Your comment was written by AI. We have equivalent evidence.
SmilingSolaris
I love how when a scheme like this fails people like you act like it succeeded in your rhetoric. Very silly billy ain't ya
Spent your whole life as a kid talking about how the old people are outta touch. Now your the middle aged guy and think you shit gold. Classic, happens every generation.
Idk how to respectfully say this, but you are being so vengeful toward religion that you forgot the intersectionality of gender and sex to that equation. This is not to invalidate your feelings, but that I find your statement invalidating a large part of this topic for no reason.
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.
Lick lick lick slurp is all I see with this comment.
Clinton went, biden didn't. Also "Clinton, and Biden". What that comma for?
As always!
I love the paranoia of you nerds. It's valid but idk how you spare the effort.
It's the principle of it.
That's funny