Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038

Apr 25, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Psychology Today

My blog posts on religion have attracted a lot of controversy. Religious people are annoyed by my claim that belief in God will go the way of horse transportation, and for much the same reason, specifically an improved standard of living.

Comments (Page 722)

Showing posts 14,421 - 14,440 of21,376
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15214
May 2, 2013
 
Many have been rehabilitated though and moved on.
Bob of Quantum-Faith wrote:
<quoted text>THAT was the name-- I could not remember-- but yeah, I've been on that website.

It's sad, really..... all that wasted energy (faith, I mean) only to finally come to realize that it's all bullsh7t-- but there they are, stuck in the PENULTIMATE of dead-end jobs... teaching lies that they KNOW are lies to people who desperately need to keep believing in the lies...

....!!!

What a waste.
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15216
May 3, 2013
 
michael godwills wrote:
<quoted text>
humanity can not survive with capitalism, and since successful communism is a merely but a dream mankind needs some form of social liberty
To me, in the nuclear age mankind has no more a chance to survive!
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15217
May 3, 2013
 
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
Agreed. Same goes with Christianity. Fundies teach their is no salvation in the catholic church. And catholics teach only their church has the fullness of truth. They all think they have the truth, and all the other 39,999 sects are in massive error. Very rare to find a tolerant religious person on topix.
All religions look for money in the first instance.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15218
May 3, 2013
 
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
To me, in the nuclear age mankind has no more a chance to survive!
Screw it, something better to debate than the lame creatards. Nuclear energy is probably the only way we could move from fossil fuels and thus allow the atmosphere to take it's own natural course, meaning the warming period we are going through won't be as bad. Let's pretend the fears of nuclear power are true, just for this thought experiment, which would you prefer:

1. No use nuclear fuels and certainly accelerate the natural warming trend, making life very difficult if not nearly impossible in the near future?

2. Use nuclear fuels, which will produce hundreds of years of energy with very little waste produced, and maybe have to deal with an excess of nuclear waste in a few thousand years?(assuming we haven't found a better solution by then)

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15219
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Screw it, something better to debate than the lame creatards. Nuclear energy is probably the only way we could move from fossil fuels and thus allow the atmosphere to take it's own natural course, meaning the warming period we are going through won't be as bad. Let's pretend the fears of nuclear power are true, just for this thought experiment, which would you prefer:
1. No use nuclear fuels and certainly accelerate the natural warming trend, making life very difficult if not nearly impossible in the near future?
2. Use nuclear fuels, which will produce hundreds of years of energy with very little waste produced, and maybe have to deal with an excess of nuclear waste in a few thousand years?(assuming we haven't found a better solution by then)
I'm actually rooting for the version where we stop big oil companies from destroying every single alternative fuel that comes along, and just have energy that's not destructive to the planet.

We can make cars run on water, they done this successfully more than once, yet because big oil companies keep getting involved we're still thoughtlessly destroying our planet :(
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15220
May 3, 2013
 
michael godwills wrote:
<quoted text>
humanity can not survive with capitalism, and since successful communism is a merely but a dream mankind needs some form of social liberty
Believe it or not but nuclear inferno is on its way of human destruction. Fukushima was another stage and it is not the least one.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15221
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm actually rooting for the version where we stop big oil companies from destroying every single alternative fuel that comes along, and just have energy that's not destructive to the planet.
We can make cars run on water, they done this successfully more than once, yet because big oil companies keep getting involved we're still thoughtlessly destroying our planet :(
Actually, they can't make cars that "run on water," sadly. It's not really feasible for several reasons, most importantly physics. The amount of energy require to break the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen gas is three times the energy derived from igniting such gasses. It's a fun science experiment but was not effective in the long term, and is less efficient than even our electric cars.

