Gromnir

as we said, we frequent a local butcher for most all our meat needs. we ain't done any genuine investigation, but the butcher has given us assurances that his suppliers is reputable. am living in CA and the butcher claims that many o' his customers is greenpeace, wwf, birkenstock shod hippies and the issue o' humane conditions o' the animals is common enough that he had to take an interest. veal crates are still used in the united states. average life span is 12-23 weeks... in a 30"x70" crate. the calves is fed a low iron faux milk substitute that is purposeful rendering the animals anemic to be keeping their flesh pale. there is a recommendation by american veal producer association to phase out crates by 2017. is a recommendation, and compliance is voluntary. we do not know how all our meat products is handled before slaughter, but we do know that calves meant to be veal is still frequent subject to horrific treatment. given that such practices is still common, why on earth would Gromnir support the veal industry? the ducks (or geese) that become foie gras gets equal barbaric treatment. http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-0128-friedrich-foie-gras-california-20150127-story.html we don't know about most o' our meat, but we is certain 'bout foie gras, and we got much reason to be suspicious o' any veal that comes our way. much like guard dog, when we did hunt for our own food, we were as humane as possible. we were taught to respect those animals we hunted. to knowingly purchase meat that were procured through cruelty would be antithetical to everything we were taught. am gonna continue avoiding foie gras and veal. HA! Good Fun! ps peta is not our first choice for factual info as they can skew a bit to make a point, but the following foie gras link is perhaps useful http://www.peta.org/issues/animals-used-for-food/factory-farming/ducks-geese/foie-gras/

Do baby cows not matter to you? You monster!! Seriously though, if you're always taking the high moral ground at the very least try to hide your sins. I mean you're just inviting Volo to bugger you about how horrible you are for eating young animals. Do you think most members on this forum care about the plight of young cows and or sometimes the cruelness about where Veal comes from well, we won't eat veal or foie gras precisely 'cause o' the lack o' humanity involved in raising and slaughtering o' the animals. all our meats is purchased from a reputable local butcher, but we do not pretend that we know the conditions that exist where all our pork, poultry and beef is raised. *shrug* am a human who needs at least some meat protein to stay healthy. also, we like meat. gotta be some advantages to being at the top o' the food chain, and it ain't as if the animals have any empathy for Gromnir. we no longer hunt. as a kid we hunted in large part out of need. frequent went months when only meat we had were what Gromnir or grandpa could acquire. however, without need to motivate us, we no longer find personal gratification in dispatching deer, bear, turkey and the like. *sigh* most common were actual rabbit. doesn't sound as impressive, eh? somehow managed to never get sick o' fried rabbit. ... made us hungry for buttermilk fried rabbit. HA! Good Fun! ps am an admitted hypocrite regarding the hunting bit as we will happily cook game meats our acquaintances provide. can't make our bigos w/o venison and wild pig.

am not particular forgiving o' games, as can be recognized from our reviews here and elsewhere. the thing is, we play so few games, and our 6 month rule allows us to thorough vet developer claims before our purchase. for example, our steam library is as follows: dragon age origins: ultimate edition poe shadowrun returns shadowrun: dragonfall torment: tides of numenera (beta... obviously) wasteland 1 (came free with wasteland 2 and have not played... well, not since late 80s) wasteland 2 xcom: enemy unknown (all dlc) that is all. fo4 came with our xbox, but we ain't played it dragon age: inquisition were a goty purchase for us last december, but is still in the shrinkwrap we purchased siege of dragonspire, but am not planning on playing 'til 6 months has elapsed post release. other games current on our computer: swtor bgee bg2ee kotor2 (heavily modded) ps:t (modded) our 6 month rule results in fewer mistake purchases. we wait for reviews from like minded friends, observe gameplay, and given that our current gaming preferences is extreme limited (crpg and strategy) results in a relative low fail rate for game purchases. is actual kinda surprising just how many disappointments we suffer given our game buying habits. HA! Good Fun!

Only 1/4th of the games you have ever played had a lot of wasted potential? Oh my, you have played a very fine selection of games in your life. "it's so plain to see just how much more fun and engaging it could've been with some minor tweaks." games that we can see marked improvement from minor tweaks? games we see having displayed "wasted potential" as 'posed to being a waste of our time? yeah, 1/4 is 'bout right. HA! Good Fun!

