"You know, the money in your wallet, in your bank account, and on your credit cards. Well, that is not *your* money, it is *God's* money. And God needs his money *back*."
" atheism is a position that arises in the context of theistic beliefs. "
Well, kinda. When the first Australopithecus pointed at the sky and grunted to indicate some other Australopithecus up there was making lightning, and another Australopithecus scratched its head and snorted to ask "Are you fucking kidding?", atheism was born.
That's not necessarily true when you apply it to every word instead of using it to highlight key points...... because it just looks plain stupid capitalizing the entirety, as it serves no useful distinctive purpose. 🤭
That's absurd. Hellenic greek skeptics in 600 BC were not responding to anyone's belief in Jesus. And my non-belief in Vishnu is just like yours; it's not a response to Hinduism, it's based on an evaluation of what I think is true about the world.
Well it's a good thing atheists don't actually do that then, isn't it? Non believers don't define themselves "in opposition to" Christians or theists, any more than most of us define our belief in a round earth "in opposition to" flat earthers. Their ideology is not why I think the earth is round, and probably not why you think it's round either. Well, same thing here. Your theology is not why I think there are no gods.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑠 𝐴𝐺𝑁𝑂𝑆𝑇𝐼𝐶𝐼𝐶𝐼𝑆𝑀
I'm not trying to find a 'neutral positoin.' I'm trying to find the one best supported by the evidence. The evidence tells me the earth is round. History and experimentation tell me that flat earthism has not only failed to produce accurate or useful knowledge of how the world behaves, but when it tries, it is less accurate than the round earth view. So I reject it as provisionally incorrect. As with flat earthism, so too with god and gods. Theism has failed to produce accurate or useful knowledge about how the world behaves, and when it tries, it does worse than nontheistic, nondeistic theories. So I reject it as provisionally incorrect. In the equation F= ma + kG where G is the theistic intervention of God, the most accurate emprical value for k we can derive is 0. So we just drop any such God term; it is useless and inaccurate. And the same is true for literally every equation in science.
No, it does not. But that is the nature of bureaucracy. It costs a lot of money to support it, and its tendency is to expand itself to justify the support which justifies the expansion of the money needed to support it..
It is easy to make the determination because the evidence is there. Faced with the permit request from the city, the church asked the food vendors to cover it. My determination is that this was ethically wrong, and probably contractually wrong too. It doesn't matter what the morality or legality of the city's request to the church is, in shaking down the food vendors to get it, the church did wrong.
What determination about *the church's request to the food vendors* do you make?
Or, are you telling me that you are unable, as in not capable of, coming to a conclusion about the church's response until someone gives you an exact accounting of how the city arrived at that fee?
Since you've asked this question nearly two dozen times, I'll provide you with an answer. I don't know. I haven't seen the math of the wear and tear on a road and the cost of maintenance, traffic analysis and other factors that go into the city's fee structure. I'm sure you could ask them since it seems to matter so much to you.
No one else cares, because it's not relevant to the point. If the church wants to contest the city's fee structure, more power to them. The point is the church made a mistake and expects other people to pay for it rather than take responsibility for it themselves.
Why don't you bother to get the right city? It clearly states in the article that this is in Vancouver, *Washington*. In the U.S. not Vancouver, B.C. in Canada. It should have also been a giveaway that the fees listed on that page in no way add up to the fee mentioned in the article.
You're so desperate to show that someone you don't like is a hateful idiot, you're not doing *your* research.
I didn't make the mistake and of course the math doesn't add up. And your assumptions are faulty. It's 424 for a daily trip, not one trip. But more importantly, 424*333 is over a $114,000, so obviously the numbers in the paper's article are not the whole story.
And there you demonstrate the point. Trying to get someone else to pay for your mistakes.
You might also look up the word relevant, since you don't seem to know what it means.
I heard recently a business that owns several apartment buildings had one of their own property managers steal rent money. Now the business is expecting the tenants to pay it again even though they did nothing wrong.
Legally they don't because they gave their rent to an employee. But practically they will either directly or through higher rents next year. Heaven forbid a business take a financial hit for their mistake when they can pass it along to people who really don't have other options.
