Oceanic Steam Navigation Spot
sleepclementine:

americaninfographic:

Night, night

Night.

reblogging this because as I see this I have to be up in 5 hours to go to a physically demanding job lmao

sleepclementine:

americaninfographic:

Night, night

Night.

reblogging this because as I see this I have to be up in 5 hours to go to a physically demanding job lmao

iammyfather:

oceanicsteam:

defliqwid:

Me flipping off Hillary Clinton.

The good news is you’ll have plenty of chance to do this once she inevitably becomes president on January 20, 2017

There are those of us that hope to hell that the Wall Street Choice is not chosen, but then what will the other branch of “The American Ruling Party” offer up?  Remember 112 M split between Obama and Romney, but 96 M registered voters didn’t vote.  3rd party can win, or not depending on SCOTUS.

Democrats could just vote in primaries for an actual good Democrat, but that’s about as hopeless as Republicans finding a candidate who could win against Hillary.

iammyfather:

oceanicsteam:

defliqwid:

Me flipping off Hillary Clinton.

The good news is you’ll have plenty of chance to do this once she inevitably becomes president on January 20, 2017

There are those of us that hope to hell that the Wall Street Choice is not chosen, but then what will the other branch of “The American Ruling Party” offer up?  Remember 112 M split between Obama and Romney, but 96 M registered voters didn’t vote.  3rd party can win, or not depending on SCOTUS.

Democrats could just vote in primaries for an actual good Democrat, but that’s about as hopeless as Republicans finding a candidate who could win against Hillary.

defliqwid:

Me flipping off Hillary Clinton.

The good news is you’ll have plenty of chance to do this once she inevitably becomes president on January 20, 2017

defliqwid:

Me flipping off Hillary Clinton.

The good news is you’ll have plenty of chance to do this once she inevitably becomes president on January 20, 2017

gaveuptheghost:

Is it just me or when that plane was shot down in Ukraine, there was more wreckage and destruction than the planes that were downed during 9/11. I mean if you look at the photos, it really blows your mind. first one is 9/11 second is Ukraine.

One plane was shot with a missile causing the plane to explode and break up in mid air.

The other was crashed full speed into the ground

The crash types aren’t comparable.

kiranerys:

This picture fm Elizabeth warrens Facebook????? I’m so gay?????????

who isn’t gay for liz warren? 
Also I’d like some fiction from someone where her and bernie sanders become president/senate leader and just bring the awesome. tia.

kiranerys:

This picture fm Elizabeth warrens Facebook????? I’m so gay?????????

who isn’t gay for liz warren?

Also I’d like some fiction from someone where her and bernie sanders become president/senate leader and just bring the awesome. tia.

nawawow:

flyestfemales:

flyestfemales  // insta: @omarsamira

واعتصموا بحبل الله جميعا و لا تفرقوا ♡

Well…..

Copacabana beach in Rio waiting for Pope Francis during World Youth day.

nawawow:

flyestfemales:

flyestfemales  // insta: @omarsamira

واعتصموا بحبل الله جميعا و لا تفرقوا ♡

Well…..

Copacabana beach in Rio waiting for Pope Francis during World Youth day.

I just want to say that I have been very impressed by the quality of your discussions. You are very well informed and do a great job conveying that.

I <3 YOU TOO

kelincihutan:

notsoslightlyinsane:

ragingcommonsense:

koffeebitch:

ragingcommonsense:

indierepublican:

With religious freedom, government won’t interfere with your idea of marriage.

THISJUST GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF ALL MARRIAGE
THISTHISTHIS

It’s not like you wake up one morning and decide to be gay or straight. You are born straight or born gay it’s that simple however you can choose to be a bigot. 

I don’t really care if you’re born that way or not. I really don’t.
I don’t care who anyone wants to spend their life with or have sex with. I absolutely could not care less.
It’s not any of my business and it’s not my problem.
What my problem is, is the government sticking their noses in something that doesn’t need the government at all.
Marry who you want. Why do you NEED a license or permission from your government to be with someone for the rest of your life? Why do you need to be TAXED for it?
You don’t. That’s my problem. You should have the right to share your life and property with whoever you love. Your life and property are your rights.
Government need not hop in bed with you.

