The 25% raise is actually a 13% raise then 4% more each year. This barely keeps up with the rate of inflation and isn’t a real raise. They are also trying to increase the rate at which they cap out their pay.
They are trying to fight the mandatory overtime which is understandable.
Yes the pension they definitely want their pensions back.
This is all about job security. They don’t want Boeing to make a plant somewhere else where it’ll be cheaper to pay the employees and such.
"... tell the American people that one candidate (Trump) is a fascist and if he’s elected it will be the end of American democracy."
-quote from JD Vance
And Trump is out here doing a fascist coup with fascist thugs, saying he’s going to be a dictator on day one, saying after this election “you won’t need to vote anymore”. Then there’s that whole Project 2025 thing. Uhhhh….
It’s all amendment rights until it’s one of the racist fucks that gets murdered.
Then the police get military equipment to deal with the rising crime rates.
I mean, let’s, for a brief instant, accept that immigrants are eating pets. For a moment, let’s consider that the nonsense claimed is true and some people are eating dogs or cats.
What are you achieving by making false bomb threats? What’s the logic behind that? What are you solving by calling to say there’s a bomb in the school? Will these threats stop people from eating cats? Will they solve the “problem” in any way?
Nazis just want to kill people. Also, you’re killing “anchor babies,” so it’s fine.
The question I have is why they would eat cats. They don’t eat them in Haiti. They have jobs in Springfield, so they aren’t starving. None of them will explain it.
The initial racist Facebook post had a cat in it. That was “my neighbors, daughter, friend” level of made up, but not even that. When the neighbor was contacted by the press, it was actually “a friends aquantance.”
Its cats because a racist 3 times removed from the racist poster of the viral story decided to make it cats. Just racism brain filtered through more racist brains.
Can’t entirely blame her for the entire arc of this silly thing because there were certainly willful instances of people sharing misattributed footage. I’m thinking of the body cam of the American woman who killed a cat with her bare hands.
A US citizen, but! she wasn’t white so might as well call her an immigrant having a snack.
If they were rational, they wouldn’t be racists in the first place and they certainly wouldn’t listen to the guy talking about Haitians eating dogs.
Timothy McVeigh thought he’d bring about the great white revolution by bombing the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Turns out he was just fucking nuts, as was his accomplice.
If you read the article, they mention how some of the threats are coming from other countries. So while some of it may be dumbass racists thinking they’re achieving something, a good amount of it just comes down to foreign powers sowing discord and election interference. Calling in a bomb threat related to a politically divisive topic is a pretty low effort thing to do if you’re a rival superpower.
True and I certainly don’t doubt that there are plenty of idiots at home who think that calling in a bomb threat to a school will accomplish something. But it’s also very easy to call in a bomb threat and for a politically charged situation like this, it would be a no brainer for a foreign state actor to take advantage of the situation. It costs them next to nothing and further fuels the political divide within.
If there’s dozens of bomb threats being made to the same schools, I would more surprised to find out that rival superpowers aren’t behind at least one or two.
Punishing people until they realize you’re right is a hallmark of conservative dads.
The bomb threats will continue until the normies realize immigrants aren’t worth having, I will make their lives so difficult and annoying that they will be forced to accept my worldview just to get me to stop.
I’d suggest it’s directly in response to the police of the city stating there was no evidence to support Trumps claim, rather then just rolling over, now they get to investigate a bunch of bomb threats, maybe in the future a police department won’t “speak out against” a claim Trump makes due to fear of similar harrasment
I swear these guys sit down every morning and make a list of all the messed up shit they’ve done, then issue a press release saying the dems did all that stuff.
Okay I didn’t watch the video until looking at your link and saw the whole “he started saying migrant wrong” bullshit and was like, “okay maybe that is what happened.”. No, this dude straight throws a hard r n word out casually, unmistakable as anything else.
They are anti-abortion. That is as far as it goes. They don’t care about giving an expecting mother pre-natal care if she can’t afford it. The certainly don’t give a shit about post-natal care. And if there’s something wrong with her baby an they both die? That’s “god’s will.”
All they care about is making and keeping abortion illegal. It’s that binary of an issue for them and it’s sick.
It’s so fucking comical to me too that they call it “god’s will” when children die of the most horrifying, excruciating diseases imagnable long before they’re capable of understanding what’s happening, but when a pregnant woman makes an informed decision not to die during childbirth over a shrimp living inside her taco, that’s a bridge too far, and the all-mighty creator and ruler of the universe is very disappointed in you for killing one of his children when he was powerless to stop it.
Sweetie, maybe your fairytale sugar daddy’s will isn’t all that benevolent. 💀
No, no, you see it’s free will. Which makes total sense, because god can’t possibly foresee what we’re going to do, which is a problem omniscient beings definitely struggle with. Or if he can foresee what we’re going to do and he is omniscient, then he’s not omnibenevolent because he had exact foreknowledge of what was going to happen and let it anyway. After all, why “test” if you already know the precise outcome if not to watch people suffer for fun? If you need people to learn lessons, why can’t you just magically teach them those lessons? And if you’re not capable of this, how are you omnipotent?
