Rougarou

Finale was awesome; this season was great. I am in for Season 4.

That was hilarious and hat tip for the DFW book

I pay for myself, wife and 3 kids. $86.94 semi-monthly, so $173.88/month, company pays $780 semi-monthly or $1560 a month Cigna EPO $20 office visit copay $0 deductible individual $0 deductible family $2,500 out of pocket max individual $5,000 out of pocket max family I have heard every time I use it that they are amazing benefits, but they sound in line with most of you guys here, so I guess everyone has the good stuff. We are privileged.

A super quick google search returned: The Secret Life of Pets 2 grossed $158.3 million in the United States and Canada, and $271.2 million in other territories, for a worldwide total of $429.4 million, against a production budget of $80 million. Deadline Hollywood calculated the net profit of the film to be $118 million, when factoring together all expenses and revenues I rented Trolls 2 for a family movie unit. 5 people, at $20 total, so basically the "ticket" was $4 each. I got to make my own cookies and eat our own Easter Candy. It was an amazing experience and the next night we promptly bought Sonic the Hedgehog because it's so frictionless. We are the family who will wait for it to come on streaming but if it were on demand, we'd buy it to see the new movies because going to a movie theatre is a pain and not worth it. I'm curious to see how this plays out because AMC is in the position of Blockbuster 25 years ago in my book.

Congratulations on completely misunderstanding, misreading and/or generally mischaracterizing my day's worth of posts in this back-and-forth?

Truly this whole thing has been a huge "what about Trump" exercise in the effort to equalize and pardon Biden's raping (allegedly). It would be more honest to just say "You know what, he potentially raped her but that was years ago and we need him to win and get Trump out of office so we aren't going to deal with it unless rabble rousers provide a smoking gun that we just simply can't ignore away. And maybe even then Trump is such an evil threat we gotta get him out."

Just watched that video again. Sickening. It's a cruel world and people should really be grateful for how they were raised and their blessings that you don't have to be cruel to someone over some $0.09 noodles.

I guess I'm just learning a lot today and getting an education on the unemployment system and how it works in one of those ways that blows everything you've ever known and seen about it, out of the water. I'll have to ask all the deadbeat people I know who were fired and yet got unemployment what sort of kompromat they all had on all their bosses and companies. I actually had no idea you were a lawyer and I'm not even sure what gainful employment-law work would look like or how to define that, but I assume it's not helping deadbeat Billy Bob from the AT&T call center who got fired for being late all the time and now can't get unemployment now but something more heady and chunky, right? Something that amounts to an ROI on your expensive time which would lend itself to more corporate work a level? Maybe not.

The way you are posting, you make it sound as if you have absolutely zero first or second-hand exposure, history or experience with unemployment benefits (giving or receiving). You are citing the policies and procedures as they are written without any consideration to how these things have historically and, until tomorrow, actually and practically play out and get executed. It's actually really strange to me because unless you really are someone who has never had a friend or family member talk your ear off about unemployment benefits and the process and technology that they are going through, citing the letter of the law and throwing out how it works when tires meet the road is averting your eyes. If you are someone who doesn't know, sorry.

Okay. I've now grasped this. I guess I've just misunderstood the unemployment racket for a long time, which is weird because I've actually also witnessed it first hand for a long time and have seen how the game is played. As the old adage goes, "don't quit, get fired." Unless you do something egregious, you will get unemployment for being fired. That's been about the reality of it for the last 20 years. Now if you are telling me, "but it's different now, they are going to audit reasons and dig in to try and limit the overexposure unemployment benefits are having in post-corona times" then I would say I don't believe that until I see it. The optics would be horrible and the majority of people this affects are lower wage/lower value roles that would be viewed as victims of a pandemic whose government failed them, not overfed and overpaid folks like us here.

Why can’t they get unemployment? Because it’s bankrupt in the hypothetical future? maybe I’m missing something fundamentally here, but just call in sick a lot and be a dummy and get fired and then get unemployment if you dont have the privilege of a white collar job that you can do from home and you don’t want to go to work in public and leave your house.

I enjoy the occasional Jim Schutze and Dale Hanson performance art as much as the next guy so don’t take this as someone who just dismisses The Observer out of hand, but that was a really, really weak take on this, in my opinion. It’s like he was stretched to take 2 real points and make them 5, so he added emotion and feelings to try and make some flimsy rationale that are valid supporting arguments to a larger point at best and flat out conjecture and stupid at worst, stand on their own. Peer pressure! The cost of disposable receipts! The What-If’s!!! e.g. “What if a customer doesn’t want to leave the table after he or she eats!?!?! HUH?” Maybe I’m not the target audience, but this linked piece just make the anti-open up the city folk look like the pajama boy memes. Or maybe that’s semi-conscious bias from seeing the guys photo at the bottom.

* You quit your job because you feel it's unsafe to work, no benefits for you * You get fired from your job because of *reasons*, benefits for you I think it goes back to the age old gaming of the system that boils down to the rule of thumb: Don't quit your job, you should get fired, if you want to be eligible for unemployment

Yep, I should have clarified the drug episode was the weakest of the season and not well executed. Otherwise agree with mdmost

Are you trying to answer inline with red or something?