Also, the "big oil company" thing you mentioned is, technically, a conspiracy theory, or as I call it, conspiracy nuttery. Oil companies make more money on plastics and textile production than anything, more factory new computers are sold every year than cars in a decade. Even with our technology recycling programs we use more virgin plastic on computers each year than any other product on the market, in the US and Europe at least. Oil companies also make no money off electricity production now, that's all coal, a different industry.

There are alternatives, the problem is that the lobbyists are all for their own pet corporations, all of them, even the "green" ones, all they want is to push for money into their corporations. One of the huge tax wasters is the raw material recycling companies now, I can go into detail if you want to change topics. But oil companies themselves don't even care about the fuel industry anymore, and while we're working on some great new bio-plastics, we will need the petroleum plastics for at least another century.
henry

Bad Langensalza, Germany

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15222
May 3, 2013
 
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
Things arent that bad! I think I am right in saying wars today are less frequent and less deadly that ones in the last century. The international powers seem to be fighting each other less. And those wars we have tend to be civil wars in developing countries.
Sorry, unfortunately this may be fairy tales. The realities of this world are more terrible either this time as ever.

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15223
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, they can't make cars that "run on water," sadly. It's not really feasible for several reasons, most importantly physics. The amount of energy require to break the water molecule into hydrogen and oxygen gas is three times the energy derived from igniting such gasses. It's a fun science experiment but was not effective in the long term, and is less efficient than even our electric cars.
Also, the "big oil company" thing you mentioned is, technically, a conspiracy theory, or as I call it, conspiracy nuttery. Oil companies make more money on plastics and textile production than anything, more factory new computers are sold every year than cars in a decade. Even with our technology recycling programs we use more virgin plastic on computers each year than any other product on the market, in the US and Europe at least. Oil companies also make no money off electricity production now, that's all coal, a different industry.
There are alternatives, the problem is that the lobbyists are all for their own pet corporations, all of them, even the "green" ones, all they want is to push for money into their corporations. One of the huge tax wasters is the raw material recycling companies now, I can go into detail if you want to change topics. But oil companies themselves don't even care about the fuel industry anymore, and while we're working on some great new bio-plastics, we will need the petroleum plastics for at least another century.
I was citing Hydrogen as a specific example, not the only example.

http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/ ( btw there are hydrogen cars :D )

http://www.teslamotors.com/ ( Electric powered car that doesn't use fossil fuels...a personal want of mine is the Tesla roadster )

Now, I'm talking about corporate greed in general. Big companies like to crush small competitors. That's pretty much the way it goes. It's why there are no longer mom and pop shops and Walmarts everywhere.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15224
May 3, 2013
 
undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
I was citing Hydrogen as a specific example, not the only example.
http://www.hydrogencarsnow.com/ ( btw there are hydrogen cars :D )
http://www.teslamotors.com/ ( Electric powered car that doesn't use fossil fuels...a personal want of mine is the Tesla roadster )
Now, I'm talking about corporate greed in general. Big companies like to crush small competitors. That's pretty much the way it goes. It's why there are no longer mom and pop shops and Walmarts everywhere.
Well, technically electric cars do use fossil fuels, coal is a fossil fuel, by the way, and 99% of our electricity comes from burning coal, an industry even I believe we should move away from completely ASAP.

The hydrogen ones are feasible, but you do realize that harvesting hydrogen is problematic as we do not, as yet, have a economical manner in which to do that. I would love to see it though, that would be my preferred future car, should I ever drive a car, I prefer not to drive. Walmarts are another topic, again most of what's stated about them is conspiracy nuttery, there's a lot more to that story than the "greens" will ever tell you.