Pick at most two of the three; you can’t have all of them.
Christians are routinely taught that god is not just loving (“benevolent”) but all-loving (“omnibenevolent”). Here’s the Pope talking about how “tender” and “astonishing” and “gratuitous” god’s love is. 4:8 of the First Epistle of John in the Bible – part of the de jure and de facto source of truth about god for Christianity – reads: “Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.”
Sure we could reduce that down to “omnibenevolent as long as you love him back”, as e.g. Proverbs 8:17 says “I love those who love me, and those who seek me diligently find me.” But even then, god heavily abuses those who love him. The Bible tries to justify this bizarre cosmic domestic abuse in the book of Job, but it’s one of the most ridiculous, fucked up stories imaginable where god literally bets with Satan that he can fuck up one of his most devoted follower’s life as much as he wants and he still won’t turn away from him.
If they were pro-life and consistent that lives are more important than human rights, they would also be clamoring for gun control on the basis of saving children’s lives in schools. Or, fuck, universal healthcare is an easy one, higher taxes for the wealthy aren’t even harming anyone’s rights and it saves lives.
But it is actually about controlling women with medical slavery and claims about saving lives are all lies they don’t actually believe.
Fascists don’t just lie, they invert the truth precisely.
Trickle-down economics, for example, was pitched as “a rising tide lifts all boats”, when in reality trickle down economics is the exact opposite of that. A rising tide lifting all boats would be the poorest person getting money until they have as much money as the second poorest person, then those two getting money until they have as much money as the third poorest person, and so on. Lying, reality-inverting fascists got up on a stage–in front of people-- and said that process was the same as giving the people with the most money even more money.
In a way it’s brilliant, because it’s so brazenly and bafflingly stupid that it acts like an EMP for logical thought. Which they know, and intentionally utilize. The most important skill a fascist has to have is the ability to make people stupid enough to vote for them. What better way than to go for the jugular and assault reality itself?
With an incessant anti-reality static, courtesy of your fox newses and heritage foundations, reality offers no obstacle at all.
Having it clearly explained to you but still not letting it go. Clearly the example Lemmy mods should be aspiring to.
Edit: The point is that a resurrected MLK jr. could have said the same thing Trump said about Kamala and still had it refuted. Racism is besides the point and requires a whole bunch of supporting evidence regarding past statements, policies, and associations for any undecideds that haven’t already made up their mind.
So was this man racist when he said the N-word or is your whole principle of charity thing demanding (your word last time) that we give the best possible interpretation here and say it was all an accident and he never meant to be racist?
Declaring it an accident actually makes the argument ‘dude is racist’ stronger. If the N-word is used so often in your speech you utter it on camera by accident… yeah, that’s racist. I cannot see a charitable version implying the argument ‘dude is not racist for uttering the N-word, accidentally or not’, but I would entertain attempts in the interest of rational argumentation.
Based on your whole ‘principle of charity’ idea, isn’t it your duty to believe him?
No. The duty is to argue against the best version of his argument. For example: “Uttering the N-word in a racist manner is evidence I am a racist, I didn’t say the N-word, so this is not evidence I am a racist” fairly (side note: this may not be the best version of the argument so if someone concocts a better one I would attack that instead).
In this example I would (and already did elsewhere) say “I listened to the tape and heard a hard-N so the premise ‘I didn’t say the N-word’ is false” so the rest of the argument collapses and the argument concludes “he said the N-word, so this IS evidence he is racist”.
Again, you’re a mod. Do better. Nowhere did I even imply ‘when I feel like it’.
You argue against the best version of the opponent’s argument. My argument transcends any accusations of racism, but does not preclude them which makes it the better form. You refusing to get that is sea-lioning at this point. Figureidout or let it go.
I am not a mod in this community either. I know you keep wanting to make that somehow relevant, but it isn’t. In the communities I moderate, it’s my job to enforce the rules. It’s certainly not my job to listen to someone excuse overt racism and not say “no, it’s racism.”
And the best version of Trump’s “she became black” claim was the one you made- that it wasn’t racist. You didn’t argue against it, you made it.
Are you trying to argue that in the forums you actually moderate you suddenly smarten up and start thinking rationally? What changes in you from one link to another that performs this miraculous change?
Nope, I’m not trying to argue that. But keep bringing up how I moderate communities other than this one as if it’s relevant to you excusing Trump’s racism.
Your seeming inability to comprehend the tenets of basic rational argumentation and outright refusal to accept what anyone says to you that you disagree with, supported or not, are glaring flaws in someone whose job it is to evaluate what people are saying in their forums and arbitrate fairly.
Did I not expressly agree that Trump is racist? Show me where I “excuse racism”. All I have done is simply (to some) state that “racism accusations are an unnecessary complication to successfully counter Trumps core argument”. As I’ve said already: if someone like MLK jr, or Al Sharpton, or Maya Angelou said “Kamala was pandering to her heritage” your ‘that person is racist!’ counter would be laughed at. It is besides the point. Nobody disagrees that Trump is racist. Let it go as it doesn’t matter for the best counter-argument.