I think, to clarify,: * You quit your job because you feel it's unsafe to work, no benefits for you * You get fired from your job because of *reasons*, benefits for you I think it goes back to the age old gaming of the system that boils down to the rule of thumb: Don't quit your job, you should get fired, if you want to be eligible for unemployment

Questions: 1. What did I miss where you get cut off from unemployment because you refuse to go apply for jobs in good faith (as opposed to just doing it to keep the unemployment coming like folks do now if they don't want to work) and get back in the workplace? 2. Why or how would you have less money flowing into the economy than you do now, when things are shut down? I don't follow that train of thought. Commentary: I don't agree with you that you are going to have businesses trying to open but no customers. The proof will be in the pudding and the assessment of the data after the first couple of weeks, but my hypothesis is that business will be booming. I am basing this off opinion and conjecture, obviously, as we all are, but mainly because: - Most people are reckless, impulsive and unpredictable - People are selfish; we want what we want and who cares about others - People are chomping at the bit to get back to normal and do things and get out of the house - In the little I've gone out and shopped for groceries and done a Home Depot run, people are already ramping it up and getting back into the swing of things. They just need the formal approval.

Full disclosure: I was/am a Yang Gang'er. I think this pandemic has-- at least, should-- have done more to advance the UBI than anythings. It's a real life case study of why we need one.

I feel like there is a false choice in our minds, which might seem to contradict what I said earlier, but it doesn't. The essential worker who is not privileged to work from home-- they cannot provide their value over the internet and their value is derived from physical interactions e.g. police officer, construction worker, bar tender, etc.-- and is mandated to come into an office or the field before they feel emotionally/mentally/physically ready is no worse off than they would be if they remained furloughed, laid off or otherwise not working due to the economy being shut down. Their choice is no income due to not being able to work and no near term prospects or quitting a job and having no income or near term prospects. It's functionally the same thing. To the privileged works from home and the government not a) being competent enough to ever roll out a safe opening and b) not caring about people over corps, I really do agree with you. I don't see passing a law like that as the government telling companies to go f themselves. Just like giving people a couple of grand; the government isn't doing it because it cares about you, it's doing it to prop up the house of cards that is our service economy driven GDP. A metric crap ton of human beings work in the services version of a bridge to nowhere, which we are finding are fundamentally luxuries and of elastic demand. While they might inform your quality of life and how you value our time on earth, nobody really needs to eat Chuy enchiladas or drink at bars or go to sporting events or buy a new wardrobe every season. These people need to make some basic income money and pay basic bills to survive, so I argue too that keeping all those who can work from home is also in the government's interest in the name of keeping what productivity and industry humming that is still capable of fixing it's lips and passing air through them, doing so. To that end I think that the government attempting to please corporations, and allowing people by law to continue to work from home, is one in the same until a vaccine is ready.

https://www.surlyhorns.com/board/index.php?/topic/14584-texas-re-opening-announced/page/6/&tab=comments#comment-2225825

Wow. She's really going all in on trying to get that VP spot. That's show business, baby.

When I say "you", I meant us UT-degreed professionals of still-somehow-abundant privilege on this website. Yes, some folks might have to go to an office before they are ready or willing and in this climate there really isn't a choice because there aren't a lot of job openings. I do think that a law should be passed folks can work from home on their decision, up until the date a vaccine is ready. If they choose to come to the office because they just have to have the social interaction and bad coffee, that's on them, but an employer shouldn't make that call for them. As for me, someone who consults and someone who pre-covid flew every Monday morning to a client site and flew back home every Thursday afternoon; I'm not ready to start flying around the country again. Not sure when I will be, but I won't be jet-setting around until I feel comfortable to do so. And I'm sure the first time back in the saddle is going to be weird and I won't be "fully" ready.

On an individual level I don't see the problem: Most people are just going to continue to stay home for a bit and let those really chomping at the bit (whether it be legitimate or they are dumb chuds) get out and be the canaries in the coal mine. After a month or so the rest of us will take a decision on whether to re-emerge from our privileged caves stockpiled with toilet paper, frozen ribeyes in our third freezer, and back-to-back-to-back-to-back--to-back zoom meetings or to bunker down for another 6 weeks. Nobody is stopping you from staying home and avoiding the risk. If the argument is, "but Rougarou, this is just going to cause a Round 2 with a spike due to not having testing and contact tracing and will delay a better opening of the cities/economy", I say to you, you are pinning your hopes on something that won't happen and you are trying to make others prove a negative a la Russell's teapot. There is not enough reasonable evidence based on the historical actions of our government to reasonably expect that come July, or whatever date you might have in your mind, we will have the processes and tools in place. Maybe we have been witnessing and following different governments, but that has been my experience. So if that is your argument, I say it's a bad one for keeping us locked down. If your argument is more akin to "no broken eggs is worth the omelette" from a moral and ethical values consideration, and even 1 death from coronavirus is too big a cost to rebuild/re-normalize our way of life, then I can jive with that. I'm not seeing a lot of that, however, and it would be a rare and hard to maintain stance indeed. I think that is why and how we've seen some really clumsy attempts at analogizing roadway deaths by vehicles (which hits close to home as someone who has used this time in quarantine to do online defensive driving) and the common flu as a way to try and have a mainstreet conversation about risk management and tolerance. The problem is that Dr. Oz is a quack and Dr. Phil a chud who raised a weirdo and the huddled masses they are trying to communicate to aren't much better.

Minority Opinion alert: This last episode was rad and I'm excited for the season finale. I think this has been a much better season than season 2. I've dug it.

I made a turkey sandwich with miracle whip on Mrs. Baird's bread and I thought about that poignant scene in the last episode. The dad and son, whose relationship was rocky as the son was going through puberty and dealing with his hormones, bonded and reaffirmed their Jewish heritage and identity as "family" over the disappointment of a bologna sandwich on mayo and white bread. "They are trying to kill us" the Jew said of the Goyem, as they smugly joked about their preference for more cured and cultured deli meats and breads. That was a nice, understated moment, I thought.