The thing is, all "big" companies were small companies, they just did what they do so well they grew up. Most companies that go under do so either because of rent costs, which are not controlled by big companies, those are determined by your locals, or because they simply cannot produce decent products. I deal with a company in Washington, I love them, they are a small business but are growing so fast now because they deliver the best quality product for the price, and offer an alternative to the sub-par generic brands that can compete. They have a great business practice and that's why they do so well, but they deal exclusively online, one of the reasons I fight to protect internet rights. They will become a big corporation eventually, because of these factors, they did it right. That's how business should work, and in my state that's how it does work, sure, we get a lot of international companies and tons of big corporations, but when we bought into the "anti-capitalism" nonsense, we almost lost our cities, all of them. now we house Amazon and Google is considering a move to here as well, we also have the cheezbuger network (lolcats central) and several other corporations. They bring in a lot of money, and almost anyone can get a job here, even uneducated people, freelance businesses are booming as well, bolstered by the big corporations not "crushed." The biggest killer to businesses are the locals and the government.

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15225
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, technically electric cars do use fossil fuels, coal is a fossil fuel, by the way, and 99% of our electricity comes from burning coal, an industry even I believe we should move away from completely ASAP.
The hydrogen ones are feasible, but you do realize that harvesting hydrogen is problematic as we do not, as yet, have a economical manner in which to do that. I would love to see it though, that would be my preferred future car, should I ever drive a car, I prefer not to drive. Walmarts are another topic, again most of what's stated about them is conspiracy nuttery, there's a lot more to that story than the "greens" will ever tell you.
The thing is, all "big" companies were small companies, they just did what they do so well they grew up. Most companies that go under do so either because of rent costs, which are not controlled by big companies, those are determined by your locals, or because they simply cannot produce decent products. I deal with a company in Washington, I love them, they are a small business but are growing so fast now because they deliver the best quality product for the price, and offer an alternative to the sub-par generic brands that can compete. They have a great business practice and that's why they do so well, but they deal exclusively online, one of the reasons I fight to protect internet rights. They will become a big corporation eventually, because of these factors, they did it right. That's how business should work, and in my state that's how it does work, sure, we get a lot of international companies and tons of big corporations, but when we bought into the "anti-capitalism" nonsense, we almost lost our cities, all of them. now we house Amazon and Google is considering a move to here as well, we also have the cheezbuger network (lolcats central) and several other corporations. They bring in a lot of money, and almost anyone can get a job here, even uneducated people, freelance businesses are booming as well, bolstered by the big corporations not "crushed." The biggest killer to businesses are the locals and the government.
Wow...you use a lot of words, yet it's all nonsense.

Let me see if I can make sense of all this.

First of all. I'm still quite adamant in my stance that there are alternatives that are safer for the environment than fossil fuels. I'm quite certain of that. That tesla roadster by the way can be powered by a wall outlet so it's electric consumption isn't really high at all. It's significantly lower than any gasoline powered car, and would make a wonderful first step towards progress ( too bad they cost an arm and leg...darn nazis :()

I'm sorry, but everywhere I go. Every city I go into I see walmarts, Mcdonalds, Burger Kings, and BPs. What I don't see anywhere are mom and pop shops. I don't see any small businesses. Maybe there are a couple ( very small amount ) that still exist, however, for the most part that isn't the case anymore. The circumstances aren't set up for small business to really stand a chance. I've seen small businesses attempted and failed several times over, but nothings stuck at all around here.

You may not think that big corporations would do unsavory business tactics, or just in general crush small business for greed, but they do.

Also, yes those big companies started off small...50 years ago when a small business could thrive. Now Sam Walton is dead and his kids have grown up with an entitlement complex and have run all redeeming qualities of that company into the ground :(
Thinking

