History is Bunk

February 26, 2009 on 3:20 pm | In Oh Yeah, The World | No Comments

History is more or less bunk.

Henry Ford

What do you think?

OH

Copyright 2009

Subject: Divorce agreement

February 24, 2009 on 11:19 pm | In Oh Yeah, Poly Tics, Relationships, Religion, The World | 1 Comment

 

Re: FW: Divorce agreement

 

 

Subject: FW: Divorce agreement

 

As an American Liberal I chose to contest this divorce agreement. I cannot in good conscious agree to these terms, for reasons I shall lay out in the following answer.

 

 

Dear American liberals, leftists, social progressives,

socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:

 

We have stuck together since the late 1950’s, but the whole

of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce.

 

In truth this relationship predates the American Revolutionary War. Yes there have been tough times I will agree that. Often times with sides just short of actual killing wars with each other.

 

 

I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future

generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course.

 

You say that we have tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations. Yet if you honestly look back at the relationship, you will see, we have played off each others strengths and weaknesses and so in the process we have in fact make each other stronger.

 

Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let’s just end it on friendly terms.

 

Your argument says that our two ideological sides can not agree on what is right. Yet in all the arguments though out the centuries we have all on both sides, more or less come to agree that baseball, hotdogs , apple pies and moms are really what America is all about!

 

We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.

 

If our differences are irreconcilable, it is not because our goal is not the same. It is because we refuse to accept that differences that come from our desire to have a better world and the methods we should use to get there.

 

Here is a model separation agreement:

 

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by

landmass each taking a portion.

 

To divide up the land mass would create a crisis unparalleled in the history of the USA.  Both sides would end up with a shortage of food and of resources, both elemental and human.

 

That will be the difficult part, but I am sure our two sides can come to a friendly agreement.

 

This would not be possible. As the liberals would get most of the modern technology and the conservatives would get most of the elemental properties. So that, again, it would be a lose, lose situation.

 

After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.

 

Can anyone really believe that is true? The liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al; would end up with most of the architects, techno geeks, musicians, doctors, thinkers, public service gurus and writers.  While the Social conservatives, capitalists and all would end up with most of the farm hands, the carpenters, the truck drivers and electrical plant laborers, the nurses’ aids and computer repair people. Sorry folks, but for a society to work it takes both the thinkers and doers.

 

We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them.

 

You say you don’t like redistributive taxes but I notice that most conservative farmers are in a hurry to get their social welfare checks to grow or not grow their crops. And that the conservative military contractors find that they should get 400 bucks US for a Hardware Hank, 5 dollar US toilet seat. Nor do the conservative law makers find it repulsive to give themselves big raises. Of course it has always been a case of socialism for the rich but capitalism for the poor! Will the poor ever learn?

 

You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU.

 

We will take these as they are good for a country. Just remember when the totalitarian state you want, comes to arrest you for something you did not do, there will be no judges or human rights groups there to remind the state that you have rights to a attorney or attorneys or to remind them that you have a right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Or that you have a right to a jury trial. And that they must treat you humanely.

 

 

Since you hate guns and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.

 

As one that enjoys shooting guns myself, I reject the notion that liberals hate guns, and therefore refuse to leave you have the firearms totally to yourself.

 

I will whole heartily agree that I hate war! But so too, don’t most conservative types? Or is it really, true, that conservatives love to kill everything including babies and pregnant women?

 

Cops we recognize in a fallen world as an unwanted but necessary evil.

 

As to the NRA, by which I assume you mean the National Rife Association?  What good are they? They do no more then support the notion that guns are about hunting! They do not support your constitutional right to keep and bear arms that could really protect your rights against the very thing that you accuse the liberals in the government of trying to take from you! The totalitarian state which you seem to want so badly will, as you so eloquently state, take your guns from your cold dead fingers and feel no remorse about it.

 

You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).

 

Actually we would, want you to keep Oprah as she represents capitalism and conservatism so well. She really is, “it’s all about me,’ type of person which represents your belief’s so well.

