I wonder how much it affects libraries that I can also walk a block in any direction and find a Little Free Library in one of my neighbor’s front yards. These certainly don’t replace the need for libraries, but I’d also have to pass up a lot of free books on my way to the library if I ever ran out of reading material.
Honestly, I doubt those affect things very much. I think I have seen decent stuff maybe once or if every 20 times I walk by a little free library. I am generally looking for a specific book when going to the library or getting an ebook from there.
I can understand not being to find a family. I can understand being unable to afford an individual burial service. But all human beings deserve to get one.
The good people taking care of this, join hands with those who have taken care of it for thousands of years. Because it’s the right thing. Recognizing that many of the silenced were given journeys that they could not prepared for or did not choose. Ask not for whom the bell tolls.
Imagine being upset about a ceremony showing some dignity to 302 people held by clergy, firemen, members of the king county medical office and some members of the public.
302 dead people shown the smallest amount of humanity and grace by a grand sum of 40 members of the city staff and public for 1 day/year, and yall pissy about the $0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000001/person it may or may not have cost to hold the ceremony.
Your namesake would have gladly whooped your ass for your shameful statement.
I simply asked questions and I get accused of being upset? you must be an absolute hoot at parties Mr. Short Trigger!
please, regale us with more tales of the fascinating insights into the inner working of your thought process. can your false dichotomy convert the unbelievers?
this may come as a surprise to you, but asking questions is how we learn. yes, imagine that. now, imagine how much someone is going to learn when they ask questions but instead get a flood of hateful responses. zero. zero is how much they’ll learn. perhaps they’ll just stop giving a rat’s ass about the issue, hmm?
perhaps you’ve heard that saying “there’s no such thing as a free lunch”? no one works for free, not in Seattle. land, regardless of it’s use, is a limited resource. so, how much did it cost us? I bet it was a lot.
If I ask a question and get a ton of heated responses, I’d at least try to take some time to consider why that might be, so I’d potentially learn something regardless of my interlocutor’s reply or my initial emotional response. It’s possible they’re just wrong, but it’s also possible that I’m wrong. And if angry replies kept me from learning anything online, I don’t think I’d learn much here at all.
Ohh, you’ve moved on from directly hateful snark directed at the homeless to playing at being incredibly stupid instead. I’d say I’m suprised, but I’m really not.
You “bet it was a lot” in terms of the city budget of Seattle, one of the largest metropolises in the United states, and to some degree the world, to bury 302 people in a single grave after the medical examiner did their legally required job? You think the city should have instead just left 302 dead bodies laying around? Y’all really going to play at being this stupid, to argue that Seattle taxpayers would be better off stepping over the dead instead of burying the deceased at a cost that was very clearly absolutely nothing in terms of our yearly budget?
You’re really going to carry on with this incredibly dumb premise that you’re just a big idiot that earnestly thinks a single grave stone and 2hr memorial was a budget busting expensive for our 4 million+ populated metro area?
This is just sad man. Playing at an idiot instead of a hateful piece of shit doesnt save you any amount of face.
Cool! I mean with the amount of money it was generating it seems like a no brainer to offer even a little assistance for businesses. I wasn’t aware of the soda tax!
It was a pretty big deal. Most grocery stores bitched about it and protested by giving an explanation of why sugary soda cost more. The beverage companies then got together and made sure a soda tax could not happen in the rest of the state. They framed it as making sure that grandma could afford her groceries. She can afford her soda now but probably not her necessary diabetes medication.
I’d love to know how affective those preventative taxes are for reducing consumption. Same thing happened with tobacco products across the country and now people are still using tobacco at high rates but just complaining about the cost.
I don’t know if there’s good data on the sugary drinks tax yet, but tobacco taxes have absolutely greatly reduced tobacco use. www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3228562/From the intro of that article:
Tobacco taxation, passed on to consumers in the form of higher cigarette prices, has been recognized as one of the most effective population-based strategies for decreasing smoking and its adverse health consequences
Thanks for linking this! That’s cool to see that it’s an effective deterrent, but also looks like it might not change the behavior of long term users.