Windsor, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15226
May 3, 2013
 
I am glad that Germany never got nuclear weapons but I don't see a compelling reason for the UK to disarm.
henry wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry, unfortunately this may be fairy tales. The realities of this world are more terrible either this time as ever.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15227
May 3, 2013
 
undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
Wow...you use a lot of words, yet it's all nonsense.
Let me see if I can make sense of all this.
First of all. I'm still quite adamant in my stance that there are alternatives that are safer for the environment than fossil fuels. I'm quite certain of that. That tesla roadster by the way can be powered by a wall outlet so it's electric consumption isn't really high at all. It's significantly lower than any gasoline powered car, and would make a wonderful first step towards progress ( too bad they cost an arm and leg...darn nazis :()
I'm sorry, but everywhere I go. Every city I go into I see walmarts, Mcdonalds, Burger Kings, and BPs. What I don't see anywhere are mom and pop shops. I don't see any small businesses. Maybe there are a couple ( very small amount ) that still exist, however, for the most part that isn't the case anymore. The circumstances aren't set up for small business to really stand a chance. I've seen small businesses attempted and failed several times over, but nothings stuck at all around here.
You may not think that big corporations would do unsavory business tactics, or just in general crush small business for greed, but they do.
Also, yes those big companies started off small...50 years ago when a small business could thrive. Now Sam Walton is dead and his kids have grown up with an entitlement complex and have run all redeeming qualities of that company into the ground :(
If you are not going to read what I post, then I will not read what you post either.

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15228
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
The thing is, all "big" companies were small companies, they just did what they do so well they grew up. Most companies that go under do so either because of rent costs, which are not controlled by big companies, those are determined by your locals, or because they simply cannot produce decent products. I deal with a company in Washington, I love them, they are a small business but are growing so fast now because they deliver the best quality product for the price, and offer an alternative to the sub-par generic brands that can compete. They have a great business practice and that's why they do so well, but they deal exclusively online, one of the reasons I fight to protect internet rights. They will become a big corporation eventually, because of these factors, they did it right. That's how business should work, and in my state that's how it does work, sure, we get a lot of international companies and tons of big corporations, but when we bought into the "anti-capitalism" nonsense, we almost lost our cities, all of them. now we house Amazon and Google is considering a move to here as well, we also have the cheezbuger network (lolcats central) and several other corporations. They bring in a lot of money, and almost anyone can get a job here, even uneducated people, freelance businesses are booming as well, bolstered by the big corporations not "crushed." The biggest killer to businesses are the locals and the government.
Been looking into this subject ( I won't lie, mainly to prove you wrong ) and the more I look the more I seem to find that your point is actually valid, and probably correct.:D

I'm still trying to find what the odds are that a small business can become a big company ( with no luck ) I feel like that statistic is very small like a .001% chance you'll make it big since every market already has major players at this point, however, I don't have any such statistic and I can' figure out a good way to search for it :(

The point is that my local area must just suck because we don't have anything...your options are a.) Walmart b.) walmart or c.) walmart....I'm sick of walmart -.-'

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15229
May 3, 2013
 
undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
Been looking into this subject ( I won't lie, mainly to prove you wrong ) and the more I look the more I seem to find that your point is actually valid, and probably correct.:D
I'm still trying to find what the odds are that a small business can become a big company ( with no luck ) I feel like that statistic is very small like a .001% chance you'll make it big since every market already has major players at this point, however, I don't have any such statistic and I can' figure out a good way to search for it :(
The point is that my local area must just suck because we don't have anything...your options are a.) Walmart b.) walmart or c.) walmart....I'm sick of walmart -.-'
Luck is another word for not trying. Microsoft started off as a garage business, it was literally run from the garage with nothing more than an idea. Bill did not depend on "luck," he used his head, he didn't even have an education at the time, dropped out of school and didn't finish until after he was wealthy.

Google was nothing but a search engine, and now it basically owns the internet, of course the owner of Google believes in internet freedom and equal opportunity so they don't try to push anyone around online. That was not luck, and for a moment Google almost crashed and burned, but they managed to finally find their niche and fill it.