The government is involved because marriage has certain tax benefits, exceptions, exclusions and considerations, as well as changes how property is divided up in court (a governmental organization), among NUMEROUS other ways that your marriage affects your government and how your government must treat you to be fair to your marriage. That is why the government is involved. That’s why you have to register your marriage with them (so they can change how they consider you to account for your new life partner) and why they can deny your request (so you can’t commit some sort of fraud against them). 


Literally all of that can be handled by notarized contract. Government involvement is still not required.

lmao no it can&#8217;t. You would need endless amounts of new contracts to deal with every separate institution and situation, and on top of it said institution can then put up a challenge against honoring said contract for whatever reason they might throw forward. I&#8217;m pretty sure everyone who has ever uttered &#8220;you can do this with a notarized contract&#8221;  has no fucking idea how contracts work. Marriage is a government institution, it&#8217;s a gigantic contract between all of society backed up by state resources. A wedding/relationship is not. If you want have a wedding go ahead, go nuts, ain&#8217;t no one stopping you. Have a friend or your local religious figure pronounce you conjoined life partners. However if you want your partnership recognized as a legal binding that doesn&#8217;t require an entire vault of separate contracts to operate, then as people have since ancient Sumeria, you have your relationship recognized and backed up by the state as a marriage.

kelincihutan:

notsoslightlyinsane:

ragingcommonsense:

koffeebitch:

ragingcommonsense:

indierepublican:

With religious freedom, government won’t interfere with your idea of marriage.

THIS
JUST GET THE GOVERNMENT OUT OF ALL MARRIAGE

THISTHISTHIS

It’s not like you wake up one morning and decide to be gay or straight. You are born straight or born gay it’s that simple however you can choose to be a bigot. 

I don’t really care if you’re born that way or not. I really don’t.

I don’t care who anyone wants to spend their life with or have sex with. I absolutely could not care less.

It’s not any of my business and it’s not my problem.

What my problem is, is the government sticking their noses in something that doesn’t need the government at all.

Marry who you want. Why do you NEED a license or permission from your government to be with someone for the rest of your life? Why do you need to be TAXED for it?

You don’t. That’s my problem. You should have the right to share your life and property with whoever you love. Your life and property are your rights.

Government need not hop in bed with you.

The government is involved because marriage has certain tax benefits, exceptions, exclusions and considerations, as well as changes how property is divided up in court (a governmental organization), among NUMEROUS other ways that your marriage affects your government and how your government must treat you to be fair to your marriage. That is why the government is involved. That’s why you have to register your marriage with them (so they can change how they consider you to account for your new life partner) and why they can deny your request (so you can’t commit some sort of fraud against them). 

Literally all of that can be handled by notarized contract. Government involvement is still not required.

lmao no it can’t. You would need endless amounts of new contracts to deal with every separate institution and situation, and on top of it said institution can then put up a challenge against honoring said contract for whatever reason they might throw forward. I’m pretty sure everyone who has ever uttered “you can do this with a notarized contract”  has no fucking idea how contracts work. Marriage is a government institution, it’s a gigantic contract between all of society backed up by state resources. A wedding/relationship is not. If you want have a wedding go ahead, go nuts, ain’t no one stopping you. Have a friend or your local religious figure pronounce you conjoined life partners. However if you want your partnership recognized as a legal binding that doesn’t require an entire vault of separate contracts to operate, then as people have since ancient Sumeria, you have your relationship recognized and backed up by the state as a marriage.

kilts-and-vodka:

jakebreel:

-milton-friedman:

Hank tells it like it is

Best line of the whole series right there in season one

That entire episode should be mandatory viewing for sjws about how ridiculous they are.

It&#8217;s you, it&#8217;s all of you unironically reblogging this, you&#8217;re also the people who made Dave Chappelle stop doing his show because white people kept not getting the actual point of the jokes and using them in awful ways sometimes. Like y&#8217;all just ignored the fact this entire episode is about Hank and the others all stereotyping Connie&#8217;s family.

kilts-and-vodka:

jakebreel:

-milton-friedman:

Hank tells it like it is

Best line of the whole series right there in season one

That entire episode should be mandatory viewing for sjws about how ridiculous they are.

