Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 59
Thanks Tree33Thanks

Thread: The Social Media Unemployment Line

  1. #41
    Veteran Member Southern Dad's Avatar
    Joined
    Feb 2015
    Posts
    27,288
    Thanks
    5995

    From
    Walking the Fine Line
    Quote Originally Posted by johnflesh View Post
    Yep, you think you're unfireable. Best delusion ever.
    I never said that but thank you for posting a little flame bait. I'm actually looking forward to retiring, hopefully soon.

  2. #42
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    13,386
    Thanks
    3592

    From
    AK

    The Social Media Unemployment Line

    Quote Originally Posted by johnflesh View Post
    The control comes from the probability that action will be taken - and that fact alone is being argued. And with a whole thread of examples, it's common sense to common sense folks that action will be taken. Where there is a threat of action, there is control.
    Are there any examples of things done purely in private that are resulting in termination? Peoples houses being bugged, computers being hacked, by their employers and then those private things are made public by the employer as an excuse to terminate them?

    Posting things publicly online with your identity publicly visible is not something done in private. It is done with the intention to be public.
    Thanks from Redwood and Kontrary

  3. #43
    Veteran Member MaryAnne's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    36,344
    Thanks
    26388

    From
    Englewood,Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by Neomalthusian View Post
    Meaning people shouldn't be fired for chirping like idiots in social media, or meaning people shouldn't chirp like idiots as much as they do?
    The second one.

  4. #44
    Established Member Redwood's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    6,718
    Thanks
    4301

    From
    Ohio
    Quote Originally Posted by PACE View Post
    And clearly this is why:


    https://apps.americanbar.org/litigat...authentic.html

    comments on social media meet the traditional description of evidence in a court of law.
    Right. If you are a self employed Plumber.. no problemo. If you Tweet/facebook by a name that won't obviously link to you.. probably safe. If you are paid by TAXPAYERS (especially a TEACHER) BE VERY CAREFUL.

  5. #45
    Worst Person on the Site Yeti 8 Jungle Swing Champion, YetiSports 4 - Albatross Overload Champion, YetiSports7 - Snowboard FreeRide Champion, Alu`s Revenge Champion boontito's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    78,746
    Thanks
    52149

    From
    out of nowhere!
    Fox Sports Reporter Emily Austen Fired After 'Insensitive Comments' About Race | Bleacher Report

    Fox Sports cut ties with Tampa Bay Rays and Orlando Magic sideline reporter Emily Austen after she made "insensitive comments" on a Facebook live stream with Barstool Sports, per Tom Jones of the Tampa Bay Times.

    Austen called Cleveland Cavaliers forward Kevin Love "a little bitch" several times, noted she "didn't even know Mexicans were that smart" and said the "Chinese guy is always the smartest guy in math class."


    -----

    It's 2016 and this stuff just keeps happening.

  6. #46
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    28,484
    Thanks
    3446

    Quote Originally Posted by Steam Heat View Post
    All it would take for any reasonable employer to kick your ass to the curb would be a few minutes looking at your posts here on PH. Your filthy habits of abusing the welfare system and putting down those who apply for welfare benefits speak VOLUMES about your character (or lack thereof).
    There is no question that the government promotes welfare and does not go out of its way to make sure recipients aren't able bodied, unattached, LAZY losers.

    Welfare for those who are truly needy is called a safety net.

    Welfare for others needs to be strictly challenged and controlled.

    Welfare should not be a lifestyle choice.

  7. #47
    Scucca Ęthelfrith's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,924
    Thanks
    1090

    Quote Originally Posted by kmiller1610 View Post
    There is no question that the government promotes welfare and does not go out of its way to make sure recipients aren't able bodied, unattached, LAZY losers.

    Welfare for those who are truly needy is called a safety net.

    Welfare for others needs to be strictly challenged and controlled.

    Welfare should not be a lifestyle choice.
    The US has a highly efficient welfare system (i.e. maximises the $ going to the genuine poor), but also an inefficient one (i.e. minimises the $ going to reducing poverty). That reflects nonsense over 'welfare dependency', rather than genuine concern over poverty
    Thanks from Panzareta and NightSwimmer

  8. #48
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Feb 2011
    Posts
    13,386
    Thanks
    3592

    From
    AK
    Quote Originally Posted by Ęthelfrith View Post
    The US has a highly efficient welfare system (i.e. maximises the $ going to the genuine poor), but also an inefficient one (i.e. minimises the $ going to reducing poverty).
    Maybe you should delineate your "welfare efficiency" measure, given it doesn't convey much to call something "highly efficient" and "inefficient" at the same time. Trying to loft up pontificating paradoxical statements that will send eager young minds into a deep state of contemplation? How about just speak clearly: what are you actually saying an efficient welfare system would literally do?

    That reflects nonsense over 'welfare dependency', rather than genuine concern over poverty
    Try restating this, except semi-intelligibly this time.
    Last edited by Neomalthusian; 18th June 2016 at 10:21 PM.

  9. #49
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    28,484
    Thanks
    3446

    Quote Originally Posted by Ęthelfrith View Post
    The US has a highly efficient welfare system (i.e. maximises the $ going to the genuine poor), but also an inefficient one (i.e. minimises the $ going to reducing poverty). That reflects nonsense over 'welfare dependency', rather than genuine concern over poverty
    The Economist did a series on public sector spending and found that the majority of spending benefited the middle class. I was surprised.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy

  10. #50
    Veteran Member Dutch's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    34,673
    Thanks
    6657

    From
    Middle of nowhere Arkansas
    Quote Originally Posted by One View Post
    And yet some people believe an employer should have control over what you do while not on their time.
    Nice to be retired so I don't have to deal with this silly bs.
    If you're a professional it's a matter of ethics.

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Social Media in Law Enforcement
    By Southern Dad in forum Current Events
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: 29th July 2015, 05:22 PM
  2. Social Media:
    By BruceTLaney in forum Current Events
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 12th November 2014, 11:24 AM
  3. Social media spanks Ann Coulter
    By Davocrat in forum Current Events
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 14th May 2014, 02:06 PM
  4. Media and the Social Security Debate
    By Babba in forum Journalism
    Replies: 260
    Last Post: 24th April 2012, 02:47 PM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed