[scaredyclassic]

in spite of the fact that every prospectus warns you that past performance does not predict future results, we all kinda believe that past performance predicts future results and the prospectus is just saying that cause the dumb old stodgy SEC makes them.

[scaredyclassic]

I tried to learn on a longboard but just couldn’t get it.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=sdrealtor]Looks like they may hit 110 tomorrow in St George.[/quote]

111.

Money may be the least of our problems soon. The world has a fever.

Maybe invest in water

[scaredyclassic]

Sort of. Still has a ton plus of steel and crap.

[scaredyclassic]

2022 Nissan leaf 4k cheaper than 2021

[scaredyclassic]

Indios 120. Humans live there. But how.

I once left a bottle of wine in my car out there by mistake and it exploded.

My new life plan is to spend every July or aug in Vermont. Maybe I need a Burlington timeshare.

[scaredyclassic]

Why not require an oath of fealty prior to employment?

Becoming a serf

A freeman became a serf usually through force or necessity. Sometimes the greater physical and legal force of a local magnate intimidated freeholders or allodial owners into dependency. Often a few years of crop failure, a war, or brigandage might leave a person unable to make his own way. In such a case, he could strike a bargain with a lord of a manor. In exchange for gaining protection, his service was required: in labour, produce, or cash, or a combination of all. These bargains became formalised in a ceremony known as “bondage”, in which a serf placed his head in the lord’s hands, akin to the ceremony of homage where a vassal placed his hands between those of his overlord. These oaths bound the lord and his new serf in a feudal contract and defined the terms of their agreement.[19] Often these bargains were severe.

A 7th-century Anglo Saxon “Oath of Fealty” states:

By the Lord before whom this sanctuary is holy, I will to N. be true and faithful, and love all which he loves and shun all which he shuns, according to the laws of God and the order of the world. Nor will I ever with will or action, through word or deed, do anything which is unpleasing to him, on condition that he will hold to me as I shall deserve it, and that he will perform everything as it was in our agreement when I submitted myself to him and chose his will.

To become a serf was a commitment that encompassed all aspects of the serf’s life.

Moreover, the children born to a serf inherited the status of the parent, and were considered born into serfdom at birth. By taking on the duties of serfdom, individuals bound not only themselves but their future progeny.

[scaredyclassic]

Frolic and Detour
Primary tabs
Frolic and Detour is a phrase describing actions taken by an employee that fall in varying degrees outside of the scope of employment. Generally, a “detour” constitutes a minor departure from an employee’s duties but is still considered acting within the scope of employment, whereas a “frolic” would be a major departure from the scope of employment undertaken for that employee’s own benefit.

The phrase originated in Joel v. Morison, an English case from the 1800s, which clarified that a master is liable for actions a servant takes stemming from a master-servant relationship (now known as an employment relationship) where a servant takes a “detour” while acting in the scope of employment, but is not liable where a servant goes on “a frolic of his own” that exceeds the scope of employment. The Frolic and Detour language is still cited in cases such as O’Connor v. McDonald’s Restaurants which invoke the doctrine of respondeat superior to assess the extent of an employer’s liability for an employee’s actions under tort law.

Additionally, an employment relationship is considered suspended during commutes to and from a place of employment as there is no service rendered during this time, so Frolic and Detour is not typically implicated in these circumstances.

[scaredyclassic]

If a remote employee in an RV gets in a wreck while on the clock, is the company liable for those damages?

[scaredyclassic]

Part I: Duties of Employees to Their Employers
Current employment law evolved from the feudal relationship between the lords and the peasants. In many legal indexes this is still termed the law of the master-servant relationship.

[scaredyclassic]

Fucking people and their fucking dogs.

[scaredyclassic]

What are the ethical duties an employee has to her employer today?

Is it to work as hard as possible during work hours? Is it to accomplish as much as possible for the employer? Or is it just to not actively try to harm the employer while meeting minimum standards?

Given the extraordinary lack of any hint of any loyalty toward workers nowadays, it feels like the duty to work as diligently as possible is not an ethical imperative.

It is an interesting sociological question.

[scaredyclassic]

Most human effort is pointless or actually backwards moving.

[scaredyclassic]

The small piece of earth each man dies alone upon is flat.

[scaredyclassic]

[quote=an][quote=scaredyclassic][quote=an][quote=scaredyclassic]The true cost party

Wants all prices to disclose full environmental cost of the product.

Upside. You’ll feel like you’re getting a screaming deal while destroying the earth

https://www.adbusters.org/listserv/the-true-cost-party-of-america%5B/quote%5D
LOL, the earth will destroy us long before we can destroy it. It survived meteor that caused the extinction of dinosaurs, so I’m sure it can handle anything we throw at it. We might not be able to handle what it throws back though.[/quote]

Lol. What I mean when I say destroy the earth is destroy the habitat that sustains us. Lol.

Indeed, the “Earth” won’t exist without us, as the word earth, it’s a human word, and without humans, whatever is here will have no one to call it “earth”. It will be a nameless rock. No not even a nameless rock, as the very concept of anything being named and unnamed will disappear with us. So no, the “earth” cannot survive without us.

Lol.

Without language, I’m not sure anything knowable to us can exist. See, e.g., genesis 1.

Shop on, Americans!!![/quote]
if a tree falls and no one is around to hear it, it still makes a sound

Earth is an English word. People who speak other languages does not call this rock earth[/quote]

Sound. Definition.

vibrations that travel through the air or another medium and can be heard when they reach a person’s or animal’s ear.

Vibrations yes.

Sound, no.

[Author]

Posts