-
In many ways, the only real major difference between a union and a corporation is that a union is not a profit-making body.
Except for the guys running the unions. I'm sure those country clubs are a real help when negotiating for auto worker pensions.
-
The ones who protested it because it ruined their bargaining power? The ones who retired that year because they had no way of earning enough money to live on without being on welfare and social security? Yeah, I'm sure they were "flush with money".
The teachers who have more money in their paychecks because they aren't greasing unions and politicians and overpaying for health insurance? Don't be a useful idiot.
-
if it became illegal to be a programmer and they no longer had to pay those people.
Except you'd have to be a moron to think that is a fair comparison.
The unions were gouging the hell out of the school districts. Your commie pinko college professors lied to you, Ben, about what happened.
-
Your commie pinko college professors lied to you, Ben, about what happened.
I think he was probably still in high school back then, but yeah.
-
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/09/24/larizona-revenge-porn-law-bathtub-baby-photos-felony
An Arizona law that won unanimous approval in the state legislature this year could send parents to prison with a felony conviction if they share bathtime baby photos, according to a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday.
[...]
The lawsuit says parents who share nude photos of their babies are subject to felony convictions, as are educators who show students the famous “Napalm Girl” photo taken during the Vietnam War. Newspapers that publish images of U.S. troops abusing Iraqi prisoners or former Rep. Anthony Weiner’s lewd Twitter selfies also could be exposed to prosecution, according to the suit.Moreover, sharing a link to websites that host such images could yield felony charges, the suit says.
-
Sounds like it will go down in flames like a similar law recently did in Texas. It will be interesting to see if the ruling that strikes the law down will be as misunderstood as it was in Texas:
-
The story contains this bit of language from the bill:
“It is unlawful to intentionally disclose, display, distribute, publish, advertise, or offer a photograph, videotape, film or digital recording of another person in a state of nudity or engaged in specific sexual activities if the person knows or should have known that the depicted person has not consented to the disclosure.”
It seems to me that a parent can legally consent to a lot things with respect to their child, so it might not be problematic for that sort of thing.
-
It seems to me that a parent can legally consent to a lot things with respect to their child, so it might not be problematic for that sort of thing.
Oh, there's more hyperbole in there than baby bathtime pictures.
-
Oh, there's more hyperbole in there than baby bathtime pictures.
A rape victim might be guilty of a felony for sharing a nude photo of her rapist with anyone other than police, the lawsuit says.
That seems reasonable to me. In fact, it seems to fit a definition of revenge porn, which was the intended target of the law.
-
An Arizona law that won unanimous approval in the state legislature this year could send parents to prison with a felony conviction if they share bathtime baby photos, according to a federal lawsuit filed Tuesday.
That's a pretty good idea. Maybe it'll encourage people to put some goddamned clothes on their brats, instead of having everyone around on the beach or wherever awkwardly looking away because they don't want to have trouble with the police.
You want me to see your kid naked? Send her over when she's 18, dammit.
-
'I had a third breast implant so I can turn off men'
American Jasmine Tridevil, 21, claims she had plastic surgery to create a third breast and now hopes to have her own MTV reality show
SFW, if pictures of women in bikinis are.
-
WTF
-
Has that been revealed to be a hoax yet?
-
Has that been revealed to be a hoax yet?
5 reasons why ‘woman with three breasts’ is probably a hoax
Did Jasmine Tridevil really have a third breast implant in a bid to become a reality TV star?
Responding to the hoax claims, she told 10 Tampa News: “I figured people would be sceptical, but it's true. I recorded the surgery and it will be on my show.”
-
Can't find it right now, but not surprisingly, AceOfSpades has been following this story. He was talking about how some of what she's been doing totally doesn't add up and kind of points to a hoax. Of course, someone putting on a hoax would deny it.
-
-
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11113452/Third-boob-woman-I-had-a-third-breast-implant-so-I-can-turn-off-men.html
SFW, if pictures of women in bikinis are.
so I can turn off men
honey, men don't work like that. if they did i would hgave an easier time.
-
Bad idea: messing with a gamer while playing
http://i.imgur.com/fsXDjlD.gif
http://np.reddit.com/r/WTF/comments/2hpdk7/never_interrupt_a_gamer/ckuuvsi
NOT a fake:
This is not fake and happened around 2004/2005. This was at the Kiski School, my boarding school in Saltsburg PA. The student who got the scissors stuck in him said he fell on them to the school to not get his roommate and somewhat friend who did it in trouble. The school never found out until several months later when a kid who got expelled posted the video online. Here is a photo after in the nurse's office. I'M SO EXCITED FIRST VIRAL VIDEO WHERE I WAS THERE!! :-P
Edit: Thanks for the gold!