It’s you, it’s all of you unironically reblogging this, you’re also the people who made Dave Chappelle stop doing his show because white people kept not getting the actual point of the jokes and using them in awful ways sometimes. Like y’all just ignored the fact this entire episode is about Hank and the others all stereotyping Connie’s family.

How Jobs Work
(Scenario 1)
Employer: I have this job available that requires a specific amount of experience and skill. It pays $X per hour.
You: I would like a job and I fit the qualifications. However, $X per hour is not enough.
Employer: I have another job available, but it requires experience and skill that you don't have, according to your resume. If you take the first job, you can get the experience you need to be promoted to the second job where you will get paid more.
You: I can either look for another employer who pays more for my skills and experience, or I can take this job and make do with less until I qualify for the better job. I get to make that choice!
(Scenario 2)
Employer: I have this job available that requires a specific amount of experience and skill. It pays $X per hour.
You: I would like a job and I fit the qualifications. Sure, I'd like to make more than that, but until I get more experience I can make do with this.
Government: Stop right there! Employer, you aren't paying this poor worker enough.
You: But I'm fine working for--
Government: Hush, I know what you need. Employer, pay $Y per hour!
Employer: At $Y per hour, I can only hire half as many employees. This "poor worker" won't get a job, since I can't hire anyone new and will have to fire people who are currently working.
You: Thanks, Government.
Government: You're welcome, citizen!
lmao how delusional do you have to be to believe this? Like the amount of metaphorically forcing a fork into your own eye sockets to be blind to reality just to make this belief work is astounding. Like even on the philosophical level this requires actually believing a single worker who is competing for a position among numerous other people who are just as qualified as them actually as the same bargaining leverage as someone who holds/controls access to large amount of capital. it also requires believing on face value there's actually a perfect equilibrium in the job market between available jobs, workers demanding said jobs, and skill level of each job that is available in contrast to the skill level of each applicant. In reality now, 100 years ago and 1,000 years ago there is always a surplus of low to moderate skilled workers in regards to said jobs available for them, and there is always someone willing to work cheaper even in good economic times, and in actual not la-la land what actually happens is the market would drive down wages like hell.(like what factually happened pre-unions/government regulation. When Ford did his famous $5 a day thing, the average wage was around $2.30 a day for factory work for a 10-12 hour day. That's around $55 a day today which works out to $4.50-$5/hr depending on shift length, and of course that's just the average). Yeah eventually you hit a floor but it's pretty damn low because a lot of people are desperate for work even with government help, let alone in libertarian-topia where you're done fucked if you're laid off and don't find work immediately. I mean basically this requires believing that huge amounts of people must purposely live in poverty to make the market work on an optimal level which maybe means the market is sometimes kind of shitty in certain regards and needs to be regulated because humans are not a bunch of completely rational actors all on a level playing field

The guy who “retired”(some said he got forced about) the other week who use to be the main bottle room attendant was 82. Holy shit, I thought he was like maybe 65. Those bags from the machines are freakin heavy, I can’t even actually really lift them.

polishingmirrors:

oceanicsteam:

polishingmirrors:

lulllllz I just found out today that Ayn Rand died on welfare.

sources 1, 2, 3

What I love the most is a spokesperson for her at the time defending it(the SS and Medicare) by saying essentially “Well medical bills are expensive and Ms. Rand is currently a person of limited income in her older years”

Jeez, really? It’s almost like that’s the fucking point of the programs.

I also read arguments that “she paid into the system, so how can it be hypocritical?” That is literally the case for every person who collects benefits. And yes, OBVIOUSLY they are necessary.

Also being an author who made most of her money off royalties and Objectivism fanboys/fangirls(and mostly from the latter at that), she never really paid into either system as she never had wage work(or on the flip side employed people as wage workers) and hence the payroll taxes that pay for SS and part A of Medicare she never really paid into. But you know, she was a special case, not like those people. The only moral welfare is my welfare, ect.