Religion. I was raised (reluctantly) in a Christian church (until age 14 when I announced to my father that I would no longer be attending) and even then I knew what a scam it was. But, having that background and realizing their trend to be massive hypocrites, this does not surprise me at all.
I'm an atheist and glad to be nowadays-- for many more reasons.
Far more accurate would be unrealistic 𝑐ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ expectations, i.e. the church's expectations that rules don't apply to them because Christian Fucking Privilege.
How many municipal staff does it take to quantify the monetary cost of increased traffic flow? None, they just pull a number out of their wild donkey. El Jefe better leave soon before it is hit with an EPA fine.
"This was the church’s mistake. It’s the church’s job to fix it."
Hahahaha! Oh man, good one. Churches don't *fix* problems, especially not ones they caused. I wonder how many of the churchy folks who made this decision are members of the 'party of personal responsibility'. All, I expect.
I don't think they can charge a fee, after the fact, that was not part of the original agreement. This church is trying to shift the burden onto small businesses who didn't create the problem.
I was thinking the same thing, unless it was a month by month they can't just change the deal. Until it reaches the SC and they rule in the churches favor, of course.
It's actually $424 for 365 vehicles making one trip, or one vehicle making 365 trips, since it's daily trips. So the question should be "Is $1.27 for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
Of course, that's before the 30% and 15% percent discounts are applied so the question should be "Is $.69 for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
But, that's before the bill was revised and cut in half so the question should be "Is about 35 cents for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
That site is for Vancouver, Canada and this is Vancouver, Washington, fyi. I missed it too until I tried to look up the address. Presumably, all the trucks have their vendor and health dept licenses but this is a land use permit that the church had to apply for, according to the article. I think I can agree that it would be fair to pass on some of the cost to the vendors but that isn't really the point. The point is the church didn't do their research, agreed to a price, signed a lease agreement, and now want to go back on the deal. Also, $1500 x 5 trucks x 12 mo = $90,000. Twice what the permit cost.
I was going to say the same thing, but thinking about it, there's never anyone at the grocery end door, but occasionally there is someone at the pharmacy end door. At my Walmart, anyway.
Everybody else expects a tip, why not landlords. (Sorry, I'm a little annoyed with 'tipping culture'. AFAIC, tipping should be reserved for exemplary service, not expected as an augment to someone's (maybe) minimum wage job.)
All those little screens at restaurants, cafes, etc. that have varying tip "suggestions" for you to tap on.
Emotional blackmail much? I don't pay a tip when I pay at the counter. Tipping is reserved for being seated, ordering, getting my food and being presented with my cheque after the meal. Then it's 1 dollar for every 5.
Some years ago some friends dragged me out to dinner at a snooty French restaurant. After the first course, our waiter came around with a tray of little mints to "cleanse the palette." As he passed by I told him I'd like a second one. In classic snnoty waiter style, he asked, "Would the gentleman like me to leave the whole tray?" I reared up and snarled, "I hope 'the gentleman' isn't expecting a gratuity." It was amazing how quickly he changed from smug condescension to efficient helpfulness. (But I still didn't leave a tip and I told me friends if they tried to, I'd make a scene that would embarrass them for the rest of their lives.)
DM and we don't tip waiters/waitresses much, about 2/3 euros. Delivery men and women is another story, 10 € for climbing to the 5th floor and still greeting me with a smile and a bonjour.
Exactly. The deliverymen who brought DM's couch (40kg) got 10 euros each instead of sharing it because of the heat. Our staircase is like a greenhouse.
My problem is I never know who's getting screwed with sub minimum wage. I don't tip at MickeyD's, but I do tip the DoorDash driver (and the Walmart delivery guy)
I recently read an article about when not to tip, professional services was their first place. But they were talking about plumbers and carpenters not landlords. But another place was counter services, if you have to go to a counter like fast food restaurants or hardware stores, you don’t tip, but the caveat there was if you want to tip for exceptional service like the barista remembers your order. I just stopped into Noodles and Co and the card reader asks for a tip, and I always feel guilty not giving one (there are a few other places similar in service to Noodles that do this too) but this is a fast food restaurant (counter service) and they should t be tipped, I have to get my own drinks and get up to get my food , I wasn’t even staying there to eat so no one would have to clean a table when I leave. And I wonder who gets those tips anyway. I do Starbucks a lot, but I don’t electronically tip, I always give cash. All that to say that fast food workers need to get together and unionize before the corporations start treating them as tipped workers and paying the theft wages. Just because you include a tip option on your card readers does not mean the workers will ever be able to function on the tips.
