Random Thought of the Day

Quote: kenarman

You obviously haven't been an upscale lounge lately. You would probably get kicked out if your jeans weren't ripped. They would of course have to be factory rips.

Haha. That was pretty good!

Quote: kenarman

So you believe the electrical company has the right to not provide you power because they don't like your politics?

No, mostly because they are a regulated monopoly (in many cases) and almost always considered a public utility.

Quote: kenarman

The setting of rules just gets confused anytime the government gets involved because goal posts are continually moving. A business is forced to continually change by the government. Not many years ago a bar would get in trouble if they allowed a male into a women's washroom, now if the male declares he thinks he's a women they will get in trouble if he is not allowed in. An business owner has few rights, now the government is continually creating new rules for him to follow and providing new "rights" for everyone but the business owner.

That's a fair point.

I think the one thing that hasn't changed much is the general concept of, "Free Association." That's to say that a business has the right to disallow any patron from its property, or its services, for any reason that the Government does not specifically prevent them from doing so.

It all comes back not only to property rights, but also the right of a person/business to feel secure in their property and in their person.

If I were forced to guess, (aside from the hearing that you mentioned in a previous post) then I would suggest that Facebook is concerned about public perception as the platform is often seen as, "Toxic," insofar as it's often used for people to get really nasty with one another about politics.

I imagine it would be quite difficult, and probably costly, for them to attempt to police posts from individual users especially considering, as with most other social media platforms, it's relatively easy just to create more accounts. You could ban by IP address, but then that comes with a whole host of other problems, such as inadvertently banning an entire household (if they are at home) where most of the people in the house aren't doing things unwanted by the platform.

For lack of a better guess, I'd have to suppose that they think banning Trump simply takes a lot of fuel away from the fire and makes things easier for them in the long run. Also, Facebook is not any kind of necessary public company, so there's no, 'Right,' to have access to Facebook.

The First Amendment does not strictly apply because it's not a Government platform and is not owned by the Government.

Finally, despite all of the attempts to compete against the major social media platforms (with varying degrees of success---some phone apps do fairly well) and general failure to get anything to the level of Facebook & Twitter, Trump himself isn't prohibited from starting his own social media platform, and thereby, being able to ban anyone he wants to from that.

Quite honestly, I'm surprised he hasn't done so by now, assuming he has the start-up capital. I imagine many of his more fervent supporters would be quick to sign up for it and he shouldn't have any trouble getting advertisers to market their products there. Guns, ammunition, four-wheelers...maybe motorcycles...it seems like it could be a demographic that largely shares many of the same interests.

Quote: Mission146

Both sides want the Government to have absolute control of everything, just in different ways and to accomplish different goals.

The Republicans of old would do well just to drop social issues from their list of concerns (they've already lost that fight---and rightly so) and just become Libertarians.

It won't happen, but a drastic shift to Libertarianism would be the last chance we have as a country of getting the Federal Government somewhat in check.

They never will because they are obsessed with personal life (mostly, but not always) because of religious dogma. And, I think most don't actually care (at least I suspect so), but they feel that they need to drum up the support of the religious. For example do you think Trump actually cares one way or the other about abortion? Of course not, he just wants evangelicals to vote for him.

Most of the Republican I respect (and maybe would actually even vote for) are Socially Liberal, Militarily Strong, Economically Moderate (Basically a NeoCon). McCain (at least later in his life) is a close one. Most good Republicans that I somewhat like (and in some cases would possibly even vote for) are being forced out of the party by Trump fans... It really is the party of Trump, the days of NeoCons are ending (which I find sad, because I consider myself a NeoCon and there really is not many places left where that term is not used as a slur, I use NeoCon very specifically, because I have nothing in common with actual conservatives, in many ways NeoCons are more democratic than republican).

Anyway people are obsessed about the rights of business to restrict whoever they want, except when it comes to people they like (which I generally agree with). I have massive issues with Facebook in the past year , so you know what I did, I quietly deleted my account (I did not make a thousand posts on Facebook about it like some people seemed to) and moved on, they will not care, but I am happy with not supporting a company I think is shady (at best).

My philosophy is the same with physical businesses, to use casinos as an example (since pretty much everyone here gambles), there are some that have policies that I disagree with so I simply do not go, I don't argue with people on the floor about rules or policies. Why would you want to support a business that does not respect you? For example why would Trump want to spend millions on ads every year on a platform (Facebook, whatever other social sites etc...) to support massive companies that despise him? That is just stupidity.... Lots of conservatives bash Facebook, but they still filter countless millions in advertising dollars through them (Facebook does not care they will take the money)....

Quote: Gandler

Should I be allowed entry into the upscale lounges in ripped up jeans and a stained T-shirt, or should they be allowed to block me entry until I change?
..

Bad example! You can’t afford the ripped up jeans my wife has! And no one is throwing her out for wearing that designer stained T-shirt!

But I agree with your point....