 

Michael Moore, we can take him while far too capitalist for us liberals we do find he has some good points. He makes us question what we believe in and why? And that is good.

 

We will take Rosie O’Donnell too as she is funny and we understand that comic relief is past your finite understanding.

 

As to moving them? Don’t you know that is why we have 49 CC motor scooters?

 

But what do we do about the Beetles for sure a liberal counter society group but also much loved by an older generation of conservatives? And Elvis for the same reason?

 

As a liberal I ask do you really want to go though this divorce? If so we claim the likes of Tennessee Ernie Ford, Willie Nelson, among others for their strong belief in family and righteousness.

 

While appearing counter conservative we give you Madonna, the Material Girl as she represents the conservative, capitalistic world view, very well.

 

 

We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies, Wal-Mart and Wall Street.

 

You can have them, because we know that you will have to come crawling to us for the techno toys they need to run their companies and we will take a fair profit and still be richer then you.

 

You can have your beloved homeless,

 

No problem but what will your bosses threaten you with? Isn’t their argument, that there are always people that willing take your job?

 

 homeboys,

 

You mean close friends? Yeah guess as a conservative you don’t have many of them?

 

Or I am guessing that what you really mean is homosexuals? Which is way down on the list of definitions of homeboys, most people would not even guess that is what you meant! We have no problem with homosexuals unless you mean the likes of… Representive Mark Foley, Senator Larry Craig, Pastor Ted Haggard. To be fair of course, there are others of good repute that we would have no problem with.

 

 hippies

 

Hippies? You mean the ones that came back from Vietnam with long hair and a conviction that killing others was wrong?  Or do you mean the long haired conservatives that want people to think that they are hip but believe war is all glory? Yet they themselves have never seen action in a war where they had to kill someone. Yeah we will take the first with all their  emotional issues. You can keep the other group.

 

and illegal aliens.

 

If we take them, who’s going to clean your houses and cook your food and work the fields?

 

We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s and rednecks.

 

Yeah you need the Alaskan fear mongering hot hockey moms, that will tell you that they need to take your guns for the good of the world after their greedy CEO’S, crash your economic system and you try to revolt with guns that are no match for air to ground missiles mounted on choppers and fighter jets. And yeah, at least having the rednecks, will leave you a little better off, as you will need someone to teach you how to break store windows so you can steal what little food that is left after the collapse.

 

We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and Hollywood.

 

Us, liberals will take the Bibles as a good share of us, believe, in God and try to be like Christ.

 

We will give you NBC and Hollywood as mostly what comes out of them is pro conservative, pro capitalist and pro military hate propaganda any way.  Besides with your rednecks assuming your society lasts that long within 30 years 95% of your population won’t be able to read anyway. It is after all waste of effort to teach farm hands and bedpan handlers how to read.  Besides rednecks don’t see no reason to it, anyhow. Right?

 

 

You can make nice with Iran and Palestine

 

Why is peace a bad thing?

 

 and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us.

 

And that proves what? That you have the bigger hammer? Oh well they will still hate you after you win so you will never get to sleep without one eye open.

 

You can have the peaceniks and war protesters.

 

Sure we want them, as they will keep us honest enough to ask the question of if what we are doing is right or wrong.  Only a totalitarian state desires that no one asks any the hard questions. And remember that what a government does to other countries, they will also do to their own people.

 

When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security.

 

As will we but first we will try peaceful means. Of course your way controls your internal population far better. And in all honesty keeps down the number of rednecks you have to feed.

 

We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values..

 

Truthfully I doubt that. But will deal with that below by the songs, mentioned.

 

You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain.

 

We have no problem with that as long as they remember that their rights end where our nose begins.  As Ishmael in Moby Dick pointed out, it is better to sleep with a drunken cannibal then a sober Christian.

 

You can also have the U.N.. but we will no longer be paying the bill.

 

Being liberals we don’t need the U.N. But how will your bosses control Europe and the other countries with out a disguise to hide their invading armies, behind? Of course we can look at the fact that more violent control will control your population better. And not knowing how to read, what will your people have to do at night, besides make more babies to grow up to be killed in a war somewhere?