Landlords want tips for what? One place said for maintenance services and such, professional services not for tipping, but the actual landlord who is getting the tip rarely do the maintenance work, or answering your phone calls or what have you. Not only that, but seriously, I’m already paying you to live in your building , plus you’re holding more money hostage to make sure I don’t wreck the place, I shouldn’t have to pay more for the privilege.
The TL;DR version is pretty straightforward: "We screwed up and now we expect YOU to pay for our screw-up! That's okay with us. Okay with you? Of course!"
1. With the "creative" fee structure, it sounds to me like the city doesn't like food carts. I mean, "30 percent “business enhancement factor”" . 30 % of what and wtf is business enhancement?
2. The food carts are providing a service to church. The church should be paying the food carts to be there, not charging rent.
1. Business enhancement I think you can get in pill form now.
2. The carts aren't really performing a service for the church. I doubt people go out for lunch and say "Oh while I'm here, let's go to church." I don't think it's unreasonable for the church to provide a space for the food carts for a fee, but it just sounds like they didn't do their homework.
Yeah, it seems like the city is bilking both Church and Cate..erer (see what I did there?). Since the trucks have been there for weeks now, the city already knows how they influence traffic patterns and road use and frankly it doesn't sound like they've had any sort of big effect at all.
But, nevertheless, the city can't play favorites. If they have a process for negotiating fees (including the discount), and a formula for food truck road use, they need to apply it to everyone, including the church. So while the charges might seem excessive for the impact the trucks observably, empirically have on traffic, I don't think the food trucks or the church are going to win on that front.
Thank you. But you seem to be posting a whole lot of attempts to avoid the core issue.
So, I'll answer your question, and hopefully you'll do me the courtesy of answering mine. That number seems high to me.
Now my turn: do you think it is either legal or ethical for the church to attempt to back-charge the food vendors for a permit screwup between the church and the city?
As the right wing war on trans people and drag grabs the headlines, Mat Staver's Liberty Counsel has been busily chipping away at 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 issue behind the scenes- in addition to the latest win for torture proponents in Waterloo, Iowa, bans on the thoroughly debunked practice of abusing queer people until they duck back into the closet have also been repealed or blocked in several places in Florida (𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦). While obviously places without state-level bans are at greater risk than in bluer locales, there a bunch of cases wriggling their ways through lower courts, and it seems likely that SCROTUS will weigh in at some point, so... keep an ear out, because if the Nazis see a path to making brainwashing the law of the land, they'll skip down it with a grin and a whistle.
Challenging based on the 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 constitution is an interesting move. That couldn't be appealed to SCROTUS, if it succeeded... but would only help Texas because it couldn't then be used to challenge other states' bullshit (mind you, that'd still be a huge win).
When I read this, I regret we are not living on the same continent. Jomicur, cdbunch, you and any person DM and me could shelter would be welcome in our home.
If the church doesn't have the money, I have some serious questions about where that money went and who was responsible for it. That's a professional web page that displays pictures of a church with some serious means, not some back-in-the-woods Baptist box for a town of 500. I'll also admit I have questions about how the city of Vancouver handles these cases considering that most food carts just don't make that kind of money, but it's pretty clear the city's been willing to negotiate on the issue considering they slashed the fee in near-half.
At this point, however, the church should without question pay the fee. If it's a yearly fee, they should pay for this year then advise the cart owners and let them know if the church will be responsible for the fee in the future. As often as we hear about the superiority of Christian morals, it'd be nice if they did the morally right thing and fixed their mistake as quickly and painlessly as they can. Because too many megachurches worship money, I honestly don't expect that to happen; I fully expect these food carts to be forced to choose to either pay the additional fee or go out of business, and it looks like that's already happening to one of them.
Best of luck to these small business owners, who will undoubtedly be the ones to pay the price for this issue.
