The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Those heathens at Disney gave benefits in 1995 and somehow the theme park hasn't been destroyed by meteors and Snow White hasn't turned into a pillar of salt.

My daughter works for Disney. Giving their gay employees benefits is essentially equivalent to giving their employees benefits. Ol' Walt would not be happy.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

If the reality is that discrimination against gays is no longer good for business, that's great. But I assume it's regional. You're not going to make any friends in my town if you put a rainbow flag outside your business. You might just get a brick through the window. Neolithic remedies.

If you're talking Walmart, it's not regional, they are multinational and certain serve many areas where they would get protests and the media is also national/multinational.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Yes, we all know how much Wal-Mart quakes in fear of negative publicity.

You really don't understand that negative press of this sort could hurt business? Thanks for reminding me to not put a lot of effort in responding to your different understandings.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

You really don't understand that negative press of this sort could hurt business? Thanks for reminding me to not put a lot of effort in responding to your different understandings.

So, Wal-Mart cares that it could get negative press about gays but it doesn't care about how over 75% of their workers require public assistance? Amazing. Do you think maybe it's because Fox News spends 100% of the time they talk about Wal-Mart fellating them?

 

[Foxton]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

So, Wal-Mart cares that it could get negative press about gays but it doesn't care about how over 75% of their workers require public assistance? Amazing. Do you think maybe it's because Fox News spends 100% of the time they talk about Wal-Mart fellating them?

Ugh would people quit responding to that ****ing **** bob already about this? What response do you really think he'll ever give past gays/abortion/equal rights are bad?

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

If you're talking Walmart, it's not regional, they are multinational and certain serve many areas where they would get protests and the media is also national/multinational.

I'm saying the acceptance of gay rights is still regional. The Woolworth lunch counter in NYC wasn't segregated while the one in Greensboro was.

Multinationals have to be careful not to offend "local community standards" (read: prejudices). I'd be interested in knowing why Wal-mart went out of their way to twist Hutchinson's arm. Given the typical Wal-mart customer, I'd have bet they would have played "I zee nuuuuuuuuuuuuthink!" They're amoral, but they're smart, so they must have seen a freight train coming.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I'm saying the acceptance of gay rights is still regional. The Woolworth lunch counter in NYC wasn't segregated while the one in Greensboro was.

Multinationals have to be careful not to offend "local community standards" (read: prejudices). I'd be interested in knowing why Wal-mart went out of their way to twist Hutchinson's arm. Given the typical Wal-mart customer, I'd have bet they would have played "I zee nuuuuuuuuuuuuthink!" They're amoral, but they're smart, so they must have seen a freight train coming.

Walmart has flipped from being a pretty conservative business entity to embracing a variety of "progressive" issues in recent years. I'm sure they looked at all relevant factors and decided this move was good for business. Their embracing of renewable energy is another example.

Certainly there are significant variations in different regions. No question.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I'm saying the acceptance of gay rights is still regional. The Woolworth lunch counter in NYC wasn't segregated while the one in Greensboro was.

Multinationals have to be careful not to offend "local community standards" (read: prejudices). I'd be interested in knowing why Wal-mart went out of their way to twist Hutchinson's arm. Given the typical Wal-mart customer, I'd have bet they would have played "I zee nuuuuuuuuuuuuthink!" They're amoral, but they're smart, so they must have seen a freight train coming.

I was thinking that Wal-Mart has a key employee or a member of the family who's gay. Like others have said, Wal-Mart doesn't run away from controversy regardless of the situation. Doing so in this case makes me think that there's someone closer tightly connected to the organization who has a vested interest in that law.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

What response do you really think he'll ever give past gays/abortion/equal rights are bad?

This actually reminds me of something I heard on a POTUS show a few days ago. A guy was pimping his book called something like "Shedding My Skin," about growing up in the Jim Crow south and going through desegregation. He said when schools were desegregated white kids had two reactions. Some got it almost immediately -- he described an instance where he was 11 and he called a black classmate a racial slur and she came right back at him, and it stopped him cold because blacks just didn't talk to whites like that back then. He said he basically did a 180 within a couple days of that incident because he began to see that his black classmates were exactly the same as his white classmates, and all the racist garbage his society had crammed into his head was simply, empirically, false. About half the kids were like that. The other half just dug in deeper and became even more bigoted, and they never -- even decades later as adults -- changed.

It is entirely possible that humans are hard-wired to have one of those two responses, and that's why we can't speak to each other. We are literally living in two different worlds.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I was thinking that Wal-Mart has a key employee or a member of the family who's gay.

Nah, it's nothing personal, Sonny, it's just business. I'm with Bob in saying captains of industry and politics check their personal beliefs at the door and go for the dollar. For all we know half the GOP contingent in Congress is gay, and I'd be willing to bet at least a third of them (the tier 1 grads) are closet atheists, but when it comes to thumping the tub they know what to do. Businessmen are the same -- when they put on their work clothes in the morning they put their morality up next to their toothbrush. It'll be there when they get home.