Again, my job as a moderator is to enforce community rules. That’s it. If you see me do that incorrectly, report it to the administrators.
He didn’t say, “Kamala was pandering to her heritage.” He said, “she became black.” You just decided he was talking about pandering. That is excusing his racism.
If you feel that I am not doing a proper job as a moderator in the communities I moderate which, again, does not include this community, please report me to the administrators. You can find their contact information on the lemmy.world front page.
downvoting means i dont think you are adding anything useful to the conversation. I see you learnd to do it yourself at last! You started all this off by posting a false dichotomy and acting like I had asserted it. Everything youve posted since has been waffle. THE VOTING SYSTEM ISSSSS THE SITE. ITS HOW IT WORKS!
If you say so. And yet I still don’t care if I’m downvoted. Or if someone doesn’t like what I have to say. Or if they feel I don’t contribute to the discussion.
I don’t know you or anything about you. Your opinion of me has no relevance. I’m only even talking to you because I’m bored and waiting for my kid’s next class to start.
What evidence do you have that she would ever say such a thing? Or are you just now making a horrible slur against Maya Angelou along with excusing Trump’s racism?
I would answer that “if” the same way I would answer the question, “if Jerry Seinfeld said that Jews controlled Hollywood and the banks, would that be antisemitic?”
The answer is: It’s not something he would say. And in your example, it’s not something she would say.
So now you presume to know what people say. Easier to answer the hypothetical imo. Weird choice. Your tap-dancing to avoid answering yes or no tells me my point is starting to sink in so I’ll leave it there.
We’re off topic and I’m done relitigating this. It’s really not that difficult a concept to understand. Read that wiki article I linked you about the Principle of Charity. It will really help you in the future.
I was all but bending over backwards trying to hear how it might have been just a slip, bringing to bear the fact that both words have a nasal consonant and hard ‘g’ sounds, but… nope. He enunciates an ‘n’ again, clearly after he’s done saying “Haitian” and therefore where it doesn’t belong, and then he gets all the way to the hard ‘-er’, a “murmur diphthong” that simply doesn’t exist in ‘immigrant’ or ‘migrant’. The most charitable explanation with any plausibility whatsoever is that the n-word is a part of his spoken vocabulary and he failed to censor himself quickly enough.
I meant an accident in the sense of “I said something racist out loud when I meant to only say it in my head.” But I don’t think that was the case here.
I don't know. I mean, he does sound like he catches himself, and he isn't that good of an actor. But then, who the hell has that just... ready to go to the point where it just blurts out by itself? Like, how often do you have to say that out loud for it to just hijack your train of thought? It's almost less damning if he did it on purpose, honestly.
The United States is currently experiencing a shortfall in the number of immigrant workers. This has exacerbated service disruptions and labor shortages in vital industries that rely on immigrant workers, like leisure and hospitality. However, the impact of this shortfall extends beyond just the industries in which foreign-born workers perform a significant share of the labor. For example, immigrants also help counteract the slowing growth rate of the U.S. population, which helps drive the expansion of the labor force and contributes to overall economic growth.
Foreign-born workers are more likely to participate in the labor force than their native-born peers. As a result, immigrants have helped power the U.S. economic recovery by returning quickly to work, despite being disproportionately affected by job losses during the pandemic.
The importance of foreign-born workers will only continue to grow over time, as these workers remain vital to sectors that drive economic innovation and competitiveness. For example, jobs in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math), which rely on the contributions of immigrants, are projected to continue growing faster than other occupations. Similarly, foreign-born workers are vital to the care industry, shouldering a significant share of the work performed by home health care and child care workers. Immigrant workers, a significant share of them women, are also helping to meet the growing demand for caregivers as the overall population ages.
Am I the only one who finds this kind of disturbing? We need immigrants because Americans aren’t willing to do certain jobs, for the amount of money that companies want to pay, and because Americans aren’t having enough babies? We need immigrants because we don’t do a good enough job developing talent and competency in STEM fields? We need immigrants because our people don’t want to do home health care or child care work, for the amount of money those companies are willing to pay? It sounds like immigration is necessary due to our own failures.
That’s not good, and I don’t think immigration really solves the problem. In fact, I think it makes it worse, because it allows us to continue to not invest in our own people the way we should. Plus, what happens to those other countries? If we have all their talented and hard working laborers, what are they going to do?
Its always been about artificially keeping the price of labour down. I don’t blame people for wanting to move to have a better life but we have to be honest about the real reason it happens.
Theres never a skill shortage. Theres only ever a shortage of companies who are willing to pay people what they’re worth.
Yeah it bothers me when liberals push the “we need immigrants so they can be exploited” narrative. Really owning the republicans with that one… We should let them in simply because it’s the right thing to do, given in many cases we destabilized their home countries.
news
Newest
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.