"Thank you for the laughs"
Bet'cha granny couldn't answer the question. She has stupidity written all over her posts. HA-HA-HA HA
"This is not new territory."
Being fired for violence in the workplace wouldn't be picked up on a criminal background check unless the person was arrested. If the person was arrested and convicted, the jurisdiction let him/her go. We get back to the original argument i made involving criminal background checks, and the argument i made over circumstances and juries.
Not arguing against background checks. Questioning the value of their absence in theoretical cases like these. Started to look, don't have the time. You might want to go to the American bar association site and pick up from here, Workplace Violence, particularly the 3rd & 4th points down. Haven't read any of it, at least not yet.
"This Note provides an overview of an employer's duty to provide a safe working environment, and in particular looks at:
• Various laws that can impose liability after an incident of workplace violence.
• Granting leave to victims of workplace violence.
• Employment references for employees with known violent tendencies.
• Laws to consider when taking steps to minimize workplace violence."
"...the cost to defend could put a small employer out of business."
Again, the cost to defend is borne by the insurance carrier. If a small business owner doesn't carry insurance they shouldn't be in business. Forget criminal, there are so many ways to get sued in this litigious society, and wind up losing your business, your home, your sobriety. I've advocated overhauling the system for years but Americans, when they are on a jury, like to overlook the facts in favor of handing out large sums of money to plaintiffs who are like themselves. That's one point in Van's favor by the way. Emboldening a criminal is a pretty weak argument imo. It takes an already bold personality to be one. Not gonna read any of the others i see you posted, too much to do, nothing personal. Maybe in the evening if there are new ones and one of the people i do read gets involved with you.
"In todays world"
Today's world is an awful lot different than it was in the time frame i was referencing. Yeah, i imagine you can sue today but that doesn't mean you win. It'll depend on more circumstances than simply no dd, and it will depend on a jury. Then on the appeals process.
A good attorney for the covering carrier argues the perp was let out of jail early on parole, the governing authority found him/her no longer a danger to society. They allowed the perp to walk the streets among us. Who's at fault? It was determined no longer a danger to society and deemed required to get a job. By the way, denny, don't you carry insurance on your business? The carrier provides the defense as part of the contracted obligation. The carrier provides it because they are really defending themselves. Back to situation in question. Really, who's at fault?
Lose and it goes to appeal. I, being the business owner's carrier, then sue the state, city, town, whatever, for deeming the perp no longer a threat to society, and it's their fault. How many millions of lawsuits against towns, cities, states would be opened up along the same lines you're arguing. Every time a paroled perp commits a crime against society the victim goes and sues the jurisdictional authority for letting the perp go. Total nightmare, so much worse than the courts face now. Certainly jurisdictional authorities must already have in place protection for themselves.
A perp that served the full time, paid dues to society and required to get a job. Under your scenario, if every business did the dd and discovered criminality no former prisoner would ever be able to get a job. Even if "just" a reformed drug addict. Who knows what a hop head might do when juiced. 50% recidivism for hardcore drugs.
Needs a lot more research before being argued, both your stance and mine. I have no idea what statutes may already be in place for such situations.
"...how much you got in your account at the end of the year?"
Ok, looks like you're gonna need the weekend to figure out the answer. Try not to spend the whole weekend on it. You probably need some rest and diversion from the tough week that just passed by. If you can't solve it be the end of the weekend try contacting a good 2nd grade teacher who should be able to help you. Not for just this one problem but for others you'll come across in the future.
You'll need all the help you can get to secure a comfortable retirement for yourself. Unless you intend to work to your life's end of course. If you can't learn how to handle these type problems then working to life's end may not be a choice but a necessity for you. Ciao.
"...father's drunken putz into that dancing stripper for a mother."
Please, no one here wants to know your life's story. Trying to turn me into some kind of twin brother pustule to yourself isn't gonna work. Go cry somewhere else. I have no sympathy for you.
