Homeopaths Acupuncturists Most broad-stroke psychometric testing
1,709 karma · joined March 29, 2010
If you would like to contact me, my email address is stubaird@hotmail.com
Homeopaths Acupuncturists Most broad-stroke psychometric testing
Sure, there are bad lawyers like there are bad examples of anything else you care to name. It sucks that you've had a bad time of it, divorce court can't be fun.
But the fact that every interaction you've had seems negative - with your own lawyers, opposing lawyers, judges and even bailiffs (who are essentially non-legal admin/security staff) reveals a pattern. Eventually you have to ask: Is the whole world crazy, or just me?
Disclosure: I am a lawyer. I've had very difficult clients in the past. I generally get along well with clients, opposing counsel and even the opposing clients (to the extent we interact).
I think a real problem arises when people don't realise that their job is a bullshit job, or worse - they start drinking the kool-aid. I'm sure most homeopaths believe strongly in the methods they use and feel they are doing good. Maybe most of the time that's harmless and can be humoured. But on the odd occasion when they believe so strongly that they reject scientific treatments to the patient's detriment, it is actively harmful.
Here an HR rep who was given psychometric tests to play with forgot that he was just playing and fucked over a competent job applicant, as well as his own company.
I cancelled the life insurance policy which was automatically included in my retirement savings several years ago. I don't have any debt (even my mobile phone is pre-paid) so life insurance is basically a massive bet on me dying with no real upside.
Again, YMMV and some people consider it a worthwhile investment. Just trying to contribute my point of view to the discussion.
My country doesn't seem to have implemented the blanket-denial first stage of the process yet, however luckily I have savings which could tide me over until the payments get backdated in that eventuality.
However the submission implicitly assumes that this option is right for everyone ("The one HR benefit that every startup should add"). I recognise that some people see it as valuable. Hopefully those people can also recognise that other people don't!
I also think the strawman of "Take disability insurance or live on the streets" is rather hyperbolic. The actual alternative is relying on social security disability payments and my existing savings vs an insurance-funded pension. Maybe I'll have to let my chauffeur go, but I'm hardly going to be sleeping in gutters if I take the former option.
Maybe mine is the minority view, but I found it a horrendous waste. When I left the employer it offered to have my portion of the policy transferred to me personally so that I could "continue to enjoy the benefits". I didn't even bother responding (despite leaving on otherwise very good terms).
While I work, I expect to be remunerated. But I don't allow myself the hubris to expect that remuneration should continue in perpetuity. If I decide not to work, or am unable to work, I would prefer to adjust my circumstances to accommodate that fact, rather than continue to pretend otherwise.
http://www.amazon.com/Howard-Leight-MAX-1-plugs-Uncorded/dp/...
You're welcome.
I administer several deceased estates (the process for which is to locate and prove the will (if applicable), gather in and dispose of the assets, distribute the balance).
As most deceased people tend to be in the 70+ age bracket, it is very unlikely that you can even comprehend the volume of "stuff" involved in that undertaking.
Typically, 1% - 5% of the stuff has any commercial value. There might be jewellery, an antique or two. I can usually get $100 for a working fridge. Unfortunately we live in a disposable culture - we are geared to buy new rather than re-use old.
Some small proportion of the rest of the stuff can be donated (ie. charities will accept it). The rest fills up 2-5 rubbish skips (6 cubic metres each) and subsequently landfill.
Look around your house. Experience indicates that on your death I'll recover approximately $900 from selling your stuff.
I'm not sure how the focus on pay & conditions translates across the pacific however; our national minimum wage for casual workers is already AU$20.34 (US$18.54) and we have universal healthcare. So I'm guessing the relative benefits of working for Costco are lower as compared to in the USA.
If you manage to sell the corporate entity to a third party without making any warranties about latent claims, you will not be concerned about the corporation's liability. And the purchaser of that corporation is pretty foolish.
However you are still responsible for your own personal liability when you operated the company. Did you breach your directors' duties? Did you commit fraud? Did you sign a guarantee for the obligations of the corporation?
There are three ways to become personally liable off the top of my head. I'm sure there are several more.
The corporate veil may protect them from liabilities of the company (barring fraud/breach of directors' duties), however in this particular instance we have a founder, Rob Rhinehart, who seems to have done most of his marketing and made most of his claims personally. That is, Rob, not Soylent Nominees Ltd, made the statements.
Therefore, if he has breached laws, civil penalty provisions or acted negligently in doing so, he is personally liable.
Source: I recently acted for a home owner who sued her (incorporated) builder in negligence (for building a house which fell down). The company was unfortunately insolvent. Luckily, the founder/director of the company made a number of claims about the expertise and abilities of the building company on the company website (which he hosted personally). We sued the director personally.
Which is awkward.
Just because I sell something doesn't make me exempt from the legal consequences of my actions prior. If I negligently claim that a product will make you healthier and it cripples you, then you can sue me regardless of whether I still own the product. Similarly, I could be prosecuted for dishonest advertising type offences (which aren't wiped clean simply by selling a business!).
You might be talking about a products liability type claim.
Only an incompetent acquirer would take liability for any latent claims in a target acquiree. Most likely they will get strong warranties from the seller about the existence of claims and rely on their own due diligence to ensure they aren't buying a product which is likely to cripple people in the future.
In 90% of cases the seller will retain liability for incidents which pre-date the sale of their business.
Our olives are hand-picked and cold pressed within 24 hours of picking. We produce about 200-250L of oil per year so it is a boutique operation.
We are currently bottling our 2013 oil and have a few bottles in excess of our pre-orders. If anyone on HN is interested in a bottle of gold medal standard Tasmanian oil, please message me for the details.
When I was in certain large, developed cities in China (nearly 15 years ago now) most of the toddlers I saw in public had "open bottom" outfits on; they literally used the street as a toilet. Some parents would hold them over the bin when they needed to go. Many wouldn't.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijackers_in_the_September_11_a...
Even those whom I suspect may be aware of it seem to confine it to a cultural blindspot approaching wilful ignorance. It is something you simply _do not talk about_ in China.
1. Don't take reservations.
My favourite restaurant operates on this basis. On a Friday or Saturday night you will queue for up to an hour for a table. If you prefer to avoid peak hour, there is rarely any queue for lunch. I've eaten there over 100 times and I still don't begrudge the time spent in the queue.
2. Run a lottery
Popular theatrical productions are great at this. If you don't want to book months ahead (or can't afford to spend hundreds of dollars), Book of Mormon offers a ticket lottery before every show. Just show up at the theatre and enter for your chance to win one of 21 discounted, front-row tickets.
To clarify, I'm not suggesting that the establishment in the OP wants to let the poor and/or technological illiterate to attend. However other places have managed to do so without hurting their brand.