I don't understand. Why don't they just pray for the money?
Mark 11:24 New King James Version (NKJV)
Therefore I say to you, whatever things you ask when you pray, believe that you receive them, and you will have them.
https://www.zentaur.org/memes/but_that_trick_never_works.jpg
They always go with:
"You know, the money in your wallet, in your bank account, and on your credit cards. Well, that is not *your* money, it is *God's* money. And God needs his money *back*."
God always needs money. It's just the nature of God. Who are you to question God?
BREAKING: Someone finally managed to get a photograph of God. Here he is, in all his divine glory: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/ff/Octopus_at_Kelly_Tarlton's.jpg
God is Cthulu?
Wait, what #42 isn't gawd‽‽‽
https://www.fxguide.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/107_023_155_VFX-830x467@2x.jpg
https://th.bing.com/th/id/OIP.8Xc5w3djSTXMgBt2PqNe-wAAAA?w=238&h=180&c=7&r=0&o=5&dpr=1.3&pid=1.7
#42 is voiced by Captain Malcolm Reynolds.
A feeling, thinking being who has been abused by the asshole. (Not as much as many, but it was still abuse)
Ok, then! carry on!
Sure. Just as soon as God puts in an appearance and shows some ID.
They did pray. God said "screw over the food carts".
But they weren't virgins!
...wait, what's this in itty bitty print down at the bottom?
"*terms and conditions apply."
Oh.
Still technically virgins if you squint.
Oh, is *that* how you retain virginity?
I had always thought it was...
um, never mind.
This is why we need sex education in grades 1 to 43.
You're quite right, there's all kinds of problems with it, quite apart from wanting to kill the goose does laying the copper eggs.
I'm not sure what the atheism phenomenon is, though, and what it has to do with this
"The atheism phenomenon" - AKA the default state of every human before they're taught to believe bullshit.
Always that.
" atheism is a position that arises in the context of theistic beliefs. "
Well, kinda. When the first Australopithecus pointed at the sky and grunted to indicate some other Australopithecus up there was making lightning, and another Australopithecus scratched its head and snorted to ask "Are you fucking kidding?", atheism was born.
And WE snort at you.
CAPSLOCK MAKES ME MORE CONVINCING.
That's not necessarily true when you apply it to every word instead of using it to highlight key points...... because it just looks plain stupid capitalizing the entirety, as it serves no useful distinctive purpose. 🤭
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑐𝑒𝑝𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚 𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑒𝑠 𝑎𝑠 𝑎 𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑒 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚
That's absurd. Hellenic greek skeptics in 600 BC were not responding to anyone's belief in Jesus. And my non-belief in Vishnu is just like yours; it's not a response to Hinduism, it's based on an evaluation of what I think is true about the world.
[𝑎𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑚] 𝑑𝑜𝑒𝑠 𝑟𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑟𝑒 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑒𝑠𝑒𝑛𝑐𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑡ℎ𝑒𝑖𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ𝑖𝑛 𝑎 𝑠𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑢𝑙𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑡𝑒𝑥𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑑𝑒𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑒 𝑖𝑡𝑠𝑒𝑙𝑓 𝑖𝑛 𝑜𝑝𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑡𝑜 𝑡ℎ𝑜𝑠𝑒 𝑏𝑒𝑙𝑖𝑒𝑓𝑠
Well it's a good thing atheists don't actually do that then, isn't it? Non believers don't define themselves "in opposition to" Christians or theists, any more than most of us define our belief in a round earth "in opposition to" flat earthers. Their ideology is not why I think the earth is round, and probably not why you think it's round either. Well, same thing here. Your theology is not why I think there are no gods.
𝑇ℎ𝑒 𝑛𝑒𝑢𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑜𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑖𝑠 𝐴𝐺𝑁𝑂𝑆𝑇𝐼𝐶𝐼𝐶𝐼𝑆𝑀
I'm not trying to find a 'neutral positoin.' I'm trying to find the one best supported by the evidence. The evidence tells me the earth is round. History and experimentation tell me that flat earthism has not only failed to produce accurate or useful knowledge of how the world behaves, but when it tries, it is less accurate than the round earth view. So I reject it as provisionally incorrect. As with flat earthism, so too with god and gods. Theism has failed to produce accurate or useful knowledge about how the world behaves, and when it tries, it does worse than nontheistic, nondeistic theories. So I reject it as provisionally incorrect. In the equation F= ma + kG where G is the theistic intervention of God, the most accurate emprical value for k we can derive is 0. So we just drop any such God term; it is useless and inaccurate. And the same is true for literally every equation in science.
https://www.gocomics.com/nonsequitur/2023/08/26
"The neutral position is AGNOSTICICISM"
Another word you don't know the definition (or spelling) of.