Photo of him in the nurse's office before removal
-
That kid should never be allowed to play video games again.
I've had friends who had violent tempers when gaming. I always questioned why they even played games, if all it does is make you mad what's the point? Unless getting yourself angry somehow counts as entertainment?
-
I had a friend who cracked a keyboard in half when he lost at Tribes.
I thought it was hilarious.
-
I had a friend who cracked a keyboard in half when he lost at Tribes.
i have an ex friend who did this when i smoked him at counterstrike. he was less than amused when i insisted he pay for a new keyboard, even less so when i rejected the $5 replacement from Wallmart he tried to give me.
you break a $250 mechanical switch keyboard i expect to get a $250 mechanical switch keyboard back out of you.
At the end of that day he owed me a keyboard and a new monitor and was extremely puzzled why i had locked him out of the house and called his parents to get him with the promise that if they did not i would call the police, and oh by the way bring $600 to cover damages; thanks you.
-
As BenK said, "Remember, The Left Wants Government Out Of Your Bedroom."
Gov. Brown Signs Bill Telling College Kids Where, When to Have Sex
Wikimedia Commons California Gov. Jerry Brown affixed his signature to SB 967—the "Yes Means Yes" affirmative consent bill—which will require...
-
Reason.com, huh?
Here's the actual text of the bill. Make of it what you will.
I do have to say I disagree with the preponderance of evidence bit, but you also have to remember these are guidelines for people getting booted from a school, it's not legal action, and definitely not criminal legal action. And frankly if there's a preponderance of evidence that you're a rapist, I don't really mind much if you get kicked out of Berkeley or whatever.
It also doesn't apply at all to private schools.
-
And frankly if there's a preponderance of evidence that you're a rapist, I don't really mind much if you get kicked out of Berkeley or whatever.
This is perhaps the worst idea. RAPE IS A SERIOUS CRIME. Why are we bullshitting around with university kangaroo courts. If you raped someone, you should be kicked out of school because you can't attend from the penitentiary. Not to mention the potential for abuse of this process.
If colleges were serious about their so-called rape epidemic they would start kicking people out for underage drinking.
-
This is perhaps the worst idea. RAPE IS A SERIOUS CRIME. Why are we bullshitting around with university kangaroo courts. If you raped someone, you should be kicked out of school because you can't attend from the penitentiary. Not to mention the potential for abuse of this process.
If colleges were serious about their so-called rape epidemic they would start kicking people out for underage drinking.
Exactly. This creates a breeding ground for corruption of the worst sort.
-
If colleges were serious about their so-called rape epidemic they would start kicking people out for underage drinking.
The "college party culture" needs to die in a very horrible fire. Treating a university as a blasted social club makes it rather more difficult to you know, engage in academics?
-
The "college party culture" needs to die in a very horrible fire. Treating a university as a blasted social club makes it rather more difficult to you know, engage in academics?
The "college culture" itself needs to start over. Way too many people who shouldn't be there are wasting tons of money.
I've heard people propose things like lowering the drinking age. I think that has promise, because at least it takes away the attraction of the forbidden. I'm sure there would still be binges, but I'm not sure that it wouldn't reduce them.
-
I got into an argument over a recent SMBC comic on that topic.
Sending everyone to college is a waste.
-
Why are we bullshitting around with university kangaroo courts.
My exact point is that it's not a court: it's an organizational policy. You don't have any legal right to attend a State-funded university.
If colleges were serious about their so-called rape epidemic they would start kicking people out for underage drinking.
What's the relation between these two things?
EDIT: BTW, no comment on how horribly biased and inaccurate that Reason.com story you linked was?
-
The "college party culture" needs to die in a very horrible fire. Treating a university as a blasted social club makes it rather more difficult to you know, engage in academics?
Foreigner's opinion so take it for what is worth.
One of the strangest things with the American college system is that it seems to have two paths. One is the normal academic path, which is what you get everywhere else in the world. But then, there is the other, "athletic" path, where you can basically be a professional athlete disguised as a student.
So these people spend most of their time practicing their sports skills. They sort of attend the classes sometimes, but as far as I understand, they are required to demonstrate only the rudimentary knowledge and are basically given a free pass. The final result is, they sign a sports contract and their imaginary degree ends up collecting dust on the wall. All the while, they are taking the place of someone who might actually use the skills taught in real life and contribute something to society.
I know there are financial reasons for this. Apparently, Universities are making big money from what amounts to slave labor of these athletes.
Still seems like a complete waste of time. And also seems to breed the party culture @tarunik has mentioned.
-
This is perhaps the worst idea. RAPE IS A SERIOUS CRIME. Why are we bullshitting around with university kangaroo courts. If you raped someone, you should be kicked out of school because you can't attend from the penitentiary.
