QuoteYou really want some anti-LGBT figures like Ayoub Khan keeping Jews out of city on a "Moral question"? That doesn't seem sensible.
Quote from: garbon on October 18, 2025, 06:27:43 PMWould vetting have stopped the antisemites who apparently came out in force in Amsterdam?
Quote from: Josquius on October 18, 2025, 06:09:35 PMWhat's not to find issue with?
Blundering political interference, with a bit of a spin that draws close to other dodgy stuff lately, in a pretty sensible business as usual policing issue.
The media too is falling into presenting it as being about something it isn't rather than just being pretty standard after serious hooliganism incidents.
Incidentally what I would prefer is a compromise where a few hundred tightly vetted tel aviv fans can come but on the whole theyre generally made to stay away.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 18, 2025, 08:34:08 PMThe evidence lies in the fact that people were laid off. There is no economic or financial rationale for laying off profitable employees. It doesn't boost share price, it doesn't help the CEO's options package.
QuoteIt's perfectly plausible that a company's overall profit can increase while one division loses money.
QuoteGreed can also lead to cheating, to fraud. I am opposed to fraud.
Quote from: HVC on October 18, 2025, 08:23:11 PMYou're assuming a segment wasn't profitable. Theres no evidence of that (though to be fair there no evidence it's false). The scenario we have is profitable quarter, 25% increase year over year. People laid off. In this scenario is greed good?
*edit* and originally I left open the question of difference possibilities, you're the one that latched onto the greed is good ethos, so now I'm curious as to whether you think greed is always good hence the more narrow scenario above
Quote from: HVC on October 18, 2025, 05:14:49 PMLaying people off for a few points higher EPS and the CEO bonus* that comes with it hardly seems equitable.
Page created in 0.017 seconds with 11 queries.