"Non-belief or lack of belief is therefore a NEGATIVE REACTION TO THEISM / THEISTIC BELIEFS."
What's wrong with that, especially because "THEISM / THEISTIC BELIEFS" have been responsible for so much fucked up stuff in the history of mankind?
No, it does not. But that is the nature of bureaucracy. It costs a lot of money to support it, and its tendency is to expand itself to justify the support which justifies the expansion of the money needed to support it..
It is easy to make the determination because the evidence is there. Faced with the permit request from the city, the church asked the food vendors to cover it. My determination is that this was ethically wrong, and probably contractually wrong too. It doesn't matter what the morality or legality of the city's request to the church is, in shaking down the food vendors to get it, the church did wrong.
What determination about *the church's request to the food vendors* do you make?
Or, are you telling me that you are unable, as in not capable of, coming to a conclusion about the church's response until someone gives you an exact accounting of how the city arrived at that fee?
Doooon't make me pull out the Spam memes, bucko.
Go ahead.
Spam, spam, spam what a horrid spiel
Spam, spam, spam it won't end well
From Femmes, femmes, femmes a French song.
Since you've asked this question nearly two dozen times, I'll provide you with an answer. I don't know. I haven't seen the math of the wear and tear on a road and the cost of maintenance, traffic analysis and other factors that go into the city's fee structure. I'm sure you could ask them since it seems to matter so much to you.
No one else cares, because it's not relevant to the point. If the church wants to contest the city's fee structure, more power to them. The point is the church made a mistake and expects other people to pay for it rather than take responsibility for it themselves.
Why don't you bother to get the right city? It clearly states in the article that this is in Vancouver, *Washington*. In the U.S. not Vancouver, B.C. in Canada. It should have also been a giveaway that the fees listed on that page in no way add up to the fee mentioned in the article.
You're so desperate to show that someone you don't like is a hateful idiot, you're not doing *your* research.
He's a trumpanzee. Facts are irrelevant.
I didn't make the mistake and of course the math doesn't add up. And your assumptions are faulty. It's 424 for a daily trip, not one trip. But more importantly, 424*333 is over a $114,000, so obviously the numbers in the paper's article are not the whole story.
And there you demonstrate the point. Trying to get someone else to pay for your mistakes.
You might also look up the word relevant, since you don't seem to know what it means.
"If they wanted to invite food carts to set up businesses on their property, they should’ve done the proper legwork to make it happen"
Laws are for lay people, not them.
Perfect place for a Chick-fil-A knockoff to setup Sunday only service and call it "Side Chik".
I read this while eating lunch and now I have energy drink flooding my sinuses.😂
Or, as a fish'n'chip shop near me in the UK is called 'The Piece of Cod.'
They couldn't get away with calling it "Cod Piece," eh? :)
I heard recently a business that owns several apartment buildings had one of their own property managers steal rent money. Now the business is expecting the tenants to pay it again even though they did nothing wrong.
Sounds like a couple landlords I've had in the past. I sure hope the people don't have to pay again, that's just insane.
Legally they don't because they gave their rent to an employee. But practically they will either directly or through higher rents next year. Heaven forbid a business take a financial hit for their mistake when they can pass it along to people who really don't have other options.
Yeah, but when you say it like that it sounds so *bad*. Just say 'capitalism'. ;)
Landlord insurance?
Religion. I was raised (reluctantly) in a Christian church (until age 14 when I announced to my father that I would no longer be attending) and even then I knew what a scam it was. But, having that background and realizing their trend to be massive hypocrites, this does not surprise me at all.
I'm an atheist and glad to be nowadays-- for many more reasons.
"[U]nrealistic city expectations".