Nations sorted by the percent of women in their national legislature. In bicameral nations the lower chamber is used for the ranking. Good news everyone, we made the top 90! Full list can be found here. Rwanda currently leads with near 64% of its legislature made up of women, the only country where women make up a majority of a legislature. The runner up, Andorra, has an even split in its 28 member parliament.

Nations sorted by the percent of women in their national legislature. In bicameral nations the lower chamber is used for the ranking. Good news everyone, we made the top 90! Full list can be found here. Rwanda currently leads with near 64% of its legislature made up of women, the only country where women make up a majority of a legislature. The runner up, Andorra, has an even split in its 28 member parliament.

poliscrutiny101:

#SCOTUS  #HobbyLobby @RossDamonC                         

To a lesser extent this is also true in regards to the Senate, and both Scalia and Ginsburg are pretty old, they may retire/pass away in the next 2 years. A Republican controlled Senate might make Obama pick a nominee that is more centrist than he otherwise would choose. Vote.

poliscrutiny101:

  #HobbyLobby @RossDamonC                         

To a lesser extent this is also true in regards to the Senate, and both Scalia and Ginsburg are pretty old, they may retire/pass away in the next 2 years. A Republican controlled Senate might make Obama pick a nominee that is more centrist than he otherwise would choose. Vote.

Basically my response to this is “Yo! Right here!”. I was offered my part time job on the basis of being available whenever, which de facto means anytime between 8am-8pm(technically 11pm but they’ve never had me actually close in the time I’ve been there). I have no idea what my schedule is from week to week, I learn my Sunday-Saturday schedule 2 days beforehand at Friday, after 4pm on Friday, and a few times it wasn’t posted until Saturday. Heck I work 6 days this week and it only adds up to 26 hours, but even when it’s only a 4 hour shift, between getting there and getting home, it leaves a 5-6 hour hole in your day where you know if you want to do anything else you have to work around and it’s a pain. Christ if they’re going to give me so few hours I wish I could just work two 12-13 hour days and have the other 5 days clear to do all the other things I need to do(especially since in my particular case that would leave a lot of open time to do Yale studies for extra money). I actually love when our lot supervisor goes on vacation because he is the one person with a relatively regular schedule and I usually wind up with all his days and it means I get a week straight of a constant 8am-1pm schedule with an actual decent amount of hours. Here’s the text for those who have reached their article limit

A worker at an apparel store at Woodbury Common, an outlet mall north of New York City, said that even though some part-time employees clamored for more hours, the store had hired more part-timers and cut many workers’ hours to 10 a week from 20.

As soon as a nurse in Illinois arrived for her scheduled 3-to-11 p.m. shift one Christmas Day, hospital officials told her to go home because the patient “census” was low. They also ordered her to remain on call for the next four hours — all unpaid.

An employee at a specialty store in California said his 25-hour-a-week job with wildly fluctuating hours wasn’t enough to live on. But when he asked the store to schedule him between 9 a.m. and 2 p.m. so he could find a second job, the store cut him to 12 hours a week.

These are among the experiences related by New York Times readers in more than 440 responses to an article published in Wednesday’s paper about a fledgling movement in which some states and cities are seeking to limit the harshest effects of increasingly unpredictable and on-call work schedules. Many readers voiced dismay with the volatility of Americans’ work schedules and the inability of many part-timers to cobble together enough hours to support their families.

In a comment that was the most highly recommended by others — 307 of them — a reader going by “pedigrees” wrote that workers were often reviled for not working hard enough or not being educated enough. “How can they work more jobs or commit to a degree program if they don’t know what their work schedule will be next week, much less next month?” the reader wrote. “It’s long past time for some certainty for workers. They drive the economy.”

Some readers were shocked by the story of Mary Coleman, who, after an hourlong bus commute, arrived for her scheduled shift at a Popeyes in Milwaukee only to be told to go home without clocking in because the store already had enough employees working. She wasn’t paid for the day.