Yes, your area must have a lot of bad business leaders for one company to be able to take over. But here's the thing, there's a saying in the business world, "if you can't get a job anywhere else, there's always Walmart." Walmart hires literally everyone who applies, regardless of experience, background, or even education. The reason Walmarts tend to "take over" areas is because the standards of employees there are too low to help any business gain reliable, and valuable, workers, thus they cannot stay in business. Walmart hires those employees and pays them, crazy I know, but meh, they manage to make a profit because of that policy. Walmarts actually manage to improve the economy in the areas they move into, we had a "ghetto" here that got two Walmarts and is now the "in place" just north of Seattle. Since they got the Walmarts they have flourished and now have more businesses there than most outskirt cities of Western Washington. Downtown Seattle was dying, literally overrun with nothing but homeless and criminals, the two are exclusively unique, until we got Amazon, now it's growing again. Pioneer Square, my neighborhood, has become the "in place to be" of downtown now, it's nostalgic and people love that.

The key to such changes is time, you have to wait for the positive impact, and you have to wait longer than you do for a negative impact.

Also, thanks for reading my post. ;)
EdSed

Wishaw, UK

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15230
May 3, 2013
 
Thinking wrote:
..but I don't see a compelling reason for the UK to disarm.
<quoted text>
Expense?
From:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c569db3a-4947-11e2-...
Between now and 2016, the article says, Britain must decide whether to replace [our capacity]. This will cost £25bn. The construction programme will consume at least one-third of the Ministry of Defence’s equipment budget after 2020.

The French offered us the prospect of a 'shared nuclear deterrent', but UKGov didn't pursue it. It is one of the arguments for Scottish Indepence,(and another example of stupid Westminster decisions).

There's also the argument that we would never use an independent deterrent.

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15231
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
Luck is another word for not trying. Microsoft started off as a garage business, it was literally run from the garage with nothing more than an idea. Bill did not depend on "luck," he used his head, he didn't even have an education at the time, dropped out of school and didn't finish until after he was wealthy.
Google was nothing but a search engine, and now it basically owns the internet, of course the owner of Google believes in internet freedom and equal opportunity so they don't try to push anyone around online. That was not luck, and for a moment Google almost crashed and burned, but they managed to finally find their niche and fill it.
Yes, your area must have a lot of bad business leaders for one company to be able to take over. But here's the thing, there's a saying in the business world, "if you can't get a job anywhere else, there's always Walmart." Walmart hires literally everyone who applies, regardless of experience, background, or even education. The reason Walmarts tend to "take over" areas is because the standards of employees there are too low to help any business gain reliable, and valuable, workers, thus they cannot stay in business. Walmart hires those employees and pays them, crazy I know, but meh, they manage to make a profit because of that policy. Walmarts actually manage to improve the economy in the areas they move into, we had a "ghetto" here that got two Walmarts and is now the "in place" just north of Seattle. Since they got the Walmarts they have flourished and now have more businesses there than most outskirt cities of Western Washington. Downtown Seattle was dying, literally overrun with nothing but homeless and criminals, the two are exclusively unique, until we got Amazon, now it's growing again. Pioneer Square, my neighborhood, has become the "in place to be" of downtown now, it's nostalgic and people love that.
The key to such changes is time, you have to wait for the positive impact, and you have to wait longer than you do for a negative impact.
Also, thanks for reading my post. ;)
You are far too wordy...I feel like I'm reading a school paper :(

Also, Walmart hasn't done crap for the quality of life here. It's just a shitty little crap shack ( our walmart is like the retard small edition ran by managers who I know don't know what they're doing because they cause ( are literally responsible ) for some stupid problem on a daily basis that screws over every single employee. They also like to hire based on the 'who's my friend' principle so yeah...our walmart sucks and it's tiny with limited options.:(

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15232
May 3, 2013
 
undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
You are far too wordy...I feel like I'm reading a school paper :(
Also, Walmart hasn't done crap for the quality of life here. It's just a shitty little crap shack ( our walmart is like the retard small edition ran by managers who I know don't know what they're doing because they cause ( are literally responsible ) for some stupid problem on a daily basis that screws over every single employee. They also like to hire based on the 'who's my friend' principle so yeah...our walmart sucks and it's tiny with limited options.:(
I am wordy, I confess, I like to type non-code since most of what I type is code.