Far more accurate would be unrealistic 𝑐ℎ𝑢𝑟𝑐ℎ expectations, i.e. the church's expectations that rules don't apply to them because Christian Fucking Privilege.
That's not an expectation. It's a set-in-stone certainty.
Yes and no, I have the impression the municipal staff in charge didn't communicate well either. Why waiting several months to fix the problem ?
How many municipal staff does it take to quantify the monetary cost of increased traffic flow? None, they just pull a number out of their wild donkey. El Jefe better leave soon before it is hit with an EPA fine.
How many municipal staff also attend the church?
C'est pas faux. I didn't like the bill cut in half either. Was it an apology from the mayor for screwing up, christian privilege or both ?
Can they get a manna and quail food truck? Or loaves and fishes?
Locust beans, perhaps?
"This was the church’s mistake. It’s the church’s job to fix it."
Hahahaha! Oh man, good one. Churches don't *fix* problems, especially not ones they caused. I wonder how many of the churchy folks who made this decision are members of the 'party of personal responsibility'. All, I expect.
I don't think they can charge a fee, after the fact, that was not part of the original agreement. This church is trying to shift the burden onto small businesses who didn't create the problem.
I was thinking the same thing, unless it was a month by month they can't just change the deal. Until it reaches the SC and they rule in the churches favor, of course.
"Congress shall make no law respecting the right of churches to rip people off, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"
Supply-side Jesus passes on the costs to his customers.
https://www.beliefnet.com/news/2003/09/the-gospel-of-supply-side-jesus.aspx
It's actually $424 for 365 vehicles making one trip, or one vehicle making 365 trips, since it's daily trips. So the question should be "Is $1.27 for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
Of course, that's before the 30% and 15% percent discounts are applied so the question should be "Is $.69 for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
But, that's before the bill was revised and cut in half so the question should be "Is about 35 cents for one vehicle making one trip a fair amount?"
Seems fairly reasonable to me.
That site is for Vancouver, Canada and this is Vancouver, Washington, fyi. I missed it too until I tried to look up the address. Presumably, all the trucks have their vendor and health dept licenses but this is a land use permit that the church had to apply for, according to the article. I think I can agree that it would be fair to pass on some of the cost to the vendors but that isn't really the point. The point is the church didn't do their research, agreed to a price, signed a lease agreement, and now want to go back on the deal. Also, $1500 x 5 trucks x 12 mo = $90,000. Twice what the permit cost.
That church in the background looks suspiciously like a Walmart.
Souls R Us.
Always Low Prices.
Blue light special. It's actually a former KMart. The locals call it the KMart Church.
I got that from the article on the pastors drug bust.
And the S-Mart is next door.
There’s a church in my town that used to be a Walmart, seems a little on the nose to me. 😏
Do you notice much difference?
Walmart has tangible products..... and shopping carts.
Yeah, it may be mostly crap but at least Walmart sells you something you can use, not selling you being used.
Their greeters are pretty much the same age, though.
Greeters? Those went out with flip phones.
https://www.samsung.com/global/galaxy/galaxy-z-flip4/
I was going to say the same thing, but thinking about it, there's never anyone at the grocery end door, but occasionally there is someone at the pharmacy end door. At my Walmart, anyway.
The beer and produce selection has gone down markedly.....
Another warehouse of God.
Well, the Walton family are Christian so...
A local capitalist chapel.
All megachurches look like one, both inside and out.
I mean, the extra month’s rent every month is just a tip to the landlord/church. Aren’t we doing that now, tipping landlords?
Everybody else expects a tip, why not landlords. (Sorry, I'm a little annoyed with 'tipping culture'. AFAIC, tipping should be reserved for exemplary service, not expected as an augment to someone's (maybe) minimum wage job.)
All those little screens at restaurants, cafes, etc. that have varying tip "suggestions" for you to tap on.
Emotional blackmail much? I don't pay a tip when I pay at the counter. Tipping is reserved for being seated, ordering, getting my food and being presented with my cheque after the meal. Then it's 1 dollar for every 5.
