52
53

Peter Schiff Discussing California's New Rape Law (self.TheRedPill)

M_Ahmadinejad が 投稿

並べ替え:
ベスト
ベスト
トップ
新着
注目
論争中
古い順
あなたは単独のコメントのスレッドを見ています。

残りのコメントをみる →

[–]green49 22 ポイント23 ポイント

I don't think California is going to stop until every last job has picked up and left the state

[–]TheSliceman 7 ポイント8 ポイント

It's a nightmare here.

It's illegal here to work 8 hours without taking a 30 minute lunch. So if I have a really busy day and don't get to take a lunch at my job, my company is forced to turn a half our that I was actually working into my lunch break on the books and robs me of 15 bucks... Each day it happens.

A total draconian nightmare government cesspool.

Why the fuck is my state government forcing me to take my lunch during work rather than before or after work?!!!!

[–]Kalepsis 19 ポイント20 ポイント

That's actually a very common law, as it is in my state.

If it's lunch time, stop working. Because it's also illegal for them to force you to work through it. It doesn't matter how many customers are on the phone, or standing in front of you, or how much paperwork you have. If your lunch gets pushed back to the end of your shift, stop working a half hour before your shift ends. Scheduling is not your responsibility. If they threaten to fire you for taking your legally required lunch break, call HR, then a lawyer, then the newspapers. That is illegal, also.

[–]TheSliceman -4 ポイント-3 ポイント

Thats not how it works at my work.

There is no "lunch time". Either we take lunch or we dont. I prefer not to and just power through the block of work, as do most of my co-workers, but the state has decided that it knows better on our eating habits than we do.

Fuck that fascist shit. Let me fucking work and eat the way me and my company fucking want to.

[–]Kalepsis 20 ポイント21 ポイント

...then it's your fault for not taking your lunch. You can't complain.

[–]aditas 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Of course he can. He is being robbed by his government, he has the constitutional right to petition for redress of grievances.

[–]Squeezymypenisy 8 ポイント9 ポイント

He was outvoted. Sorry but that is democracy.

[–]aditas 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Not really, a democracy requires a majority consensus of well informed stakeholders. I don't believe 27 assemblymen can meet that requirement.

[–]Squeezymypenisy 2 ポイント3 ポイント

Then change the constitution. Though that's easier said then done. Direct democracy is incredibly difficult.

[–]aditas -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

That's the thing, our constitution recognizes this. Also, the reason we don't have a democracy to begin with.

[–]1KyfhoMyoba 1 ポイント2 ポイント

Democracy is 3 wolves and a sheep deciding on dinner.

Liberty is a well armed sheep contesting the vote.

[–]TheSliceman 0 ポイント1 ポイント

If it was a vote within our company, it would be something like 94-6 in favor of no eating regulation.

But we have to abide by regulation that other people who dont work with us decided for us because "democracy"?

Democracy is shit.

Its mob rule.

I hope you learned something today.

[–]Squeezymypenisy 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I've known it for years. I studied it. But part of it is semi enlightening.

[–]1nrokchi 5 ポイント6 ポイント

The first step of redressing one's grievances is to assess the situation and figure out if it is a government problem or a you problem. If he doesn't work something out with his employer, then he is the one that is allowing the his employer abuse the law and steal his wages from him.

[–]1KyfhoMyoba -1 ポイント0 ポイント

It's always a government problem.

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Did you even read my complaint?

The company doesn't care if we take a lunch, the state does.

I complain that the state shouldnt be regulating my eating habits.

Your reply is "then its my fault for not taking a lunch, you cant complain".

....

Are you fucking retarded?

[–]Sleep-less 1 ポイント2 ポイント

ATo be honest, I imagine that a majority of people BENEFIT from having a legally enforced period of time where they can stop work and eat. This seems like an issue you need to resolve with your employer.

If you work 8 hours, find a way to have them payaa you 8 hours while still recording that you took a lunch break.

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

This seems like an issue you need to resolve with your employer.

What the fuck are you talking about?! THEY DONT HAVE A CHOICE.

Can you fucking read? My God you are an idiot.

Not sure if the morons in this thread are autistic or just plain stupid...

[–]Sleep-less 1 ポイント2 ポイント

There are plenty of potential resolutions to your problem. I find it hard to believe that they cannot find some way to pay you 8 hours and record you taking a half hour lunch break. In this, they certainly do have a choice.

[–]HarmReductionSauce 1 ポイント2 ポイント

What fucking legitimate interest does the state have in this matter?

The man wants to work 8 hours and get paid for 8 why the fuck does the state deserve a say in it?

[–]TheSliceman 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Yes, fraud is a choice. One a company as big as mine, with hundreds of thousands of employees, chooses not to take.

Im wondering if anyone in this thread has actually been in the workforce. This is the real world, not some fucking fantasy land.

[–]mormon-nigger 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Dude are you autistic or something? It's no wonder you keep working for an employer who robs you of your lunch break. Everyone here is saying the same thing, I think you are the retarded one. Take your lunch. It is illegal in any state with a law on the books to force you to work through your lunch. Tell your employer you are taking your lunch. If they fire you, then sue them. California employees generally enjoy a lot of protections from the state. It's not the state robbing you.. it's your employers.

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

I do take my lunch, because the state forces me to against my wishes.

Thats what my entire complaint was. The state should not be regulating my eating habits mormon-nigger.

But thanks for your completely useless and content-free imput Mormon-nigger. I hope you can learn to somehow provide value.

It's not the state robbing you.. it's your employers.

LOL, you are retarded. My employer makes us take a lunch because its state law. ROFL, you are seriously fucking retarded. LOL

I love statists like you.

