Posted on Sep 5, 2022
Bed Bath & Beyond CFO Plunges to Death From NYC Skyscraper Following Mass Layoffs
1.41K
65
12
18
18
0
Edited 2 y ago
Posted 2 y ago
Responses: 6
Suspended Profile
Hey. Morning.
I subscribe to The Epoch Times as well, so I did see this headline. Not sure what to make of it. They don't say if he fell, or if he jumped. I'm sure his friends and family are beside themselves.
I subscribe to The Epoch Times as well, so I did see this headline. Not sure what to make of it. They don't say if he fell, or if he jumped. I'm sure his friends and family are beside themselves.
LTC Trent Klug
Other news reports say he jumped
(4)
(0)
I sympathize with this man's family. If he was a suicide, I pray for their peace.
With regards to BB&Y, the company has become far too "lefty Progressive" and the public doesn't want to buy into this "Woke" game. The great majority of Americans are NOT Socialists.
With regards to BB&Y, the company has become far too "lefty Progressive" and the public doesn't want to buy into this "Woke" game. The great majority of Americans are NOT Socialists.
(8)
(0)
(4)
(0)
CWO4 Terrence Clark
CPT Gurinder (Gene) Rana
No. Mixed economy. "In 1947, after gaining independence from Britain, India formed a centrally-planned economy (also known as a command economy). With a centrally planned economy, the government makes the majority of economic decisions regarding the manufacturing and the distribution of products. The government focused on developing its heavy industry sector, but this emphasis was eventually deemed unsustainable. In 1991, India began to loosen its economic restrictions and an increased level of liberalization led to growth in the country's private sector. Today, India is considered a mixed economy: the private and public sectors co-exist and the country leverages international trade.
Citizens can choose their own occupations and start their own private enterprises. However, in certain areas of the economy, such as defense, power, banking, and other industries, the government maintains a monopoly."
No. Mixed economy. "In 1947, after gaining independence from Britain, India formed a centrally-planned economy (also known as a command economy). With a centrally planned economy, the government makes the majority of economic decisions regarding the manufacturing and the distribution of products. The government focused on developing its heavy industry sector, but this emphasis was eventually deemed unsustainable. In 1991, India began to loosen its economic restrictions and an increased level of liberalization led to growth in the country's private sector. Today, India is considered a mixed economy: the private and public sectors co-exist and the country leverages international trade.
Citizens can choose their own occupations and start their own private enterprises. However, in certain areas of the economy, such as defense, power, banking, and other industries, the government maintains a monopoly."
(3)
(0)
MAJ Hugh Blanchard
Socialism and its grumpier older brother, Communism, have been attempted over 40 times as a system of governance. It has failed every time, in Europe (including the Soviet Union and its enslaved Warsaw Pact), in Central and South America, and in Asia. Socialism proponents claim that it leads to "equitable outcomes" and "fair distribution". That depends on what one conceives to be fair. In reality, the only people who benefit from Socialism and Communism are the leaders of the Socialist or Community Party. Everyone else shares misery and poverty.
I'm a follower of Ayn Rand. Philosophically, I believe that man's highest and best destiny is to achieve the best that each individual can lawfully achieve. Although equal in political rights, people are NOT equal in terms of their abilities, their intellect and their level of effort. It's not up to a Socialist, or any other form of government to try to "level the playing field" by taking away what one person has legally earned and giving it to someone else. Ultimately Socialist give-away programs foster dependence on government and resentment against achievers. Neither of those is healthy for society.
I'm a follower of Ayn Rand. Philosophically, I believe that man's highest and best destiny is to achieve the best that each individual can lawfully achieve. Although equal in political rights, people are NOT equal in terms of their abilities, their intellect and their level of effort. It's not up to a Socialist, or any other form of government to try to "level the playing field" by taking away what one person has legally earned and giving it to someone else. Ultimately Socialist give-away programs foster dependence on government and resentment against achievers. Neither of those is healthy for society.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next