I admit I haven't read the whole thing yet, but I would guess that this is intended to cover the situation where there is sufficient evidence that the offender committed an offence to justify expulsion, but not enough to result in a criminal conviction (remember a certain high-profile murder trial in which there was reasonable doubt of his guilt, resulting in an acquittal, but sufficient evidence to win a multi-million dollar wrongful death suit), or while waiting for the wheels of the criminal justice system to grind slowly toward an eventual outcome.
It also doesn't apply at all to private schools.
That's not what I read:
In order to receive state funds for student financial assistance, the governing board of each community college district, the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing boards of independent postsecondary institutions shall adopt...
It's not mandatory on private schools, but if they don't, their students suffer.
-
My exact point is that it's not a court: it's an organizational policy. You don't have any legal right to attend a State-funded university.
Oh great, so I can start firing all those poor minorities and pregnant women. It's my organizational policy, not a court matter. They don't have any legal right to keep working in my private company.
-
My exact point is that it's not a court: it's an organizational policy. You don't have any legal right to attend a State-funded university.
But it's a good use of the government to discourage proper handling of rapes? You don't have a legal right to a lot of things like that, but it doesn't mean it's a good idea to forbid people for bullshit reasons.
What's the relation between these two things?
I imagine you don't pay attention to such things, but there is a lot of hullabaloo about rape and sexual assault being major campus epidemics. If you look at the details, it's all bullshit, and a lot of the craziness is kids getting wasted and having apparently consensual sex.
However, the female can report that sort of thing after the fact, and no matter how much she was consenting at the time (and it's often he-said-she-said), because she was drunk, it's now a rape. She's not responsible for anything she does when tipsy, but he is.
BTW, no comment on how horribly biased and inaccurate that Reason.com story you linked was?
Why is anyone surprised about the fact that Reason has a very strong point of view? If you think it's inaccurate, maybe you should say something about that.
-
That's not what I read:
I'm not sure what the word "independent" means in that context, but if the only penalty is losing State funds, and your school doesn't get State funds in the first place (i.e. is independent), then ... oh no?
"If you don't do this, I'll take away your car!" "I don't have a car."
EDIT: Oh I see the distinction now. Their student loans could potentially be rejected if they went to a independent school that didn't follow this ruling. I'm a little slow.
-
But then, there is the other, "athletic" path, where you can basically be a professional athlete disguised as a student.
This is a super small portion of the college population.
All the while, they are taking the place of someone who might actually use the skills taught in real life and contribute something to society...Apparently, Universities are making big money from what amounts to slave labor of these athletes.
Yes, the athletes who get the free pass probably help fund the school. Not that there aren't a lot of WTFs, but the last thing these guys are doing is displacing people who can't get in. They'd maybe be better served with more emphasis on their education, but they're still probably better off in the end than otherwise.
-
Oh great, so I can start firing all those poor minorities and pregnant women. It's my organizational policy, not a court matter. They don't have any legal right to keep working in my private company.
Maybe in your country. There's a whole lot of history and law on the subject in the US.
-
Yes, the athletes who get the free pass probably help fund the school. Not that there aren't a lot of WTFs, but the last thing these guys are doing is displacing people who can't get in. They'd maybe be better served with more emphasis on their education, but they're still probably better off in the end than otherwise.
The impression I got was that it's pretty much 50-50. If not, that makes more sense.
-
Oh great, so I can start firing all those poor minorities and pregnant women. It's my organizational policy, not a court matter. They don't have any legal right to keep working in my private company.
Sounds like something Boomzilla would say.
Look, I don't want to get pulled into this bullshit, I just wanted to point out that this is THE FUCKING INTERNET and if you're going to talk about a bill of law, LINK TO THE ACTUAL BILL OF LAW and not some biased idiot article about it from morons.
-
Apparently I need to learn to use the sarcasm tags.
-
I took it to be an extreme analogy, so yeah, those might have helped.
LINK TO THE ACTUAL BILL OF LAW and not some biased idiot article about it from morons.
Well, I didn't do either of those.
-
I took it to be an extreme analogy
An extreme analogy can be used to either criticize or underscore a point. So sarcasm tags still aren't enough.
-
An extreme analogy can be used to either criticize or underscore a point. So sarcasm tags still aren't enough.
Maybe. But he's from one of the old Yugoslavia places, which is part of Europe, so is probably a lot more racist than Americans, so maybe it sounds reasonable in the original Transylvanian.
-
-
Some of the things I've seen with shipping container buildings have looked like a bad idea, others not so much. I mean it's basically a metal box that is cheaper to dump and build a replacement than to reuse so finding something to do with them seems like it would be a good idea.