It's a prime example of wasted potential - still fun, but it's annoying when it's so plain to see just how much more fun and engaging it could've been with some minor tweaks. the sad thing is that your observation applies to about 1/4 of all games we has ever played. HA! Good Fun!

am not having played with the newest improvements. that being said, we thought the initial beta were already worth playing... though similar to majek, our plan were to not play again 'til release. given the list o' changes, we will likely run through the beta once more so that we can be giving useful feedback. the beta we played were clear needing work, but on the positive end o' the spectrum, we do not feel as if the content we were exposed to ruined the game for us. will play again to be offering final thoughts to developers. ... admitted, many o' the early criticisms we saw adopted by the group-think regarding the torment beta at various sites were perplexing to us. too much 'signposting'? *snort* our personal gripes regarding the game were either unavoidable or unfixable. we were annoyed by the lack o' character development we were seeing in the beta. 'course the game is clear meant to be similarly character driven as were ps:t, so the fact that the developers has avoided major spoilage is hardly surprising. we found a few o' the minor npcs to be mildly intriguing, but it appeared (hopeful?) that the developers were purposeful keeping major character development to a minimum in the beta release, and we expect that inxile will continue to hold their characters close to the vest until release. so, largely unavoidable on character paucity? sadly, our other concern were largely unfixable-- the aesthetic did not match the theme. torment is clear a close cousin to ps:t in terms o' thematic focus. in spite o' that fact, the world o' torment is a relative bright and inviting place. am not sure if we would go so far as to describe setting as "cheerful," but the setting and aesthetic is definite not evoking images and feels o' torment. regardless, am suspecting that by the time the beta were released, it were far too late to do major changes to the look and feel o' the game. so, unfixable regarding aesthetic. unless something major has changed with the new beta content, we would recommend playing only if your genuine intent to do so is to be offering feedback 'bout bugs, interfaces, combats n' such. torment, as a game purposeful meant to evoke parallels to ps:t, will succeed or fail based on how well the story is told... with a particular focus on character. am having a hard time believing that you is gonna see any further meaningful character development pre-release, and regardless, would you genuine wish for more character development in a beta? HA! Good Fun!

y'know, Gromnir actual tried yoga once. were back in college and a cute girlfriend requested that we join her for a session. is hard to recall all the things we has done over the years for no other reason than to impress a cute girl/woman, eh? went twice and we actual did our bestest. we got pretty good flexibility, so we don't believe that we were humiliating our self or anything, but the looks we were getting from the instructor were... ... is kinda funny to reflect these decades removed, but never has we had to endure such contemptuous stares. am not sure if the glances were 'cause we were a man or a jock or... whatever. if we had come into her studio, squatted down and took a big steaming dump, we doubt we woulda' been able to elicit a more disgusted look from the woman instructor. *chuckle* we gave up on yoga almost immediate 'cause a 5'-nothing, middle-aged, woman yoga instructor made us feel bad 'bout our self? apologies for going complete off-topic. HA! Good Fun!

as enoch is aware, Gromnir ain't a jazz guy, but we do got a soft spot for herbie han****, and not just 'cause o' his death wish soundtrack. apparent all our jazz favorites is cartoon related? peanuts. fat albert. weird... or groovy. HA! Good Fun!