“What happened to Ms. Coleman should be criminal,” wrote “JenD” of New Jersey in the second-most-recommended comment. “These types of stories sound like they were written by Charles Dickens in the mid-19th century.”

A reader from South Dakota, “JDT,” wrote that he was baffled as to why so many employers created turmoil for their workers by assigning them a different schedule every week, making it hard to juggle their jobs with child care or college.

“As a small-business owner for over 30 years, I have always been able to provide my part-time employees with a firm, steady and predictable schedule,” JDT wrote. “My employees are a vital and important asset. I treat them right, and they do their best for me. It’s so easy … Why can’t big business run by M.B.A.s and highly compensated executives figure that out?”

JDT, whose name is Jim D. Taylor, runs a combined law and real estate firm in Mitchell, S.D. In a follow-up interview, he said: “In a small business, if you’ve scheduled someone to work, there should always be enough to do — you don’t send them home. I don’t know why big business is any different.”

Mr. Taylor said his 26-year-old son, a graduate of Minnesota State University who works at a Target warehouse, had a schedule that bounced around from week to week — 22 hours some weeks, 32 hours others, some day shifts and some night shifts.

“Why is it so hard to schedule someone for regular shifts?” Mr. Taylor asked.

A reader calling himself “Polish Ladies Cleaning Service” wrote that in the housecleaning business, it was “a particularly devilish problem” to maintain predictable schedules for employees. “If a client cancels and there’s no work, there’s no work,” he wrote. “We try to let everyone know ASAP, of course, but there are times when clients do cancel literally at the very last minute!”

In a follow-up interview, David Chou, the spokesman for Polish Ladies Cleaning Service, a company based in Brooklyn, told of a woman with a $19,000-a-month apartment who failed to confirm a housecleaning appointment scheduled for that day. So the company had to tell the scheduled housekeeper she was not needed that morning.

“We try to reschedule the ladies with other clients if that’s possible, but probably about half the times that’s not possible,” Mr. Chou said.

“Mary,” a reader from Atlanta, said it was understandable why so many employers relied on part-time workers. “We do still have issues with supply and demand that make it difficult for some businesses to hire full time (e.g., retail brick-and-mortar stores struggling with seasonal slowdowns and competition from Internet stores),” she wrote.

“How is it so many, and Obama, believe that workers have the right to tell their employer what hours they will work?” she added. “I’m thinking many here need to go to Europe or some other country. See how that works for you. Our government has no right to dictate, only to protect workers from abuse, and part-time is not abuse.”

One reader, a sales employee at an Apple store, complained in a letter that her work schedule varied every week, although she praised Apple’s medical, dental and vision benefits, even for part-timers. In a follow-up interview she said she was essentially required to be available anytime from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. six days a week — she has designated Wednesday as her day off.

“Having to give them that much availability, it means you’re at their mercy,” she said, noting that her husband works Monday through Friday. “You don’t know until the schedule comes out what your life will look like.”

Courtney Moore, a cashier at a Walmart in Cincinnati, said in an interview that she had been assigned about 40 hours a week until she told store management in June that she would begin taking college classes most mornings and some afternoons. She said she asked her manager to put her on the late shift, but to her dismay, the store reduced her to 15 hours a week.

“They said they need someone they could call whenever they need help — and they said I’m not that person,” Ms. Moore said. She said she would prefer being a dedicated full-time employee at Walmart but had to take a second job at McDonald’s instead.

A middle-aged New Yorker who lost his teaching job of two decades because of a budget squeeze in his school district said he had applied for retail jobs and was shocked by what he found.

“You had to be available every minute of every day, knowing you would be scheduled for no more than 29 hours per week and knowing there would be no normalcy to your schedule,” he wrote. “I told the person I would like to be scheduled for the same days every week so I could try to get another job to try to make ends meet. She immediately said, ‘Well, that will end our conversation right here. You have to be available every day for us.’

“I asked, ‘Even though I’m trying to get another job?’ ‘Yes.’ Then she just stared at me and asked me to leave. What kind of company does this? What kind of company will not even let you get another job?”