This hillaryman isn't a man, it's a clown, a buffoon, a real idiot, doesn't climb even to the level of hillary's trasero. No wonder i've never read it before. Just i can't figure out if it's another piece of guano's mote of a dustbrain or it's the lanceturd. Ahhh, no difference. Any idiotic American visiting the place and not figuring he/she will be a propaganda target, whether they've actually done anything "wrong" or not, is an idiot and deserves no sympathy. Any idiot who believes those people are not idiots and announces such a belief is surely a self-proclaimed idiot. Please, go there yourself and try to free them since you have so much sympathy your heart breaks for them.
I know of no employers who make a job offer before a background check of some sort."
I know the company for which i worked would hire you before they go the results of any background check. In fact, i'm not sure they actually did a background check, except perhaps for higher level employees. I know of one case where as department manager somebody who had been hired by the manager before me told me personally many years later that they had lied about their education on the application. The person hadn't even graduated high school or gotten a ged. The eligibility requirements for all company positions included one of the two. Relatively small company, 1500 people at its peak.
The people i hired when i ran my own. the 3 businesses i had, i'd already known well in the industry for years. I didn't run any checks. Right or wrong, it wouldn't have made any difference to me what i found out.
"How much you got in your account at the end of the year?"
Again, and i'll fully repeat the question just in case you didn't understand it clearly the first and 2nd times, how much you got in your account at the end of the year?
"The employer if small could be very intimidated."
Could be if didn't know his/her rights. An offer can be made contingent on a background check proving out ok. Plus there's a probationary period where an employee may be dismissed without cause. Qualifications or not. As an employer you would not want to dismiss an employee who met or exceeded your qualifications. Otherwise why waste your time having any and going through another interview process.
I'll argue there is no need for you to know about an applicant's criminal background for the same reason i've argued for decades there is no good reason for a suspect of criminal activity have their name published until indicted, the method last i saw was adhered to in england. It's none of your business until it is your business, and a person's reputation can be tainted before it is any of your business to be apprised.
Whites commit more crimes than blacks. By far. Check the crime stats. But you'll have no need to be distressed by that for too much longer. I forget how far off whites will be a minority, as they were when they first came to what is now these United States.
Now, more important, do you think the uk should stay in the eu?
You might consider treatment for illogical thought. What's your point when it comes to your flawed investment theories, the raison d'être for a stock chat board? Can't take the heat on that, move to a different room. If i was narcissistic i wouldn't admit my errors as often as i make them. You can't admit to any of yours. Can't admit them to even yourself. Who's the narcissist?
Now, you want to answer the original question instead of avoiding the subject so you won't have to face yourself in the mirror, much less face everyone else here, including me? How much you got in your account at the end of the year?
Lol, the thumb down. Got an argument to go with it or just a stupid popularity play? I don't look to be popular, just to put out what i think i know and what i don't, and learn from the feedback. An idiot's td is useless other than an indication someone is an idiot. Should be an indication to the idiot itself that it's an idiot.
From march 18:
"Might see some minor correction over the next week, we have gone through a 4 week positive stretch, but then we get toward tax deadline and from what i recall, i once did a study, like the week leading up to tax day and much of the week after were up periods through the years. After that though, usually got a moderate correction backward."
So far that's all worked out the way the odds favored it would. The first week of january, usually a bull week, is not the only pretty predictable, though not infallible, period of the year. I just hope the "moderate correction" theme holds. Get a severe correction and i'd have to change my june prediction based on my perception of fundamentals. Fundies say to me no reason for a severe correction. At least not yet. Let's see what the employment report says. The $ deterioration might even bring some international trade opportunities and have economic activity pick up at a faster pace. Lord knows we can use it.
With that, there's something else that has historical odds of the last several years favoring what will happen. Mtg. Get euphoria, or at least close to it, sell those covered calls. Out of the money so you don't get disappointed if out of the money gets to in the money. By that time you'll have made a decent profit on the stock from where you were when you sold those calls. Get market player depression, buy those calls back with a decent profit at least from the options trades if not the stock itself. Don't know options, never too late to learn. At least the basic plays.