 

 

We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars.

You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find.

 

Well, these things are all basically techno toys today, so we will take them as you will have no way to keep them running.

 

You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors.

 

Having the money we make from selling our services to everyone else we will have the practicing doctors.

 

We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right.

 

You are right it is a luxury and we understand that. But we also understand that not keeping people healthy disrupts society and makes the economic wheel slow down or even stop because sick and dieing people can’t work.

 

But of course you believe in the survival of the fittest. So if you lose half your work force to sickness the next group up the food chain will have to replace them. But as long as the people at the top don’t have to work there is no problem. For  your sake I hope you are on the top of that food chain!

 

 

We’ll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem.

 

Hummm, you mean that when we are down in the Caribbean Islands we can’t drink to them? Bummer!

 

I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World

to Sing, Kum Ba Ya or We Are the World.

 

Songs, well I guess being we get the song Imagine we also get the Beetles!

Cool, if one likes the Beetles.

 

And we get the song, “I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing.” COOL!  Part of the chorus goes like this, “I’d like to teach the world to sing In perfect harmony I’d like to hold it in my arms And keep it company,” Is it wrong to want to be at peace with others? But of course the truth is even the greedy CEO’s at Coca-Cola™  understood that as a non military company they could sell more product and make more money in peace time then in war time. So the original, “I’d like to Teach the World to Sing,” song was a jingle for Coke. I am guessing the greedy CEO’s at Wal-Mart™ understand that too!

 

“We are the World,” A Michael Jackson song while not a big fan of his because he tends to represent what the capitalists believe is good, I do like this song.

 

Part of it goes like this:

 

When you’re down and out
There seems no hope at all
But if you just believe
There’s no way we can fall
Well, well, well, well, let us realize
That a change will only come
When we stand together as one[Chorus]
We are the world
We are the children
We are the ones who make a brighter day
So let’s start giving
There’s a choice we’re making
We’re saving our own lives
It’s true we’ll make a better day
Just you and me

 

 

 

Again I wonder what is wrong about wanting to make the world a kinder, gentler place. Don’t Christians believe we are all Children of God?  And that we are to make the world a better place?  But again this goes against the survival of the fittest belief.  Oh well, I guess being the farm hands don’t get insurance and the nurses aids cant afford to go to the doctors in the hospitals they work at in your society they will soon die then you can take their place. And in 40 or 50 years your totalitarian state will be so sick the liberals that you hate so much will have to come in and clean up your mess, so they can live in peace.

 

I saved the Kum Ba Ya song for here because you really need to read the whole song:

 

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

 

Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s laughing, Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

 

Someone’s crying, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s crying, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s crying, Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

 

Someone’s praying, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s praying, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s praying, Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

 

Someone’s singing, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s singing, Lord, kum ba yah!

Someone’s singing, Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

 

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

Kum ba yah, my Lord, kum ba yah!

O Lord, kum ba yah!

Public Domain

Words and Music by Unverified

 

From: http://www.higherpraise.com/lyrics1/Kum_Ba_Ya.htm

 

The only reasonable assumption that can be make is that the person that came up with this Divorce Agreement is an rightwing conservative atheist and their true purpose is to destroy Christianity!

 

Kum ba yah means “come by here.” So the translation is this:

 

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

O Lord, come by here!

 

Someone’s laughing, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s laughing, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s laughing, Lord, come by here!

O Lord, come by here!

 

Someone’s crying, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s crying, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s crying, Lord, come by here!

O Lord, come by here!

 

Someone’s praying, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s praying, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s praying, Lord, come by here!

O Lord, Come by here!

 

Someone’s singing, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s singing, Lord, come by here!

Someone’s singing, Lord, come by here!

O Lord, come by here!

 

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

Come by here, my Lord, come by here!

O Lord, come by here!

 

Isn’t that what a Christian wants, for the Lord to come closer to them?  My understanding of this letter, is that it is not, the Christian’s desire, to come closer to the Lord. So I ask what need is it for a conservative to have a Bible?