Strength isn't that important when you are fighting with those weapons, you need just enough to wield weapon (which is something that both men and women can quite easily achieve especially in time most of the house hold work was done with similar tools, especially farmers [and there was no farming house where women didn't partake in reaping, and other heavy duties, because they could not afford not to]) without problems, but then you need skill, speed, hand eye coordination and understanding how your opponent can move and most likely move. This is because sharp sword, spear or axe needs quite minimal force to wound and kill person. Strength also plays quite little in in armored combat, because additional force that you can put behind weapon isn't that much without risking losing control over it which is when you opponent most likely wins the duel, you are better of to find spot where there isn't armor. While I have no desire to discuss gender in gaming, I will make a point of interest. The above statement by Elerond is horrendously false. They have no idea what they're talking about. Strength is critical in wielding a melee weapon. It influences everything. Endrance. How easily you can maneuver it. The ability to break through a parry. The ability to effectively parry. How precisely you can place a strike, and yes, the severity of a blow. All of this is also true in instances with armor. Source: 6 years Aikido, 3 years of Fencing, 2 years Okinawan Kenpo, 1 year of Kendo. resume time? we got a partial scholarship to University of Pennsylvania for fencing. considerable more than 3 years with sabre. we also wrestled for many years including having made varsity since sophomore year at one o' the better known wrestling schools in chicago. did not go to state, but it were close. boxed from youth through first couple years in college. admittedly weren't anywhere near golden gloves, so we ain't even gonna pretend we were something-something, but we did have experience in the ring. worked probation for a few years and went through MAB training which we used on a near daily basis. *shrug* one-on-one, mano v. mano fighting is Not same as military. bigger and stronger is indeed huge advantages, but is not dispositive particularly in military battles. if you got smaller and weaker soldiers, you is gonna use 'em accordingly. there is a reason why not all units is heavy infantry or heavy cavalry, yes? http://www.thearma.org/essays/knightvs.htm average 16th century samurai were 'tween 5'3" and 5'5" and ~135 lbs. the size o' the average dutchman is, surprisingly, not much different today than they were in 16th century... go figure. the samurai fared well enough against europeans in those limited melee combats that took place. which again, is all beside the point. in any number o' fantasy settings, a foundational premise is that men and women humans is equal strength. such settings do not implode from implausibility. d&d since 3.0, pathfinder and dragon age is all examples that quick come to mind where women is equal strong as men and wherein militaries is often populated by men and women with equal frequency. starting point of equal strength has not overstrained credulity or destroyed verisimilitude. HA! Good Fun! ps not that it is actual relevant, but am gonna once again reiterate that we recognize that women is, on average, not as strong as men. am also recognizing that strength is a vital quality in many military and civilian roles. we want our marines to be able to carry their own pack. we want firefighters to be strong enough to carry the average adult male out of a burning building. when government actors bow to political pressure and reduce minimum essential strength thresholds just so that more women can be represented in fields that has not produced anything approaching gender parity, we get a bit unhappy. am not saying that women can do anything that men can do. men and women are different. that being said, strength is not the quality that has historically prevented women from serving in Most militaries. after all, the number o' small and weak males that has been conscripted into militaries over the centuries is likely beyond counting.

am suspecting that you is "done" if only 'cause you can't string out the falsehoods much longer. as we keep pointing out, the aforementioned settings didn not simple apply equal strength to women for player characters. the world of greyhawk makes women and men equal strength-- not just pcs. is same for pathfinder and dragon age. *zoom* point missed. also, we never implied that you wanted females penalised. we specific said that the issue is "moot" as there ain't no way that tyranny would penalize. again, is much different as you is representing. and elerond is correct 'bout strength. women is weaker, but they got more than enough strength to use spears and swords. has been more than a few cultures with relative small Males who were more than capable warriors, even when facing considerable larger foes. strength has never been the primary issue.... which is, again, beside the point. HA! God Fun!

Gromnir would like for the bond franchise to make us forget spectre. what a waste o' a fantastic cast. christoph waltz had been secret hounding bond for years 'cause o' unresolved daddy issues? HA! Good Fun!

revan has short memory. "I was thinking about games, movies or books, not p&p rulesets (by the way, the older D&D versions had inferior strenght cap for females - they removed them in the newer versions just to allow players to create every character they want, I guess -, and also I've not read stories based on D&D settings but I do think that most of the regular soldiers are men, as it is in games such as BG, IWD and NWN)" again, your conclusions is untrue. d&d didn't simple remove strength differential for player characters. were similar for pathfinder and dragon age. largely equal female representation of women in military roles in numerous editions o' d&d and other game Worlds has been noteworthy only insofar as it has been non-noteworthy-- nobody cares. the verisimilitude shattering overrepresentation o' women in the lore o' d&d since 3.0, and in pathfinder and dragon age were a complete non factor. good. as an aside, am going to posit that strength differential has never been the main reason for pre-industrial real world women exclusion from military. lack o' dependable birth control and a reasonable bias in favor o' women handling child rearing duties were far more important factors. takes very little strength to kill, and to kill effective. women are not as strong as men and when US Congressmen and military generals pretend as if the genders is the same, the results is largely comical. even so, is not strength that has historical been the reason for exclusion o' women from military roles. weaker don't = weak. preindustrial women spent most of their time either pregnant or rearing children, a fact which limited their military opportunities. regardless, numerous highly popular fantasy worlds has been very successful at full integration o' genders. has been a non-factor as the developers o' greyhawk and other worlds simple started with the foundation recognition that women is as strong as men in such worlds. the many thousands o' d&d, pathfinder and dragon age fans accepted the foundational premise o' gender equality with hardly any notice whatsoever. is not a genuine issue, and is hardly "beyond retarded" for a developer o' a game or fantasy world to embrace such gender indifference. HA! Good Fun! ps does anybody actual say "retarded" nowadays?

