Maine’s passage of ‘right to food’ amendment stirs celebration, worry

what do you want me to argue? You have used phrases, that you appear not to understand.

Maybe you can better example why you think people don't have equal protection under the law for unemployment insurance....
lol. I have used phrases You appear to not understand.

Isn't it self-evident? Employment is at the Will of Either party not just the employer or the State for benefits purposes.

Why is a right-winger typically ignorant but condescending towards others?
 
No, you have the right to have opportunity to equally and fairly be employed based on your ambition so you can earn money to buy your own food.

On the surface it sounds like a noble endeavor, but upon closer inspection it won't be the end of it. Soon people will want the right to more and more and more. Expecting everything to just be given to them. Thinking they have a right to everything and democrats will want to give it to them in exchange for their votes.

Want food? Get a job and buy it. Even at the restaurant I've been going to for 30 years every Saturday for breakfast has a guy with no legs in a wheelchair that is the host. If he can work then so can almost everyone else.
 
lol. I have used phrases You appear to not understand.

Isn't it self-evident? Employment is at the Will of Either party not just the employer or the State for benefits purposes.

Why is a right-winger typically ignorant but condescending towards others?
Correct, folks can get state benefits, and due to the Constitution, and equal protection of the law, are treated equally under the state law regulating unemployment insurance and other state benefits.
 
Correct, folks can get state benefits, and due to the Constitution, and equal protection of the law, are treated equally under the state law regulating unemployment insurance and other state benefits.
Why do you believe the law is being applied equally now?
 
Why do you believe the law is being applied equally now?
Might not be in all cases....I don't know every single case out there...but there is a process to appeal, as well as if you believe your Constitutional right is being violated, you can sue. If the problem exist, and likely at times it might, it's not widespread

Why do you think it's not? Do you have some examples to show us?
 
not eating is a good thing! folks need to be skinny!

Language is important, and there's a bit of a problem with saying there is a "right" to food. A "right" is something you have that no one is required to provide for you.

The right to free speech - no one is required to build you a platform and give you a microphone.
The right to free assembly - no one is required to put you on a bus and transport you to a rally.
The right to bear arms - no one is required to give you an AR-15.

A right to food? Oops. That means that someone has to grow the food and make it available to you.
A right to healthcare? Same thing. Someone has to build hospitals, get trained in medicine, provide medical equipment, research, develop and bring drugs to market, etc.

See the difference? One is something you have, the other is enslavement because you have now forced people to work so you can have.
 
Might not be in all cases....I don't know every single case out there...but there is a process to appeal, as well as if you believe your Constitutional right is being violated, you can sue. If the problem exist, and likely at times it might, it's not widespread

Why do you think it's not? Do you have some examples to show us?
This is the Law for Legal purposes: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

This is how it is being applied unequally for unemployment compensation: At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."
 
This is the Law for Legal purposes: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

This is how it is being applied unequally for unemployment compensation: At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."
Oh, yeah, have you won your court case yet?
 
This is the Law for Legal purposes: The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

This is how it is being applied unequally for unemployment compensation: At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."
Well, that's a different clause from the Constitution then, the equal protection clause.

and it's true...but I am not sure how you think that applies to 'at-will' employment laws.

We are free to travel to any state in the Union we want, we are free to have the basic fundamental rights in each state...in other words, I can leave my home state, and say go to Vermont, and enjoy the same basic fundamental rights, I can buy property there, engage in business etc...but I still have to follow Vermont law, so long as that law doesn't violate the US Constitution...then it would be an illegal law.
"Protection by the government; the enjoyment of life and liberty, with the right to acquire and possess property of every kind, and to pursue and obtain happiness and safety; subject nevertheless to such restraints as the government may justly prescribe for the general good of the whole."

What do you think the clause means?
 
Why do you say that?

Because I spent 20 years working in the utility construction business. Most underground utilities are put in using an HDD machine (Horizontal Directional Drilling). It is very expensive to go for long distances. And the major tree root systems can stop the drilling unless it is right at the machine. And rock can stop it completely.

Add to that the extreme high voltages of the transmission lines, and you would have to open a major trench instead of boring.
 
The answer is obvious. You would need to bring a lot of equipment in, strip the land where you want to bury the cables, then dig up the ground and disturb the wildlife for years while you do it. Then, after that, you would have to maintain it, keep the ground cleared and bring in equipment to keep an eye on things.
By going underground?
 

Forum List

Back
Top