jerryskids

Sorry to hear, but like you said, it was fast and she was on happy juice.

That's a lot of words to say thank you for my adding facts to your feelz. Also I'm too busy at the moment. Besides, it's fun watching @Engorgeous Georgebang his head against the wall with you.

I can't say what was the biggest reason. But yes, there appear to have been multiple factors.

https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/14/median-annual-income-in-every-us-state.html Facts, not feelz

Bankruptcy implies that the company was already on less than ideal financial footing, so they were less able to absorb the wage hike.

I just gave you the definition of a starter job -- your first job, not intended to support a mortgage and a family. Did you work to eat and live solely on your first job? If so, I would venture to guess you were in the vast minority. The labor is not "exploited," comrade. It is paid what it is worth. Again, since you continue to ignore it, I'm talking about a starter job which is a HS kid flipping tortillas at Rubios... oops, no longer. Question: Do you think it makes sense to raise the minimum wage in the entire state? Do you think a restaurant in, say, Beverly Hills could afford to pay more than a similar one in, say, Bakersfield or Fresno? Mmm hmm...

I probably wouldn't have jumped at that bet; DBacks haven't been playing well. Corbin Carroll is completely broken, and 3/5 of our starting pitchers (top 2, maybe 3) are injured. But hey, thanks to the Giants for fixing what ails them.

I just said it was for HS kids with no training or education. Are you high? if not, why do you waste my time by replying without reading my posts?

Rubios apparently had a choice.

And "fair" is not the word I use to describe $20 for a starter job intended for HS kids with no training or education.

Perhaps. Regulations are designed to incentivize behavior. It's often not the behaviors the regulators want though. Unintended consequences.

I'm imagining a thick Russian accent saying "poodle of AIDS"

Turrble post.

Well, I have found some women to be physically attractive, so I presume so.

Alts: Poston Kitayama

5.08 Thomas Detry @dain11279for Mr. Irrelevant

Yeah, that's what I'm doing. Were you doing a double bicep pose when you typed this? They say when you have a hammer, all problems look like nails. Torrid has a big racist hammer and is flailing like whack-a-mole trying to hit his racist boogeymen. Besides, the post in question? I made that in response to you. At the time, neither you nor anyone else questioned my explanation. So remarkably, you actually come off as (a little) smarter than Torrid here. Well done, baby steps.

Yeah, getting called a dumbfuck racist by another simp pseud Leftie who can't process English is taking its toll on me.

Yeah, smoke is just spraying from my fingertips, you've upset me so.

Since you had trouble reading my initial words, I'll paste it slower.

You're restating my words in a simplistic, inaccurate way. The answer is in them, read more slowly. Plus you added another simple conclusion: supporting racist belief and policy. You Lefties will just never get those unlike you. I've noticed you like to call people weak and frightened. Projecting a bit, I'd say.

These responses show the typical Leftist inability to understand anyone who opposes their obvious correctness. And "racist dumbfocks" is a typical simplistic Leftist summary. You'll fit in well with the new breed of simp pseud Lefties here.

Also, I just noticed that the headline says 10 now, and the list within has removed the Lions, but it still says 11 at other parts of the article.

Agreed. First, it seems to be measuring if they've seen proactive tweets from the teams. Clearly they missed the Lions, as @TimHauckpointed out. Second, what exactly does support in the offseason mean? Send your cheerleaders to a parade? Whatever. Third, it's written like crap: Can there be no question, or are they apparently in favor of it, dummy?

OK