adespoton

On Lemmy you’ve got a strong socialist faction. Unlikely to vote for Trump, but may vote for someone else or not vote at all.

The phone isn’t going to end up in China from people passing them hand to hand; they’re going to be collected somewhere and bundled for shipping in an EM-protected covering of some sort. The record of the route they took right up until they go silent will be available for every phone. Looking at an aggregate map of this data should give the police a pretty good idea of what’s going on.

I suspect the difficulty is that the police need to get a data release from each individual involved and then get Google/Apple and/or the owners to voluntarily share the historical location data with the police… which most people aren’t willing to do out of an abundance of caution.

I don’t know why I didn’t draw the Vizzini parallel myself before now; it’s not perfect, but does fit a surprisingly large portion of not just who Trump is, but also how he sees himself.

But he really wants to be seen as Prince Humperdink AND the six fingered man. And Vance is his Igor.

Also, relying on relatives is a way of circumventing freedom of movement. It keeps everyone in the same place, at the same low paying jobs, with no hope of improving their or their children’s situation in life. Which is also perfectly in line with the Republican playbook.

“Please beware,” he went on, “that this legal exposure extends to Lawyers, Political Operatives, Donors, Illegal Voters, & Corrupt Election Officials. Those involved in unscrupulous behavior will be sought out, caught, and prosecuted at levels, unfortunately, never seen before in our Country.”

What people don’t quite grasp is that he means exactly what he says.

He considers, for example, being a lawyer to be “unscrupulous behavior”. As is donating to anyone but himself. Or voting for anyone but him.

Probably less?

Thing about people like Trump and Musk is they think they’re special and can handle themselves fine without an attorney. And they can’t stop talking.

To me it sounds more like they have a dying business and want to hide this fact from the employees for as long as possible.

I worked for one of these once. And one of my skills is in retaining co-workers. Eventually we ended up with a bad credit rating, nobody would invest in the company, and the company couldn’t afford to keep the lights on AND pay its debts. It made/sold a great product that the market wanted, but some bad years racked up bad debt that the owners couldn’t get out from under.

So, eventually those of us who were left just wrote our own pink slips, got the owner to sign them, and nobody went back to work the next day. Owner sold off everything of value to cover as much debt as possible and declared bankruptcy.

Then they partnered with someone else and started a new debt-free company and hired back a lot of the same employees (it WAS a fun place to work when we weren’t having to worry about if we were going to be paid that month).

I went somewhere else instead, where my starting wage was 3x what I’d been getting at the other place, with options for bonuses and raises.

I’ll bite.

Don’t make it related to pay. Make them WANT to work there, and then put a bunch of employment requirements into the contract that sound reasonable but can’t all be done AND accomplish the job.

At that point, all your employees are in breach of contract and you can just investigate and fire anyone who doesn’t seem to be providing value.

You’ll get a few people who position themselves as unfireable anyway, and some people who it will be difficult to prove they broke the contract. And if you fire people too often, you’ll again have retention issues.

Maybe the value of your business isn’t as much as you think it is, or you’re not charging enough for what you sell….

It’d be more coherent then.

Depends on how many ants and lions were present.

Do we? Has he firmly committed to not being there?