 

 

We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can give

trickle up poverty your best shot.

 

Trickle down economics did not work under Reagan and it will not work today. Hey let’s give more money to the banks to bail them out so us rednecks will get some money from it!

 

Poverty is caused by greed.

 

Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag.

 

As a liberal the name United States of America, does not offend me. As a liberal history buff our history does not offend me. Though I to admit that conservatives that don’t know bull about the history of the USA does. As do their simplistic unthought out answers to history and to problems the USA is facing. When I see the USA flag I am as patriotic as most conservatives. The flag reminds me of all that mankind can be! But it also reminds me of how bad people can be and that makes me sad!  

 

Would you agree to this? If so, please pass it along to other

like minded liberal and conservative patriots and if you do not agree, just

hit delete. In the spirit of friendly parting, I’ll bet you ANWAR which one

of us will need whose help in 15 years.

 

The fact is that liberals and conservatives need to play off of each other because it makes them and their country stronger.

 

If you think that this makes some sense perhaps you would pass this along.

 

Another war? Why do we need a war? Besides the conservatives would most likely lose as all the neat techno toys will be owned by the liberals and their children will be able to read and write so even if the liberals lost they would still control the victors, because they would need their skills.

 

Sincerely,

 

John J. Wall Law

 

Student and an American

 

P.S. Also, please take Barbara Streisand & Jane Fonda with

you.

 

 

This liberal wonders why the conservatives want to give us Barbara Streisand and Jane Fonda?  What?  They only like to, kill and rape little boys and girls?

 

The above is to be considered satire and does not reflect any hatred toward any persons. Though it does reflect a hatred toward simplistic answers to complex issues.

 

Satirely yours,

 

OH

 

Copyright 2009

Nose Hair and Other Things

February 23, 2009 on 1:37 pm | In Oh Yeah, The Body and Things | No Comments

Nose hair and other things.

 

As we get older, especially us guys, we tend to get more nose hair and ear hair. Which I suppose is really is not that bad.  Yet, at the same time these things grow in thicker we seem to lose what little hair we had on the top of our heads, in the first place.

 

Now mind you that really I am not complaining. That does seem to be what life is all about. Getting more of one thing while exchanging it for something else. Like when we were children we had lots of time but not much money. As we get older we tend to have more money but we seem to lose the time.  A sad but true state of affairs, I am afraid.

 

Though I must confess, that extra nose and ear hair does come in handy as we get older. I mean look at all the old folks out there that have hair hanging down over the faces. Have you noticed how they seem to always have it hanging over their ears and sitting just inside their earlobes?  I mean have you really noticed that? They always seem to have a little bit of hair on the top of their head that just seems to be somewhat out of place? You have noticed that haven’t you?

 

Well the next time you notice that, take a good look. Well try to be somewhat discrete about it! This is no reason to embarrass anyone! Do you know what you will notice? Hummmm? Hummm. Well, I will tell you what you will see. You will see that the hair hanging over the nose!  And that hair that looks so uncomfortable hanging inside the ears! You well see the truth that it is really not hanging over the nose and hanging inside the ears! And the truth will set you free! Yes, that truth will set you free! What is that truth?

 

And that truth is, that instead of hanging over the nose and hanging inside the ears, it is coming from there. Really if you don’t believe me take a good look yourself. And the truth will set you free! Amen!

 

And you all thought us old people were slowing down in the brains department. Had you fooled didn’t we?

 

Thinnin’ on top,

 

OH

 

Copyright 2009

Why bail the car companies out?

February 22, 2009 on 5:03 am | In Oh Yeah, Poly Tics | No Comments

Why bailing out the car companies won’t help the economy.

 

We hear a lot about the need to bail out the car companies.

But we don’t ask we they need to be helped. The assumption seems to be that if we give them money to build new cars all will be fine and people will buy the new cars that they build.