Some years ago some friends dragged me out to dinner at a snooty French restaurant. After the first course, our waiter came around with a tray of little mints to "cleanse the palette." As he passed by I told him I'd like a second one. In classic snnoty waiter style, he asked, "Would the gentleman like me to leave the whole tray?" I reared up and snarled, "I hope 'the gentleman' isn't expecting a gratuity." It was amazing how quickly he changed from smug condescension to efficient helpfulness. (But I still didn't leave a tip and I told me friends if they tried to, I'd make a scene that would embarrass them for the rest of their lives.)
Did the waiter decided to rejoin the band?
DM and we don't tip waiters/waitresses much, about 2/3 euros. Delivery men and women is another story, 10 € for climbing to the 5th floor and still greeting me with a smile and a bonjour.
No elevator, huh?
Yeah, I can see a hefty tip in that case.
Exactly. The deliverymen who brought DM's couch (40kg) got 10 euros each instead of sharing it because of the heat. Our staircase is like a greenhouse.
Pizza delivery guy gets a big tip from me. :)
My problem is I never know who's getting screwed with sub minimum wage. I don't tip at MickeyD's, but I do tip the DoorDash driver (and the Walmart delivery guy)
Yup. Any service that requires an automobile. Delivery, taxis, etc.
I've actually seen tip jars at self-checkout aisles.
The sonic app has a tip section and of course you have to explicitly select no tip.
I recently read an article about when not to tip, professional services was their first place. But they were talking about plumbers and carpenters not landlords. But another place was counter services, if you have to go to a counter like fast food restaurants or hardware stores, you don’t tip, but the caveat there was if you want to tip for exceptional service like the barista remembers your order. I just stopped into Noodles and Co and the card reader asks for a tip, and I always feel guilty not giving one (there are a few other places similar in service to Noodles that do this too) but this is a fast food restaurant (counter service) and they should t be tipped, I have to get my own drinks and get up to get my food , I wasn’t even staying there to eat so no one would have to clean a table when I leave. And I wonder who gets those tips anyway. I do Starbucks a lot, but I don’t electronically tip, I always give cash. All that to say that fast food workers need to get together and unionize before the corporations start treating them as tipped workers and paying the theft wages. Just because you include a tip option on your card readers does not mean the workers will ever be able to function on the tips.
Landlords want tips for what? One place said for maintenance services and such, professional services not for tipping, but the actual landlord who is getting the tip rarely do the maintenance work, or answering your phone calls or what have you. Not only that, but seriously, I’m already paying you to live in your building , plus you’re holding more money hostage to make sure I don’t wreck the place, I shouldn’t have to pay more for the privilege.
The TL;DR version is pretty straightforward: "We screwed up and now we expect YOU to pay for our screw-up! That's okay with us. Okay with you? Of course!"
PUL-LEASE.
Sounds like an employer.
Sounds like t h e i r employer, the Gawd. Make the world imperfect, punish those that inhabit it because they don't live up to perfection.
Or ANY capitalist.
Two thoughts.
1. With the "creative" fee structure, it sounds to me like the city doesn't like food carts. I mean, "30 percent “business enhancement factor”" . 30 % of what and wtf is business enhancement?
2. The food carts are providing a service to church. The church should be paying the food carts to be there, not charging rent.
1. Business enhancement I think you can get in pill form now.
2. The carts aren't really performing a service for the church. I doubt people go out for lunch and say "Oh while I'm here, let's go to church." I don't think it's unreasonable for the church to provide a space for the food carts for a fee, but it just sounds like they didn't do their homework.
I didn't say they were good thoughts.
Yeah, it seems like the city is bilking both Church and Cate..erer (see what I did there?). Since the trucks have been there for weeks now, the city already knows how they influence traffic patterns and road use and frankly it doesn't sound like they've had any sort of big effect at all.
But, nevertheless, the city can't play favorites. If they have a process for negotiating fees (including the discount), and a formula for food truck road use, they need to apply it to everyone, including the church. So while the charges might seem excessive for the impact the trucks observably, empirically have on traffic, I don't think the food trucks or the church are going to win on that front.
Thank you. But you seem to be posting a whole lot of attempts to avoid the core issue.
So, I'll answer your question, and hopefully you'll do me the courtesy of answering mine. That number seems high to me.