Well, female fighting characters (either ones you fight as, with, or against) are certainly treated the same as male fighting characters in D&D - at least, I think so. Fighting characters are not the only type of characters in D&D, though, and on a wider overview, I don't think you could really consider that principle to stand up to any great degree... Yup. You're character is created, not randomly sampled, so she doesn't need to represent a typical member of society. You can play a Nikki Fuller-type character if you want. Revan is stating that in the typical fantasy universe, females are weaker than males. I don't see any evidence of that in D&D, at least that I've seen. I was thinking about games, movies or books, not p&p rulesets (by the way, the older D&D versions had inferior strenght cap for females - they removed them in the newer versions just to allow players to create every character they want, I guess -, and also I've not read stories based on D&D settings but I do think that most of the regular soldiers are men, as it is in games such as BG, IWD and NWN). For example, in The Wheel of Time women usually hold more power than men, but that is because they can use magic while men go mad after using saidin for a while (and so are forbidden to use it or hunted down). Regular soldiers are men, there are women that go to war with them but they are sorceresses. There's pretty much the same situation in The Witcher series (Triss, Yennefer, Philippa and the Lodge are arguably more powerful than Geralt, but their source of power is magic, not their combat prowess and the regular fighters/soldiers are men). Then again, there are women who rise up to become good fighters in many fantasy stories (Eowin in LOTR, Brienne in ASOIAF, etc.) but they are not common and don't represent the average woman (who shares the pros and cons and the traits of real world's women). highlighted is untrue. as o' 3e, the d&d rules specifically note that women (not just pc women) is as strong as men in greyhawk (the core d&d world at 3e release.) subsequent editions have followed suit. pathfinder has also stated in their rules that women is equal strong. while we ain't read pathfinder or d&d novels o' the past 20 years, the game worlds 'pon which they is based is normalizing male and female strength. am unsure of dragon age lore, but we would be incredible surprised if the biowarian social progressives had not made special note that women is equal to men in all things in their world. all o' which is complete beside the point 'course. the initial revan complaint is largely meaningless with recognition that tyranny, like so many other fantasy rpgs, would be ill-advised to handicap women players who wish to play their women characters equal strong as men. the fact that there is equal numbers o' women seeming represented in tyranny world military units is about as non a factor as a non-factor can possible be. is admitted not possible in real life. so what? in a fantasy world where developers control the biology and the physics, why wouldn't they create equality? misplaced notions o' verisimilitude? is a freaking game... a fantasy game. HA! Good Fun!

am suspecting you are correct, but keep in mind that the goal o' brine is not typical to make your chicken taste like pop. is not gonna taste like pop regardless, but many o' the stronger flavors in the soda pop will be infused into the chicken to a lesser or greater degree depending on the time length o' the brine. have never tried ginger ale, but 7-up is actual a good option for a pop brine. lemon and lime flavors. were actually 'bout ten years ago that we started frequent doing soda pop brine for chicken... 'bout the same time we switched to boneless and skinless chicken breasts as our most common grilling choice. thighs is our actual preferred piece for almost any kinda chicken cooking, but like so many other folks, we became more health conscious over the years. *sigh* boneless and skinless is not a fantastic choice for grilling-- tends towards dryness and flavor paucity. ick. to combat the shortcomings o' our meat, we devised ways to improve to the flavor and moistness qualities o' our boneless and skinless breasts. rubs and brines. in any event, have fun experimenting with soda pop brines. in addition to trying out different varieties o' pop, we would recommend 15-30 minute incremental increase o' brine time starting with 30 minutes as kinda your base. perhaps 2 pieces brined 30 minutes, 2 pieces brined 45, 2 pieces brined 60 minutes, etc? HA! Good Fun!