 

To see why it won’t save the car companies we need to ask ourselves a some questions:

 

1.     Why have people been buying so many cars in the past?

2.     Do people really need to buy a new car every 2 to 3 years?

3.     Do most people that buy a used car need to buy a new used car every 2 to 3 years?

4.     Is it possible that by thinking that there was a need to buy new that often that people were buying beyond their means?

5.     Is it possible that the car manufacturers were expecting, something, that was not sustainable in the long run?

6.     Should we have looked when interest rates on vehicles went down to 1 to 2 percent and even zero percent, to seen if something was wrong with the car buying model we were using?

 

I am not going to give the answers I believe are correct. I am just going to put these questions out there, that you may have something to think about.

 

A shopping we should go,

 

OH

 

 

Copyright 2009

Wine or Beer?

February 20, 2009 on 9:12 pm | In Oh Yeah, Pigin'g Out!, The World | No Comments

Wine or beer? Which is better for the environment?

 

The question comes from Norway to a MSN website:

 

http://green.msn.com/Green-Living/Sip-Siding/?gt1=45002

 

The question was this:

 

Hi Umbra,

Due to, among other things, (organic) beer, I ended up in a rather heated discussion on the environment the other day. I’m wondering if you could help clear up a couple of these more or less classic micro-level questions. Which is more environmentally friendly: lighting a cigarette with a match or a lighter? (And how bad is smoking from an environmental point of view anyway?) After hand wash: paper towel or air dryer? Paper cup of coffee or good old ceramics? Wine or beer?”

Today my interest lies mainly with the wine and beer question.

The answer given deals with mainly transportation and in what quantities it is moved in.

 

One of the obvious answers is not to drive and drink as it cost much energy to drive.

 

The author used a 2007 study called “Red, White, and Green,” http://www.drvino.com/2007/10/30/calculating-the-carbon-footprint-of-wine-my-research-findings/ . It deals with the carbon costs of production and transport of wine. The report, http://www.wine-economics.org/workingpapers/AAWE_WP09.pdf , mentions the CO2 emissions caused by the making of wine but it proposes that it is more then offset by the CO2 that the vines take remove from the air.

 

So they basically look at the cultivating and machinery needs and transportation of the product.  In short they boil the issue down to how the product is shipped and how far. And how they store it.

 

Beer on the other hand boils down to storage refrigeration at stores, manufacturing the glass bottles and producing the barley and malt. And finally the transportation. For the carbon footprint left behind.

 

Still though the question that begs an answer to me is in the processing of wine and beer which leaves the biggest carbon footprint? And the second question, is this, what about in the actual use of the product?

 

Does anyone know this? Does anyone care about this but me? I would think that in the environmental equation it would be important to know this also, so that one would make wise decisions on what to drink. For providing that transportation costs, growing costs and storage costs were equal wouldn’t these two questions make a difference if it were really about the environment?

 

But let’s get real; it is really about feeling good about getting high that we ask these questions.  Isn’t it?

 

Should we have a glass or wine or a glass of foamy beer? Which one at this point gives off the biggest carbon footprint.

 

Awaiting a good answer.

 

Cheers and bottoms up,

 

OH

 

Copyright 2009

 

 

 

Asteroid North Dakota

February 17, 2009 on 7:39 pm | In Oh Yeah, The World | No Comments

North Dakota has finally come of age.  Who would have thought that we could look at the skies one day and say, yes sir, Asteroid North Dakota is out there going around the sun somewhere between Mars and Jupiter in the Main Asteroid Belt.

 

It was named but University of North Dakota doctoral candidate, Vishnu Reddy, who discovered it. 

 

While a doctoral candidate in North Dakota, he has to go to other states to look at the sky though a big observatory telescope as North Dakota has none. While still being a candidate for a graduate degree, of which he hopes to complete his studies this spring.  He has been very busy scanning the skies and has found 18 to 22 asteroids, depending on the source and a supernova. One asteroid of which was named for his native India.

 

He discovered this one in when he was star gazing in Arizona. And he chose to name it Asteroid North Dakota to honor the state and to bring to attention the fact ,that North Dakota has no big telescopes. Even though as he points out that the state because of lack of lots of people would make a wonderful place to have a big telescope.

