SmilingSolaris

"I don't know if I'm good or evil. Stupid words, anyway... But I'm trying to be gentle to others and hard on myself. I know how to sympathize and not judge. I try to love whoever I touch. That's the only answer I have."

• pathologic 2

https://www.gao.gov/

Creating a second department to do something there already is a department for so you can have funni name is peak efficiency.

Here's your argument then. The very nature of the relationship between worker and boss under current capitalist economics is inherently exploitative. To further use that leveraged position as a cudgel when a worker does not use a gift you give them in the exact way you wanted is morally evil. The money is budgeted, the intent is irrelevant.

Defending this is a defense of a evil action in an inherently oppressive and exploitative situation already. Only someone who has done similar, or someone who feels the need to become the devils advocate would defend it. Neither of those people deserve to have their opinion respected, just as they, you, don't respect the workers position or the scummyness of the action itself.

This argument will not convince you, because you have already sided with the boot and your tongue is glued to it.

Oh ho ho, looks like we got a haaaaard worker over here. Yeah dude, I'm a trust fund baby 10 million dollar loan from my father to open my professional esport beenie baby collection company that I hired someone else to run and yet still have an adversity to bootlicking bosses.

Or, I'm a regular guy who also still hates bootlicking abused of power.

Lick lick slurp slurp but it sounds to me like you moved on from the boot ifyouknowwhatimsayin.

It's crazy to see people justify this. I wonder how they'd feel getting microscoped at work until fired. There's always a cause if your scummy enough.

Lick lick lick slurp is all I see with this comment.

I love the paranoia of you nerds. It's valid but idk how you spare the effort.

Same... Do people hate me?

I just find it neat that former and current "communist" (broad term for this) countries have a high level of home ownership. People largely like to pretend that under communism you own nothing, while in reality, nations who even for a brief period of aspiring to communism had given what were peasants who didn't own their own shirt a whole ass house and let them own it. No rent, No payment. Just supplied it.

It's neato. An interesting statistic that dispels partially the myth that (what the OP said I think, it may have been another person) that communism never built wealth for anyone. It did at times. Just not in the way we normally like to view it. The american dream to own your own home.

But I am not willing to sit and argue every minute detail of this explanation. Such as when one person said "not a single one is communist" Which while technically true, is not worth the time to discuss with someone who is just using a very common bait.