 

[GrinCDXX]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I was thinking that Wal-Mart has a key employee or a member of the family who's gay. Like others have said, Wal-Mart doesn't run away from controversy regardless of the situation. Doing so in this case makes me think that there's someone closer tightly connected to the organization who has a vested interest in that law.

I think what it comes down to is that Walmart doesn't really care one way or the other whether gays have equal rights--it doesn't directly affect them all that much. So, they'll go whichever way the wind is blowing. Treating their employees like sh** on the other hand, they do care about. It puts a lot of tax payer money in their pockets. So, they are perfectly willing to face the wind on that.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I think what it comes down to is that Walmart doesn't really care one way or the other whether gays have equal rights--it doesn't directly affect them all that much. So, they'll go whichever way the wind is blowing. Treating their employees like sh** on the other hand, they do care about. It puts a lot of tax payer money in their pockets. So, they are perfectly willing to face the wind on that.

I'm sure their CEO is proudest of all the employee's he's hired that require public assistance. After all, he's maximizing his tax dollar then. His accountant must be proud as well.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I'm sure their CEO is proudest of all the employee's he's hired that require public assistance. After all, he's maximizing his tax dollar then. His accountant must be proud as well.

Privatize profit, socialize loss. American capitalism at its finest.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Amazing. For once, I think Bob's been the most reasonable poster the past couple of pages. Fact of the matter is, most of the country does not care whether the gays can marry or not, so for a majority the question has become, "Why not? Let 'em have at it." With that attitude shift, big business is now jumping on board.

Give it 20-30 years, as the Worst Generation becomes an increasingly shrinking minority, and the gays will be a non-issue outside of some churches in flyover country.

 

[Priceless]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Amazing. For once, I think Bob's been the most reasonable poster the past couple of pages. Fact of the matter is, most of the country does not care whether the gays can marry or not, so for a majority the question has become, "Why not? Let 'em have at it." With that attitude shift, big business is now jumping on board.

Give it 20-30 years, as the Worst Generation becomes an increasingly shrinking minority, and the gays will be a non-issue outside of some churches in flyover country.

There's a big difference between "jumping on board" and "strongarming" the governor.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Amazing. For once, I think Bob's been the most reasonable poster the past couple of pages. Fact of the matter is, most of the country does not care whether the gays can marry or not, so for a majority the question has become, "Why not? Let 'em have at it." With that attitude shift, big business is now jumping on board.

Give it 20-30 years, as the Worst Generation becomes an increasingly shrinking minority, and the gays will be a non-issue outside of some churches in flyover country.

Sorry but Bob's all wet. Corporations want to attact good workers without worrying about dumb restrictions like anti-gay laws. Its not any more complicated than that. Coming out in favor of gay rights doesn't generate huge profits unless your business is selling Judy Garland merchandise.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I read an article several days ago (can't find link right now, it's probably behind a paywall anyway....) which described how a US company was prosecuted and fined under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. It was accused of de facto bribery of a foreign government official when it made a donation to that government official's private charity.

Basically, the article said that, if a US-based company were to make donations to a charity run by the family of an official in a foreign government, that company would be in violation of US law and probably would be subject to substantial fines and penalties.


Here's the SEC publication on how to comply: http://www.sec.gov/spotlight/fcpa/fcpa-resource-guide.pdf

and here is the text of the statute itself: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/15/78dd-1



Kind of ironic that it is such a major crime for a US-company to donate to a charity run by the family of another country's government official, yet apparently no big deal at all for a charity run by the family of a US government official to accept donations from other countries' companies, eh?

When a US company does it, it is automatically presumed to be a bribe, yet when a charity run by the family of a US official accepts a similar donation, we are supposed to believe that it is not a bribe?

I thought attorney's were big on precedent and consistent application of the law. Oh well.

 

[Rover]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Having dealt with compliance on this issue, I believe the liability is if you donate with the specific intent to get the govt to approve something you want. A ***-for-tat in short. Being a good corporate citizen wouldn't subject you to criminal prosecution and your compliance department would be on top of what you can and can't do if they're minimally compentent.

 

[burd]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Walmart has flipped from being a pretty conservative business entity to embracing a variety of "progressive" issues in recent years. I'm sure they looked at all relevant factors and decided this move was good for business. Their embracing of renewable energy is another example.

Certainly there are significant variations in different regions. No question.

Corporate conduct aside, Bob, do you personally believe same sex couples should be allowed to become legally married, with all the attendant rights afforded to hetero couples who marry?

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Corporate conduct aside, Bob, do you personally believe same sex couples should be allowed to become legally married, with all the attendant rights afforded to hetero couples who marry?

<img src="http://troll.me/images/futurama-fry/not-sure-if-serious-or-just-trolling-thumb.jpg"></img>