Quote: SOOPOO

Bad example! You can’t afford the ripped up jeans my wife has! And no one is throwing her out for wearing that designer stained T-shirt!

But I agree with your point....

You guys are obsessing about my choice of clothes in the example, I didn't realize ripped jeans was actually a trending choice of clothes (I don't get why people would pay money for ripped jeans, but that is neither here nor there).

But, the point is, buisneses have the right to enforce any dress code they want (unless is involves banning religious garbs). They also have the right to enforce social behavior (they can ban you for cursing or being too loud etc...), social media is no different.....

Quote: odiousgambit

I'm picturing 'Darkside', the ransomware cyber criminals being blamed for shutting down the pipeline, as being something basically like a James Bond villain. Does the leader of it hold zoom meetings where he doesn't show his face, while petting a white cat on his lap?

Cracked about this elsewhere and I've run into some people who didn't get it

Quote: Gandler

They never will because they are obsessed with personal life (mostly, but not always) because of religious dogma. And, I think most don't actually care (at least I suspect so), but they feel that they need to drum up the support of the religious. For example do you think Trump actually cares one way or the other about abortion? Of course not, he just wants evangelicals to vote for him.

I agree with that. That's the thing about the Republican Party; it's always been an unusual alliance of the Evangelicals and big business interests. Of course, it seems that many of the wealthiest people are now Democrats, so Republicans consist mostly of the Evangelicals and people who aren't very well educated. In any event, the smart Republicans should just become Libertarians and the Evangelicals should ideally move to a different country, but they can do whatever they want with themselves.

You could once clearly define political parties---and I guess you still can. What is a Republican? A Republican is a person who likes Donald Trump. If you do not like Donald Trump, then you are not a Republican.

Quote:

Most of the Republican I respect (and maybe would actually even vote for) are Socially Liberal, Militarily Strong, Economically Moderate (Basically a NeoCon). McCain (at least later in his life) is a close one. Most good Republicans that I somewhat like (and in some cases would possibly even vote for) are being forced out of the party by Trump fans... It really is the party of Trump, the days of NeoCons are ending (which I find sad, because I consider myself a NeoCon and there really is not many places left where that term is not used as a slur, I use NeoCon very specifically, because I have nothing in common with actual conservatives, in many ways NeoCons are more democratic than republican).

I agree. Why should any socially Conservative politician ever win? The fight is over and the churches lost---rightly so. I'd also vote for a Republican with all of those same qualities, except I would like to cut a lot out of military spending and would probably prefer someone more economically conservative (at the Federal level) than you would like. When it comes to state-level spending, I tend to be slightly more economically liberal....or maybe I should say slightly less conservative.

Quote:

Anyway people are obsessed about the rights of business to restrict whoever they want, except when it comes to people they like (which I generally agree with). I have massive issues with Facebook in the past year , so you know what I did, I quietly deleted my account (I did not make a thousand posts on Facebook about it like some people seemed to) and moved on, they will not care, but I am happy with not supporting a company I think is shady (at best).

Vote with your time; vote with your wallet, that's all. It's kind of like when Whole Foods was wanting the employees to donate their PTO to one another in the event that one of them got Coronavirus, this was March or April of last year.

That's a policy Whole Foods has always had, but you'd think AMAZON could afford to take care of employees during a pandemic if they get Covid-19 which would literally legally prohibit them from coming to work.

Anyway, they're a company and are free to have whatever policies they want. I haven't shopped at Whole Foods or Amazon since, (not that I ever really used Amazon that much) and their loss has been Trader Joe's' gain.

Whole Foods is overpriced, anyway. The only thing that I really miss from there is that they have really good pizza.

Quote:

My philosophy is the same with physical businesses, to use casinos as an example (since pretty much everyone here gambles), there are some that have policies that I disagree with so I simply do not go, I don't argue with people on the floor about rules or policies. Why would you want to support a business that does not respect you? For example why would Trump want to spend millions on ads every year on a platform (Facebook, whatever other social sites etc...) to support massive companies that despise him? That is just stupidity.... Lots of conservatives bash Facebook, but they still filter countless millions in advertising dollars through them (Facebook does not care they will take the money)....

I pretty much agree with all of that. If you don't like a business' practices, then just don't go.

I'm also not some Liberal Arts Major Junior in college who has to metaphorically masturbate to my misguided fantasy that I matter and am changing the world. No online petitions (that accomplish nothing) and no demonstrations needed. I just don't shop at certain places and, if someone asks why, I tell them.

Many non-essential locations are also on my boycott list due to being open on Thanksgiving Day. The only problem with that is I might run out of places to buy clothes...also, some malls apparently also require stores to be open anytime the mall is open (or on the same days, anyway) in the lease.

Quote: Mission146

I agree with that. That's the thing about the Republican Party; it's always been an unusual alliance of the Evangelicals and big business interests. Of course, it seems that many of the wealthiest people are now Democrats, so Republicans consist mostly of the Evangelicals and people who aren't very well educated. In any event, the smart Republicans should just become Libertarians and the Evangelicals should ideally move to a different country, but they can do whatever they want with themselves.