is gonna sound strange, but give pop a try for your brine. get a 2-litre o' coke or rootbeer or dr. pepper (do NOT go diet. artificial sweeteners make a brine taste vile. am not kidding or exaggerating) and dissolve your salt into the pop via a nice bit o' boiling. after salt is complete dissolved, cool the brine by adding ice or refrigerating. make sure your brine is genuine cool before adding chicken as you do not wanna risk salmonella or other bacteria growth. brines is particular useful when doing high-temp grilling with various rubs. keeps chicken juicy even when you gotta blacken to bring out flavor o' your rub. two hours is likely the maximum amount o' time you wanna brine chicken pieces. as little as 30 minutes is okie dokie. regardless, try pop... almost any kinda pop. different flavor will be added to chicken. experiment. caution: lengthy pop brine will make your chicken taste odd. is not necessarily bad, but is kinda weird when your grilled chicken breasts taste a bit like ham. HA! Good Fun!

am not a fan of blizzard games. we did play starcraft for many hours. even so, am not recalling the last time we played any blizzard game. that being said, we were surprised approving o' the aesthetic choice blizzard went with for wow. photorealistic, particular back in 2004, were resulting in rather fugly games... at least from our pov. blizzard instead went with a more colorful and cartoony look. ridiculous over-sized weapons and armour is typical turnoffs for Gromnir, but given that the entire aesthetic o' the game were a sorta a warhammer-as-reimagined-by-hanna-barbera, we didn't see room for much compliant. the thing is, that same aesthetic doesn't set well with us for live-action. as we said, the look o' wow is decidedly cartoony. live-action and cartoony is rare complimentary... save for perhaps the bakshi lotr? *shrug* haven't seen warcraft, nor do we plan to. even so, what scenes we have seen from the warcraft movie via trailers and youtube snippets look fundamental wrong to us. have a live-action movie trying to nevertheless capture wow aesthetic is resulting in a kinda frankenstein abomination. HA! Good Fun!

why is "realistic" an important consideration in this context? men are stronger and more athletic... in reality. in a fantasy game, the developers is already ignoring reality with great frequency. has never been a fantasy crpg with realistic combat. thank goodness. realistic magic is kinda an oxymoron no? realistic economy? recovery from injury? reality and verisimilitude is always needing be flexible in a fantasy game. reality ain't fair to women. women are, on average, weaker and slower than men. Gromnir were top ten (barely) in the illinois state 100m track finals in high school. our time were good enough for women's olympic gold. is not fair that women is less athletic, but nobody promised fair in real life. but again, so what? tyranny ain't reality. tyranny is a fantasy game. tell women that in the fantasy they need be weaker than men? why? have women start off with a statistical handicap compared to male counterparts? reality is never gonna be complete fair to women insofar as athletic ability is concerned, but tyranny is a game. oh, and some games has given women a statistical advantage to endurance/constitution/fatigue as a way to balance the inevitable strength/might handicap. is always a fail. one o' these days a crpg developer is gonna actual make constitution as valuable as strength, but we ain't seen it. furthermore, the discussion itself complete ignores the actual problem: women don't wanna be weaker than men. women got the fuzzy end o' the athletic lollipop in reality. so why force 'em to choke on it in a game? poe offers a nifty alternative. the might attribute is not realistic... period. developers admitted that it ain't realistic. you want an explanation for why the skinny wizard gots a vast strength advantage over a man-at-arms who has been training with arms and armour? in the poe universe, perhaps the strength o' one's soul is more determinative o' both physical and magical might than is physical mass and power. dunno. poe don't even pretend to brace reality in regards to a few o' the attributes. didn't break the game by doing so. regardless, the desire for verisimilitude regarding weaker human women strikes us as ridiculous and anachronistic. the number o' male gamers who has their suspension o' disbelief destroyed by equal strong human women in a fantasy game has gotta be exceeding small. even if it is a concern for a few male players, it can't be anything other than a minor quibble. conversely, am knowing more than a few woman gamers who is more than a little irked by developers who force "reality" 'pon 'em in the form o' a strength handicap for playing their natural gender. so, why handicap so many potential purchasers? the cost v. benefit winner strikes us as obvious. HA! Good Fun!