 

Of course the questions we all want to know, is how big is it? Where is it at? And is it going to crash into North Dakota?

 

The answers lie blowing in the wind. Though roughly it is a couple of miles in length which means conceivably it is somewhat smaller when it is measured the by its width. It has a surface temperature of about 170 degrees below zero, Fahrenheit? Not sure of the temperature scale used. Though in any case it is somewhat cooler then the usual low’s, North Dakota normally experiences. While it is traveling at several thousand kilometers an hour it some 270 million miles from North Dakota and is currently in a holding pattern that present no short term or even long term threat to North Dakota.

What a relief!

 

If you want to see it you will need at least a 20 inch telescope to see it as a dot in the sky.

 

Hope you have many happy years of star gazing Mr. Reddy. And I hope you inspire others to star gaze too.

 

OH

 

Copyright 2009

Redundancy

February 13, 2009 on 11:17 pm | In Oh Yeah, Poly Tics | No Comments

Redundancy, according to Webster is “the quality or state of being redundant.”*  Hummm, that sure tells me a lot? So here, I get to look up the word redundant. Dear Mr. Webster will like that. I suppose, so will Mrs. Webster. A chicken in her pot again tonight.

 

Webster bless his great knowledge of the English language tells me that redundant means it is “exceeding what is necessary or normal.”*  Cool I can understand that. Likely very simple English, as I suppose I may learned that in 4th or 5th  grade.

 

Which brings me up to the point of why I looked up the word redundancy.

I just love the British, they have such funny ways of saying things. In all fairness, though, I suppose they think the same thing about us midwestern Americans. Well the article I was reading was about americans losing jobs. Well it was on Telegraph.co.uk, so I suppose, I should not expect them to use good old fashioned English! And they said that there were 1.5 million people made redundant.  An interesting way of saying that they had more people then the work they had. But I could live with that little quirkiness, no problem.

 

I went a little farther in to the article then they said that one company was “dispensing with 5,000 positions in its first company-wide redundancy scheme in its 35-year-history.” From the Telelgraph dated 06 Feb 2009.

Ok I say to myself I understand the first word redundant. I understand that redundancy is a word the comes from the word redundant but what is a redundancy scheme?  It seems that the British likes to say that too many workers for a company’s sales makes the workers redundant. And since they can not make money if they have too many workers. Which I point out here, the extra workers are redundant. They need to get rid of the redundant workers. So a redundancy scheme is getting rid of too many workers.

 

What I have not figured out is how they get rid of the workers? In US they would call them in and say we’re sorry, joe, but we just don’t have enough work for you so we are going to have lay you off. But in the UK workers are redundant and word redundant is also use to mean they are laying someone off.

 

Does the conversation go something like this?

 

Boss: Joe could you come into my office for a minute?

 

Joe: Sure.

 

Boss: How many years have you been here Joe?

 

Joe: 10 years.

 

Boss:  Well you know business is slow and times are not looking good for some time to come? (Assuming the boss is a nice guy).

 

Joe: Yes I understand that.

 

Boss:   Well Joe you are redundant and so we are going to redundant you.

 

………..

 

That would have to be a big moral booster! Joe must kinda feel like, just a bunch more spare parts for the old Ford that got thrown out.

 

Well I guess that most of have at one time or another been in a job that though no fault of our own, were just a redundant part. And in a redundancy scheme got thrown out. That, happens in life. 

 

Words are funny sometimes in how they get used. The pain of no work is not so funny.  Laid off or redundanted means tight times.

 

 Hopefully, things will turn arround soon and many that have been “laid off” or “redundanted” out of work will be going back to work soon. If not remember there are a lot of redandanted people out there, that are going though the same thing and keep the faith.

 

Hang in there!

 

OH

 

 

* Merriam-Webster online.

Copyright 2009

Powered by WordPress with Pool theme design by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds. Valid XHTML and CSS. ^Top^