You could once clearly define political parties---and I guess you still can. What is a Republican? A Republican is a person who likes Donald Trump. If you do not like Donald Trump, then you are not a Republican.



I agree. Why should any socially Conservative politician ever win? The fight is over and the churches lost---rightly so. I'd also vote for a Republican with all of those same qualities, except I would like to cut a lot out of military spending and would probably prefer someone more economically conservative (at the Federal level) than you would like. When it comes to state-level spending, I tend to be slightly more economically liberal....or maybe I should say slightly less conservative.



Vote with your time; vote with your wallet, that's all. It's kind of like when Whole Foods was wanting the employees to donate their PTO to one another in the event that one of them got Coronavirus, this was March or April of last year.

That's a policy Whole Foods has always had, but you'd think AMAZON could afford to take care of employees during a pandemic if they get Covid-19 which would literally legally prohibit them from coming to work.

Anyway, they're a company and are free to have whatever policies they want. I haven't shopped at Whole Foods or Amazon since, (not that I ever really used Amazon that much) and their loss has been Trader Joe's' gain.

Whole Foods is overpriced, anyway. The only thing that I really miss from there is that they have really good pizza.



I pretty much agree with all of that. If you don't like a business' practices, then just don't go.

I'm also not some Liberal Arts Major Junior in college who has to metaphorically masturbate to my misguided fantasy that I matter and am changing the world. No online petitions (that accomplish nothing) and no demonstrations needed. I just don't shop at certain places and, if someone asks why, I tell them.

Many non-essential locations are also on my boycott list due to being open on Thanksgiving Day. The only problem with that is I might run out of places to buy clothes...also, some malls apparently also require stores to be open anytime the mall is open (or on the same days, anyway) in the lease.

I feel that I have always been consistent (despite people trying to twist my words above). I have my views on many things and many policies. But, I believe in free association, if a place does not like me they can kick me out and I will not whine about it, if I do not like a place I simply will not go.

I even support the Court's decision about the gay wedding cake. Why would a same-sex couple want to give such a large purchase to a business that does not view them as equal humans? (I know that was not the legal basis behind the decision, I am just pointing out my views, even if it may make me unpopular with people on my side).

Same with Chic Filet, I think its absurd that people try to ban them on campuses (and some cities), personally I love their chicken (though I think Wendy's has a slight edge as far as fast food chicken goes). And, if the owners happen to have backwards religious views on some issues, so be it, I think the fact that they treat their employees well and pay them well, good benefits, etc.... (for an entry level fast food job) far outweighs any issues I have with the owner's donating money to a political group I find distasteful, so I have no problem eating there occasionally (very occasionally I try to avoid fast food, and I prefer Wendy's when I do, but that is nothing to do with politics).

This is what I do not understand about Trump (and others who have been banned) who are upset that they can not give millions of dollars to Facebook every year? Why would you want to contribute (significantly) to a company that hates you (in your view, and probably in reality)? Same thing with sexual minorities wanting to make large purchases at bigoted shops? Why? I can understand the outrage if you are denied critical services (like medical) that you need to survive, but cakes, jewelry, and social media are all non-essential...... Its really not complicated if you hate Facebook and you feel Facebook hates you, why would you want to give them countless ad revenue?

I honestly don't know anything about Whole Foods seizing PTO days from workers, but that is pretty sleazy if true. I do order quite a bit from Amazon (and even Whole Foods because they have some hard to find ingredients that I occasionally enjoy).

I do agree that petitions and protests are meaningless (and generally just serve to gratify the person making it's desire for attention), and often counter-productive (historically they drum up support for the business being protested), making them pointless for a number of reasons.
Though I have no problem with writing respectful and private letter/emails to upper management r owners if you feel that they have a policy that is unfair, that is free speech, and they can choose to ignore the letter or respond as they wish..... This can actually make an impact (again depends on the company, but some are actually receptive to feedback from people who take the time to write a letter).

I agree with your first four paragraphs 100% and have nothing to add.

Whole Foods didn't seize the PTO, they have a long-standing policy that an employee with PTO accrued can donate that PTO to an employee without who happens to be out sick for an extended period. Personally, I think that part is perfectly fine and a nice thing to have. My problem with it in the context of Covid-19 is that they are running an essential business during a pandemic and the parent company is the highest-valued company in the country. IOW, it's a company that I feel could pay employees out due to getting Covid and not even touch their PTO---no problem.

It's not even a political statement, "Outrage," or anything along those lines. They can do what they want. I just don't want to buy any of their products anymore because I don't want my money going to them.

Same thing with several places that have decided to be open on Thanksgiving Day. Everyone who is non-essential should be off on that day, in my opinion. It's the perfect holiday: Not religious, not really political, not really, "Patriotic,"---it's just a day where we say we're going to get together, eat a huge meal and watch football. Why? Because we can, that's why.