Click on a label to read posts from that part of the world.
Jul 16th 2011 4:59PM Some foods deemed unhealthy are actually healthy for others. For example, those requiring a low sodium diet,, would have foods high in sodium deemed unhealthy, but those peoploe who require a medically formulated diet that i8s high in sodiumk, this would no become a healthy food. So, some people would need to have foods with certain concentrations of compounds high and others low and in different combinations and concentrations in order to have a healthy balanced diet and that would mean their "fat" tax would have to beased on a case by cases basis - a rather cunbersome and complicatd process. This looks like the tax will be either unfairly applied across the board regardless of actual unhealthyness or not, or it will be applied to everyone regardless of any kind of medically required diet - healthy or unhealthy.
Jul 8th 2011 7:18PM It's obvious she can't take care of them, she never could or would. They need to be removed from the current hostile environment they are in, prevened from being exploited by these publicity shows, require the mother to work for their full maintenanceand fully repay the state for their care, and the children be permanently placed in foster care until emancipated.
Apr 6th 2011 2:54AM This change is irrelevant and without merit. There is no possibility of aan average person being the selection to ride a boat. Everybody has a different height, bone structure and size. A Woman who is 6' 3" with a BMI of 25 is within her weight range and it is about 190. A woman who is 4' 6" and a BLMI of 25 would probnably be in the range os 100 lbs. A man 6' 8" and a BMI of 25 and 225 lbswould be within his weight range. A man of 4' 10" and a BMI of 35 could be 190. The arbitrary figures of an average person is just not possible to apply to all persons of all ages and of all heights. The changes should be appealed as not feasible nor realistic nor reasonable, nor actual. If they want to regulate the boat carrying weight, they should obtain and verify the actual weights of all passengers before boarding. When they have reached the limit, the number of passengers is cut off.
Mar 29th 2011 1:12AM You pay for a ticket to fly. It is price gouging to charge baggage, legroom, left side, center, exit, movie, muisic, headset, food, and myriad other fees. This should be stopped by people refusing to fly until these fees are dropped and not added to their ticket price. If airlines had no passengers, business or casual, fliers, they would get the message in a bit. If they stopped the fees of all kinds and did not add the fees to the price of the ticket, people would come back. If they start adding fees back on, the people would stop flying. again. Simple.
Mar 21st 2011 10:55PM Had the passenger specified vegetarian diet, no meat, or whatever, that is what would have been provided. Since she did not specify it, and the flight did not have a non-meat dish, the passenger should have either declined the meal or requested (and the request should have been honored by the airline without cost increase, a second meal. Both of which she could have eaten around the offending piece of food. In no case should she have thrown the meal at the FA. She should have brought it to the FA's attention, requested a non-meat entre or two entre's in which she just eat around the meat. The airline is obligated to provide for specific dietary meals or restrictions. This is determined before the flight. Many people have specific alergies to certain foods, others worsen medical conditions if they eat a meal that contains high levels of sodium, same wiith peanuts and peanut products, or milk, or red meats. These situations needs to made known to the flight team prior to the flight so they can bring those specific items on board the flight and then are reserved specifically for them.
Mar 17th 2011 12:56AM All the MMA people along with all state and federal prisoners should be shipped out to Afghanistan and places where their MMA skill could be put to good use exterminating the Al Qaida
Mar 16th 2011 3:27AM This yahoo is apparently not familiar with the laws of this country. The TSA searches are completely reasonable and necessary. These TSA have a constitutional duty to performn these searches. The passenger has a constitutional obligation to comply if they want to fly.
Mar 12th 2011 3:36PM So what are you going to do if the plane decompresses while you are in the toilet? These masks are dropped automatically by the crew and not passenger accessible. I suppose that someone could tamper with the drop down door housing the mask. So rather than ban the masks in rest rooms where you very well would need one during decompressing, they need to come up with a tamper-proof delivery system that would still be effective when needed in restrooms.
Also, what about passengers who carry oxygen bottles around with them as part of their normal breathing needs? I suppose that they will just have to stop breathing while in flight.
Mar 9th 2011 9:05PM Kill the shows and put something decent and educational in their place
Mar 5th 2011 6:32PM Forget what your coworker gets. Be concerned what you are making. It's none of your business what a coworker makes. That's private and confidential. There are differences between worker qualifications, experience, and capabilities. And these characteristics are specific to individuals and not subject to examination or question by others not authorized or charged with knowing. If the person was told by a coworker what they make, that's their business, inadvisable, but, nonetheless their business if they wish to disclose what they make on their own. It has no bearing on anything. Discussing pay of other co-workers is a breach of confidentiality and should be punishable, but if one coworker discloses his pay to others, that's his business and is not to be considered for increasing your pay.