As I said, it takes time for the positive change, but it will happen, those managers you complain about would be on welfare if not for Walmart, and then no business would survive because they'd have no money to spend at other businesses. As to your mention of hiring practices, that happens everywhere, a single store's hiring practices for any business will often end up being a "hire your friends first" just because most managers are just as biased as anyone else. Eventually though, after a few changes and some stumbles, the store will balance out, again, happens with all businesses. More times than not I have had to correct hiring practices for restaurants when I worked for those, I was a headhunter even though I preferred working in the kitchen, thus why I left that career, I just didn't like it. Most of our small businesses here have almost all family members working, only the big businesses will hire more outside the family. Starbucks has a corporate controlled hiring policy, the locals have almost no say in who works at what store, and they do a great job of employing a variety of people. But they also require you do everything online to get hired because that's the only feasible method for such a system.

In short, you have to take some bad with all good, a cloud cannot have a silver lining without the cloud.

“Dancing with the devil”

Since: May 12

...Dreaming of angels

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15233
May 3, 2013
 
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
I am wordy, I confess, I like to type non-code since most of what I type is code.
As I said, it takes time for the positive change, but it will happen, those managers you complain about would be on welfare if not for Walmart, and then no business would survive because they'd have no money to spend at other businesses. As to your mention of hiring practices, that happens everywhere, a single store's hiring practices for any business will often end up being a "hire your friends first" just because most managers are just as biased as anyone else. Eventually though, after a few changes and some stumbles, the store will balance out, again, happens with all businesses. More times than not I have had to correct hiring practices for restaurants when I worked for those, I was a headhunter even though I preferred working in the kitchen, thus why I left that career, I just didn't like it. Most of our small businesses here have almost all family members working, only the big businesses will hire more outside the family. Starbucks has a corporate controlled hiring policy, the locals have almost no say in who works at what store, and they do a great job of employing a variety of people. But they also require you do everything online to get hired because that's the only feasible method for such a system.
In short, you have to take some bad with all good, a cloud cannot have a silver lining without the cloud.
I'm not sure what to think really...

Personally I'm a bit confused. I can't seem to wrap my head around what I've been looking up. Oh well XD

The statistics I keep finding on small business don't really add up with other statistics I've found.

If the wealth distribution is so messed up that I don't understand how a small business can thrive at all when 7% of the wealth is held by 80% of the population...I feel like the math is messed up somewhere along the lines.

I don't know, all that I'm really sure of is that a minimum wage job is not enough to live off of which doesn't make sense to me :(

I'm at a loss...

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15234
May 3, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

undefined apathy wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not sure what to think really...
Personally I'm a bit confused. I can't seem to wrap my head around what I've been looking up. Oh well XD
The statistics I keep finding on small business don't really add up with other statistics I've found.
If the wealth distribution is so messed up that I don't understand how a small business can thrive at all when 7% of the wealth is held by 80% of the population...I feel like the math is messed up somewhere along the lines.
I don't know, all that I'm really sure of is that a minimum wage job is not enough to live off of which doesn't make sense to me :(
I'm at a loss...
Statistics are often skewed by those taking the records or compiling the data into readable information, the only thing we have to go on in such matters, really, is personal observation. Remember, statistical data is collected by corporations and companies, so the source of the statistic becomes questionable in all such instances.

However, a minimum wage job is better than welfare, no matter how it's spun. Most of the anti-corporation garbage is actually driven by some small businesses who want an edge, but instead of providing better products they just want to get either people or the government to hand them that edge, thus they make up these skewed statistical reports to do just that. Big corporations respond in kind, making many of their statistics questionable as well, when dealing directly with their production and such.

Sometimes, pictures are worth more than numbers.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 14,421 - 14,440 of21,376
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••