Now my turn: do you think it is either legal or ethical for the church to attempt to back-charge the food vendors for a permit screwup between the church and the city?
You did not answer the question.
Do you think it is legal or ethical for THE CHURCH TO ATTEMPT TO BACK-CHARGE the food vendors?
Because that's what they attempted to do. It's right there in the story. The church asked the vendors for the money.
OT- Conversion "therapy" bans are next on the GQP hit list, targeted by the dumbest lawyer in America not named Larry Klayman: https://apnews.com/article/lgbtq-gay-transgender-conversion-iowa-f6d220171feac884a42006c1b5a19b1b
As the right wing war on trans people and drag grabs the headlines, Mat Staver's Liberty Counsel has been busily chipping away at 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 issue behind the scenes- in addition to the latest win for torture proponents in Waterloo, Iowa, bans on the thoroughly debunked practice of abusing queer people until they duck back into the closet have also been repealed or blocked in several places in Florida (𝘲𝘶𝘦𝘭𝘭𝘦 𝘴𝘶𝘳𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘦). While obviously places without state-level bans are at greater risk than in bluer locales, there a bunch of cases wriggling their ways through lower courts, and it seems likely that SCROTUS will weigh in at some point, so... keep an ear out, because if the Nazis see a path to making brainwashing the law of the land, they'll skip down it with a grin and a whistle.
Of course, Christians have rights. LGBT people have no rights, only whatever privileges the Christians choose to give them. Ask Mr. Graf.
I tried, but it seems he's off somewhere, forcing LGBT kids into anti-LGBT homes "for their own good."
Let's hype conversion therapy that will remove the Christianity from the Christian. Think they'd go for it?
How's that again? You'll have to speak up. I can't hear you over the shrieking from Christians.
I thought those were howler monkeys?
There's a difference?
The monkeys smell better.
😂
👍
Well, if the stories I've heard are to be believed, the best way to convert a Christian into an atheist is to make them read their Bible, so...
See, torture.
Read?
https://www.birdtools-developers.com/images/simpsons-sharedviews.jpg
Even harder for them? Comprehending what they read.
https://www.alternet.org/tx-judge-anti-trans-constitution/
Challenging based on the 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 constitution is an interesting move. That couldn't be appealed to SCROTUS, if it succeeded... but would only help Texas because it couldn't then be used to challenge other states' bullshit (mind you, that'd still be a huge win).
I wish I could believe it was more than temporary.
When I read this, I regret we are not living on the same continent. Jomicur, cdbunch, you and any person DM and me could shelter would be welcome in our home.
As long as you don't make us eat snails.
DM wants to know if you like tripes and cauliflower ?
Tell DM I'd sooner be boiled in a vat of my own snot.
It can be done. We have a restaurant sized pot and some good knives.
No on the tripe. Have you ever tried this:
https://www.goodhousekeeping.com/food-recipes/healthy/a37151/cauliflower-popcorn-recipe/
I love cauliflower as much as Aria loved chocolate.
You're going to have to prod my memory on that.
I have something better, a bloc of tofu with your name on it.
It's better as a writing surface than as food.
If the church doesn't have the money, I have some serious questions about where that money went and who was responsible for it. That's a professional web page that displays pictures of a church with some serious means, not some back-in-the-woods Baptist box for a town of 500. I'll also admit I have questions about how the city of Vancouver handles these cases considering that most food carts just don't make that kind of money, but it's pretty clear the city's been willing to negotiate on the issue considering they slashed the fee in near-half.
At this point, however, the church should without question pay the fee. If it's a yearly fee, they should pay for this year then advise the cart owners and let them know if the church will be responsible for the fee in the future. As often as we hear about the superiority of Christian morals, it'd be nice if they did the morally right thing and fixed their mistake as quickly and painlessly as they can. Because too many megachurches worship money, I honestly don't expect that to happen; I fully expect these food carts to be forced to choose to either pay the additional fee or go out of business, and it looks like that's already happening to one of them.
Best of luck to these small business owners, who will undoubtedly be the ones to pay the price for this issue.
Professional volun-told web designer?
God will provide. God provided the food trucks to pay the fees and fines for the church not bothering with the proper paperwork. Good for him.