However, there is a striking lack of evidence about the impact of increasing cigarette prices on smoking behavior in heavy/long-term smokers, persons with a dual diagnosis and Aboriginals
Starting in the 1940s, many U.S. cities were banning activities like pinball machines, under the argument that they were bilking coins from children. The machines were associated with gambling (because early forms of these machines were gambling devices), and in turn, they were tied to organized crime. That was the situation in Seattle, where suppliers of pinball machines and jukeboxes were suspected of blowing up each other’s warehouses, and threatening elected officials and public figures. Instead of banning the machines, Seattle set up a fee system to control them.
Had no idea that the pinball industry was so cutthroat back in the day.
Or are you not aware of the caliber of disaster
Indicated by the presence of a pool table pinball machine in your community
Well, ya got trouble my friend
...Trouble
Right here in River City Seattle
With a capital "T" and that rhymes with "P" and that stands for pinball
My DoorDasher picked up my order the other day and went to a mall parking lot and sat there for an hour until the order was cancelled since DD couldn’t get ahold of them. They presumably ate it. They should be deactivated. Bad workers shouldn’t get extra protections.
Right to work doesn’t apply to contractors. You have a contract.
If you get deactivated without cause, sue.
edit: Right to work lets employees be fired without cause. Contracts can’t be breached as easily so deactivation without cause isn’t legal. Suing is easy. File a complaint with your state labor board or department of labor. The gig corp will want to settle so precedent doesn’t get set in court and lead to a big class action.
I did this to Instacart when they violated state labor laws They asked to settle. Mediation is next week so no idea yet how much they will settle for. 40k is the average for these types of cases.
edit 2: I was mixing up right to work with at will employment. My point stands though. Contractors aren’t employees and can’t be terminated without cause. Deactivating a contractor when they haven’t done anything to violate the terms of the contract is a breach of contract .
It’s actually easy. I sued Instacart for something similar.
Lodged a complaint with the state. Instacart asked to settle. Didn’t cost me a dime.
They know they’re in the wrong. It’s cheaper for them to settle. Even if they have billions they don’t want a big lawsuit. If they lose a lawsuit instead of settling out of court it sets precedent that could end their whole gig economy bullshit in a big class action.
Right to work refers specifically to laws that make mandatory union membership illegal. It has absolutely nothing to do with at-will employment, termination, or anything relevant here.
Again, that is not what 'right to work' means. You are talking about 'at-will' employment, which is a completely different topic that is essentially unrelated.
'Right to work' has to do with not being required to be in a Union in order to get a job (ie, you have a right to work at a location whether you're in the union or not).
Right to work is bullshit and definitely helped in gutting the unions, but, I'm not sure how that has to do with anything to do with gig workers at all.
Do a quick Google search for "right to work vs at will employment" because you've got them mixed up.
Additionally, the gig folks don't have a contract that protects them and they're being classified as contractors when (it's being argued) they shouldn't be. That's literally the issue.
It doesn't; this guy is just unaware of what 'right to work' means (admittedly, it's a deliberately obtuse name), and seems to have no willingness to entertain the possibility that he might not know something.
My point was contractors cannot be fired at will, even in right to work states where regular employees can be.
So, deactivating gig workers without cause is a breach of contract. Which you can easily sue for. And these assholes know they’re wrong, so they will want to settle out of court. You don’t even need a lawyer.
Any competent contractor will include a termination clause in their contract. I have signed many contracts, and every single one had language to terminate the contract under some specific circumstances.
Especially with a big company like uber they can bury a favorable termination clause somewhere in the contract, and you can’t exactly negotiate with an app if the terms aren’t to your liking.
Companies have lawyers who get paid handsomely to write language to let them get away with things. There’s no way they would be deactivating contractors if it was opening them up to significant liabilities.
kuow.org
Hot