more significant is that tyranny is a game with a magical setting. in the real world, men are stronger and typically better than women at activities that would be mimicking combat. it is a scary truth for most women that the average man is considerable stronger than is they-- ask any woman that has been physical assaulted by a man just how terrifying the truth can be. past pee-wee ages in sports, girls/women become a handicap on a sport team comprised primarily o' men. that is reality and the reality for women kinda sucks in regards to physical strength and athletic abilities. but guess what? tyranny is a game. is games that allows people to be something they ain't and do things they could never do in real life. in reality women is weaker and less physical capable than is men. so what? why on earth would a game developer wanna tell potential female gamers that if they desire to create a female game character, their choice is gonna be handicapped compared to a male character? what possible reason is there gonna be to effective handicap female characters? some misplaced notion o' verisimilitude? biology and physics is ubiquitous hurdles to women in the real world. in a game world, biology and physics is the developer's sock puppets. if Gromnir were a woman, we would likely fume and rage at the manifest unfairness o' the real universe. 'course, who claimed that the universe were fair, eh? well, obsidian is the folks creating the tyranny universe, and it is a game universe. kinda an integral quality o' successful games is that they is fundamental fair. always strikes us as jackarse stoopid when developers force women to be weaker or slower or less athletic in a game. freaking unclear on concept o' games to even consider such silliness... not to mention complete oblivious to concerns o' potential female purchasers. HA! Good Fun!

y'know, we got nothing 'gaist pre-made guacamole... with two provisos: 1) fresh tomatoes do not handle refrigeration with their flavor intact 2) lime juice should be fresh squeezed honest, in spite o' possible coloration changes which can be averted with proper storage, avocados survive limited refrigeration with aplomb. most other guac ingredients will see little benefit from a at-your-table prep. that being said, if you see the guacamole actual being made and the preparation involves lime juice from a bottle, send the server away with a polite dismissal... visibly mild disdain is perfect acceptable in such situations. if you is gonna make guac at home and then store, be sure to only add your tomatoes immediate before serving. you may add the fresh squeezed lime juice pre-consumption as the acid in the limes will helps prevent avocado oxidation. 'course good avocados is always the primary factor in good guacamole. kinda like watermelon, the seemingly perfect avocado can end up being a bit meh. no matter what guidelines and skills you got for produce choosing, you can be fooled by mother nature. avocados is, nowadays, available year round, but your local grower (always your best source) is gonna have a peak season. ask. buy from source if possible, and don't be afraid to ask the farmer 'bout when his/her avocados is at their bestest. HA! Good Fun!

complete untrue. everytime michael j. fox said "sorry" on family ties or spin city, we recognized the twerp as kanadian. HA! Good Fun!

congrats and good luck. HA! Good Fun!

Couldn't that be because any time we set it at a static value it will eventually lose purchasing power? So it helps for maybe a couple of years and then we're back to where we were? unfortunately, history is clear opposed to such a belief. the majority o' folks living at poverty levels is unemployed-- over 60%. so you just raised their cost o' living w/o any corresponding increase in income. also, and this is another guarantee, teen jobs decrease dramatically when min wage is increased. 600,000 teen jobs were lost in the 6 months following the 2009 fed min wage increase. so, low income families who is most likely to genuine need teens making extra income is gonna lose out, and lose in a big way. and again, min wage doesn't create money. the business owner who needs must pay more for labor must find a way to cut cost or pass along such costs to customers. raise minimum wage necessitates a corresponding cost of living increase just as does increase in basic utility costs or food prices. the folks making the least amount o' income is always the folks hurt most by such increases. the poor is the folks who has the least disposable income, so raise costs o' basic needs disproportionately affects the poor. minimum wage increases actual hurt the poor, particularly the mostest poor. am understanding that the economics is counterintuitive. if bob is getting paid $15 instead o' $10, he has more money to spend on pay day, yes? seems so obvious that bob is benefitting. unfortunately, bob, as representative o' poverty and low-income earners, is actual losing Every time we see a minimum wage increase. also, keep in mind that Gromnir is the guy always complaining that the single biggest problem facing America is income disparity. the reason why we advocated bernie sanders for President is not necessarily 'cause we thinks he would be the most effective executive, but we believe that bernie gots the correct priorities. we don't always agree with sanders' conclusions, but the President's most important role is actual setting the national agenda. if the impossible were to happen and sanders were elected, then Congress and the media would also be talking 'bout income disparity. nevertheless, in spite o' our seeming obsession 'bout income disparity, we absolute hate mandated min wage increases. seeing as how we is opposed to policies that hurt the poorest segments o' an already polarized society, our aversion to min wage is predictable. HA! Good Fun! ps many small business owners, 'ccording to department of labor, is actual in favor of small and gradual increases in min wage. 'course were only 3 of 5 in favor and from a limited study. even so, incremental, small and predictable increases make far more sense to us. keep up with cost o' living ? is reasonable arguments in favor o' such. unfortunate, that ain't actual how min wage gets increased.

