Top 10 Lists Of A Different Sort
AAAAAGGGGGHHHHHH!!! You threw me into a tailspin at 6:50AM. I had to read the first sentence 3 times before I realized it was a typo. Original sentence said “Top 10 anti-homosexual companies...” Then listed notoriously pro-gay companies.
I need more coffee.
Posted by Tacberry
03/09/2005 at 06:53 AM
OOOPS! Fixed.
Cool,now I’m glad I shopped at RadioShack over the weekend.
Alas Nike makes the BEST heavy-duty walking shoes-I walk 30+ miles a week.
Gay or no gay-my Nikes are the best shoes I own and for that reason ONLY I’ll still buy them.Posted by Annoying Little Twerp
03/09/2005 at 08:16 AM
>>How stupid is it from a pure financial standpoint to make an investing decision on whether or not the company has a “gay policy”?
Not stupid in my opinion. It ranks up there with whether a CO allows unions or not. In most CO’s, their primary expense is their labor force. A pro-gay CO is far more likely to allow for ‘same sex domestic partners’ to be allowed on am employee’s health care - a potentially huge expense.
Many factors determine whether or not I will buy a stock. While placement on a top or bottom 10 list as shown above will not be a sole determining factor, it can contribute to the overall profitability of an equity. Especially if evaluating 2 CO’s in a particular sector that are otherwise equal. That being said, I have never made a decision based on this.
Granted, same sex partner costs in and of themselves will not make a HUGE difference, they start a path down a somewhat slippery slope. Next step is unmarried hetero couples feel discriminated against, etc etc…
All factors in how a company runs its business are on the table for potential shareholders.
And by the way, who is saying homosexuals would not be entitled to a private account beneficiary status?
You are off topic. The issue is not whether homosexuals find gainful employment at a CO, it is whether a CO’s corp policy (pro/anti) is an issue to consider for investors.
And by the way Vilmar - given Allan’s recent commentary on lables, observe the following example:
Vilmar provides a list of the “Top 10 Anti-Homosexual Companies.” Why are they “Anti”? Because they:
“Little or no diversity/homo/lesbian/transgendered etc. sensitivity training, virtually non-existent domestic ‘partner’ benefits and no donations to homosexual groups and causes.”
That’s not really “Anti” - if anything it is “Non”. Just because I do not donate to homosexual advocacy groups only means that I do not donate to homosexual advocacy groups. Same thing for forcing my employees to go to sensitivity traianing. It does not mean I think all homosexuals should be lynched. This is the same misinterpretation as the MSM drowned in on Nov 3rd, 2004.
And by the way, if you think laws forbidding gays from beneficiary status are a real possibility, then you’re nuts. The legal ramifications are staggerring - it would be political and litigious suicide.
Vilmar/Allan - Any chance of getting a spellchecker?
Tuff,
For whom? You or us?
I TRY and use one depending on my post.
GENERALLY, if it is short I do it right on-line. If longer, I type it in Word, spellcheck it, cut and then paste to the blog.
If you meant for the people making comments, try going the “MS Word” route.
>>For whom? You or us?
For me! It’s all about me!
>> If longer, I type it in Word, spellcheck it, cut and then paste
Same here, but I’m trying to keep up with OCM’s between bong-hit posts, and as you know it can make for a demanding schedule
Folks, this is a friendly little tip from the BMEWS SecWar: next to the SUBMIT button below is another button named “PREVIEW”. The PREVIEW button is your friend and wants to help you. Before you SUBMIT a post, click the PREVIEW button and take a look at how your post will display. Read over it and correct mis-spellings before you click SUBMIT.
I am not going to add a spell-checker to this blog just because a few morons get excited and rush to submit a hastily written reply that probably shouldn’t have been submitted in the first place.
Take the time to write a pleasant, intelligent reply or comment and you shall be blessed. Failure to do so will result in being cursed. Or flamed. Or both.
USE THE PROPER EDDY-KIT!!
SDK - Speln dont kount. (What can I say, I learned how to spell in the Florida School System at a time that the “whole word method” was being tought.)
OCM - What, you don’t like the free flow of ideas? Someone puts a list together you don’t like and you get your panties in a wad? Come-on, people make investment decisions based on lots of issues, why not forced sensitivity training of their employees?
I sure as hell don’t want a law that says “GAYS HAVE NO RIGHTS TO RETIREMENT BENEFITS!”.
OTOH: I sure as hell don’t want a law that says “Companies must provide gay couples retirement benefits.”
It’s up to the companies to decide what beni’s their employees get. Gay employees can go somewhere much more friendly. If they have a talent or service that is in demand the company will yeald.
Posted by Tacberry
03/09/2005 at 02:14 PM
>>"OCM - What you don’t like the free flow of ideas? Someone puts a list together you don’t
like and you get your panties in a wad?
[snip]
>>Sir or madam (which ever the case) tell me where you got your information from to make that statementhmmmm..
>>Perhap YOU ALL will pass some dumbass law that says GAYS HAVE NO RIGHTS TO RETIREMENT BENEFITS!
>>Speculation: IN OUR GREAT HOMOPHOBIC COUNTRY, A LAW FORBIDDING GAYS FROM RETIREMENT IS NOT OUT OF THE REALM
OF POSSIBILITY!!!!!!!and for dessert:
>>AND GET A GODDAMN PIECE OF SOFTWARE THAT EXPLAINS TO SOME FOLKS WHAT THE FUCK ‘’CONTEXT’’ MEANS.....
>>TUFFBEINGRIGHT: YOU SIR, ARE FUCKING FABRICATING LAIR BY TAKING WHAT I SAY OUT OF CONTEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Here OCM, have some more rope…
OT, but for spell check if you use IE try http://www.iespell.com.
Posted by mt
03/09/2005 at 05:50 PM
Here’s anuther spel chekkur.
Next entry: A Subject Seldom Touched On
Previous entry: Liberals Have Got To Be Seething (Part 2)