[–]1nrokchi 3 ポイント4 ポイント

Sounds to me a problem communicating with your employer rather than bad government legislation.

[–]TheSliceman 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Maybe you didnt read the whole rant.

The employer doesnt have a problem with it, but the government does. They are forced to make us take a 30 minute break before 6 hours of working or they face the risk of getting sued on state regulation grounds.

[–]zero_four_twenty 4 ポイント5 ポイント

Not even, its healthier to take multiple lunch breaks over one.

Skipping lunch to get "work done" is counterproductive. People forget that food is fuel, not entertainment. You'll do better and have more focus with food in your stomach every ~3 hours.

Though the corporate workforce is very unforgiving of healthy living, you're better off with your own business anyway.

[–]aditas -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

Counterproductive for who? If he remains clocked in by skipping lunch he gets paid.

[–]andres7832 0 ポイント1 ポイント

He would still work 8 hours. If he works over 8 hours then he would be in OT, which the employer may not want. If this guy is in OT a lot, employer may just hire someone else to lessen the load.

Stop complaining over nothing, if you don't like it go on business for yourself. Change what you can stop throwing fits over stupid stuff, concentrate your determination on better things than ranting over regulations that are almost universal and meant to protect employees from abuse.

[–]TheSliceman -2 ポイント-1 ポイント

/r/bluepill is where you need to be at if you are the type who needs an authority figure to protect you from yourself because taking it on yourself would be too much responsibility, which would be too much for you to handle.

[–]andres7832 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I don't need any of that. That's why I'm my own boss. I don't waste my time complaining about why lunch is mandatory, I use that time to improve myself.

If you work for someone else, there are rules imposed as an employee, and his boss has to follow those rules too. Much as I hate regulations I won't be paying the fine for my employee not taking his breaks, or dealing with a disgrunted former employee turnig me in because I don't agree with the law.

Call me blue pill all you want, you can continue bitching about something that will not change unless you're out of the US, I'm doing business here, would love to know how you handle this situation...

[–]HarmReductionSauce 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Seconded, what the fuck is this pro big-daddy government doing in theredpill?

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

No idea, but it is very disappointing to me, to say the least.

I thought RP was about self-ownership and individualism, not asking daddy and mommy for permission for everything imaginable.

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Do you understand how much food a hungry man can eat in the time span of 2, 15 minutes breaks?

Over 8 hours, thats food every 2 hours and 45 minutes.

Sorry, but your uninformed post-hoc justification just crash and burned.

[–]zero_four_twenty 1 ポイント2 ポイント

That's simply bad math and understanding of biology.

Your body can't process food like that. You will have massive dips in energy and focus in between those meals, and most of the meal would be discarded through waste.

Not to mention eating while you're hungry leads to overeating.

[–]TheSliceman 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You just said you need food every 3 hours, now you are saying food every 2 hours and 45 minutes is not enough.

You have literally no idea what you are talking about.

[–]mormon-nigger 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Not to mention eating while you're hungry leads to overeating.

/facepalm

I only eat when I'm hungry.

[–]TheSliceman 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You just said you need food every 3 hours, now you are saying food every 2 hours and 45 minutes is not enough.

You have literally no idea what you are talking about.

[–]zero_four_twenty 0 ポイント1 ポイント

You literally need some social skills. How confrontational are you in public?

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

You need to stop shit-posting and learn to admit when you are wrong.

[–]CoachGordonBombayD5 2 ポイント3 ポイント

The Sriracha sauce plant is another ridiculous example. Residents and government officials filing a lawsuit over the "offensive smells", forcing the company to move its manufacturing elsewhere. Fastforward a couple weeks, and they literally had a line-up of states begging for their business, flying officials out and offering them whatever they wanted....California is a disgrace to western society, their default is going to be catastrophic to the rest of the country / north america / world.

[–]realhacker 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Show up a half hour early or stay a half hour late?

[–]TheSliceman -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Some people do that.

Yes there is annoying solutions. The point is that the state should not be regulating my fucking eating habits plain and simple.

[–]M_Ahmadinejad[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I unfortunately live in California too, simply because my job doesn't exist in any other state. I work on a salary though, so I am exempt from all of those crazy labor laws. It is also nice to be able to come and go from work as I please on my own hours as long as my work gets done. Do you have the opportunity to work on salary instead of hourly?

[–]aditas -1 ポイント0 ポイント

Why would anyone choose to be on salary when given the choice? Don't you want to be paid for every hour you work?

[–]M_Ahmadinejad[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I work no more than 40 hours per week. I can basically pick my own hours as long as I am in the office when I need to be in meetings or have specific things I need to do at specific times. I can take however long of a lunch that I want to, take breaks whenever I want, and and I don't have to go through the administrative mess of being on hourly pay.

[–]aditas 0 ポイント1 ポイント

I personally would forgo OT and work 50-55 hours if they paid me hourly. I have no incentive to do so now cause I'm salaried.

[–]M_Ahmadinejad[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント

For the type of job I have, it doesn't make any sense to pay hourly. I am paid to carry out my responsibilities and whether I do it in 30 hours or 50, the company gets the same benefit so I am on salary. If I were working hourly, it wouldn't make sense because I would finish my responsibilities in 30-40 hours and then have nothing to do for overtime.

[–]aditas 0 ポイント1 ポイント

Granted, it may not make sense for the employer, but would you take an hourly wage if offered? All else being equal, same job same responsibilities.

[–]M_Ahmadinejad[S] 0 ポイント1 ポイント

No way. I would be getting paid the same with not nearly the freedom of being salaried. Not to mention the better benefits offered to salaried employees.

[–]Kelly_Gruber[🍰] 0 ポイント1 ポイント

3 hours work = 15 minute break by law here