...Why exactly? I mean, seriously, who benefits from having a minimum wage so low, most people on it have to apply for various welfare programs to cover basic necessities? Why is it fair that people indirectly have to pay for services and goods they never use nor want through taxes, because the reason said services and goods are available at such low prices is that the employer is paying minimum wage to its workers? Gfted already linked a good article on some of the issues, but I'd add that all employers are different. It is pretty easy for me to tune out the big chains when they complain about minimum wage. McDonalds is not going to go under because it pays the fry cook a few bucks more. They should trim the fat at the top, and given they are a consumer driven business, the consumers should be driving for that. But small businesses don't have the same profit margin. The difference of a few bucks and hour may drop them into the red. We need to make sure that doesn't happen. I remain skeptical. After all, this isn't the first time the minimum wage was raised, and it was always precluded by much flailing and doomsaying, which generally turned out to be without substance in hindsight. the predictions ain't doom. the predictions is that the minimum wage increase do not actual help. the quality o' life o' the folks earning min wage doesn't improve when their wage is increased, 'cause costs is passed back onto consumers. the fact that we is having this same conversation should be proof that all those previous min wage increases didn't help. is not predictions o' doom. is predictions o' pointlessness. is not simple a prediction either. this is 'bout as close to inevitable as is possible. HA! Good Fun!

is becoming clear how little experience most folks here 'bouts regarding small businesses. single biggest cost o' running such a business is invariably labor. your margins is already razor thin to begin with, so something as trivial as increase cost o' those freaking ketchup packets is gonna put a noticeable dent in profits. am not kidding. places such as mcdonalds has extreme high turnover, so fact that there is scheduled pay increases is not particular significant-- many o' your employees is always gonna be new employees. is just not a heck o' a lot o' fat to trim at an individual mcdonalds franchise, or most other smallish businesses that depend on minimum wagers. any business that depends on minimum wage employees is gonna need pass along costs to consumers. oh, and guess what? the folks most likely to be hurt by the increase costs resulting from a minimum wage increase is the folks who is earning minimum wage. HA! Good Fun!

affirmative action is unfair. am recognizing that there are long-term social benefits that accompany affirmative action, but am not gonna pretend that if Gromnir had, for example, gained admission to boalt 'cause some more qualified asian or caucasian applicant were denied a seat, that woulda' been manifest unfair. the reason why we didn't avail our self of aa benefits is twofold: 1) as we said, aa is unfair 2) if you are a minority, people tend to assume that you benefited from aa. in the eyes o' our colleagues, our accomplishments has been diluted by aa 'cause folks reasonably believe that we benefited from aa. we know better, but we understand the knee-jerk. *shrug* never watched longmire. we recommend renting powwow highway if you is genuine interested in indian and reservation life. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0098112/ the typical african immigrant works... really works. we need nap time. we need game time. we watch football on weekends and hit the gym multiple times a week. we work hard, but we don't feel a need to work any harder than we do. “the art of life is the art of avoiding pain; and he is the best pilot, who steers clearest of the rocks and shoals with which it is beset.” -- thomas jefferson am not actual a thomas jefferson fan, but am a big fan o' avoiding pain. HA! Good Fun! ps we continue to say native american instead of indian. oh well. old habits.