Just noticed the thread heading being different. My advice was to you. Mgt doesn't need advice. They are earning enough money for themselves.
"...Oil and MEMP can stay strong into the close..."
How much of memp is oil and how much is the $? In reality, how much of oil over the past week or two has been based on the deterioration of the $? For how long more will the $ deteriorate? Me, i'm still looking for a fed rate increase in june, have been for many months now and haven't changed over that time. Only a weak employment report or two will get me to change, though if june comes and goes without a rate increase that'd get me to change as well 8 ).
"so now you are stuck with a criminal"
Wrong. So very wrong. If you were an employer you'd know that.
"...you as the employer declines the applicant after you made the offer now that you know a criminal background and guess what , you just bought a law suit."
None but a shyster lawyer would waste his/her time taking the case off that reason alone, and the shyster, if he/she's got any brains at all, would demand payment up front from the complainant because he/she knows none is gonna come from anywhere else. If you were an employer you would know that.
I chose to read you this morning, i certainly do my best to stay away from guano but sometimes that's the only entertainment around when i need a bit of a diversion. Your denny side, or section, of what you call a brain fighting again with the guano section of what you call a brain? How you doing with the other personalities inside that speck of dust?
Back to the criminal record thing. What do you think is the reasoning behind obama not wanting you to have the details of criminal activity before you, as an employer, and a prospective employer of the applicant, at least made an offer?
"...a better policy to suggest?"
I already have here. A number of times. One basic idea. Don't fall in love with a fund just as you shouldn't fall in love with a stock. Don't be afraid to constantly critique whatever you bought into.
You think pro investors hold onto something when they find something they think is better, that they stick themselves onto something forever? I don't mean day trading type changes, i mean constantly evaluating holdings, their fundamentals and performance, stand alone and in comparison with other issues of like type. They don't let themselves get stuck by emotion, the love of an issue and fear of finding something better out there. The reason for there being the possibility of that fear you should be able to figure out for yourself so don't just dismiss the idea as rubbish.
If they find something they believe is better they go get it. They don't get hung up on whether their previous decision was right or wrong though they take away from wrong decisions lessons learned. As they do from correct decisions. Can't learn a lesson and become a better investor if you're not willing to teach yourself one.
"West Virginia workers know it is awful work"
Wow, you're really on a roll tonight. Yup on the coal workers ( and the other things). And they knew it well before they got to this (US) country. Coal's had a good run of human use, something like 6,000 years. Time for it to stop polluting the air we breathe.
Ever catch the movie, 'how green was my valley'? Some day i've gotta read the book. Maybe if there's a heaven. As for denny, he'll never get the chance if he waits for the afterlife. He'll be too busy shoveling the stuff where he's going. And denny's guano side. Since guano totally believes in the bible as i recall, you'd think it'd be scared enough to follow it and avoid an eternity in the burning coal pits.
"I'm in this to add 7.9% yearly to my tax-free IRA,..."
Then you're deluding yourself thinking you get 7.9% when 1/2 of that is simply your own money returned to you. Like saying you've got $100 in the bank, they give you a 7.9% payment for the year, but $3.95 is taken from the $100 you had in the bank. You then put the payment you got back in the bank. How much do you have at year's end?
I'll make i simple for you, multiple choice from among 3 possible answers below
a - $107.90
b - $103.95
c - neither of the above
If you actually get the right answer, plug it back in and then tell me how much cash your account appreciated over the year, then tell me how much of a % return you really got.
Hopefully for your sake, and doubtful it won't happen, just when the change commences i can't say, it doesn't continue that way much longer, 1/2 your own money being given back to you as part of the dividend payment. Hopefully they return to where they can earn the full distribution they pay. But at least open your eyes in the meantime.