Nevada AFL-CIO: Obamacare Will Destroy 40-Hour Work Week

reply to post by neo96


1988 was a good year for prophecy then ...
Interestingly enough, many presidents since then have been "personalities"
Some, much better than others.

Originally posted by burntheships
1+1 = 3 and you get a star!

Nice!
looks like it's even been redistributed!


reply to post by neo96


Tread carefully there youngster... it wasn't that long ago...



was it?

They had to pass the TAX before they could know it was a TAX.



Fixed.

reply to post by lernmore

Tread carefully there youngster... it wasn't that long ago...

LOL I was a teenager when I watched that video.

It's why I even remember it.

Graduated high school the following year.

The Nevada AFL-CIO is slamming Obamacare because it is too conservative. It doesn't do enough to reign in the greedy practices by big businesses snd insurance companies.

In essence they are complaining about the already existing greed and gouging processes carried out by insursnce companies and corpirations. They are upset because ACA is not socislist enough

Originally posted by neo96
LOL I was a teenager when I watched that video.

It's why I even remember it.

...and if you ask me to buy booze for you again, the answer is still no.

*wink*



I don't even know how to get this post back on topic...

Oh yeah... I read it!

reply to post by lernmore


I think congressman and the potus were drinking quite a bit when they wrote Obama care

that is why everyone is so upset with it.

Back on topic.

LOL.

Originally posted by aoxomoxoa
The Nevada AFL-CIO is slamming Obamacare because it is too conservative. It doesn't do enough to reign in the greedy practices by big businesses snd insurance companies.

In essence they are complaining about the already existing greed and gouging processes carried out by insursnce companies and corpirations. They are upset because ACA is not socislist enough

Strange thing is...

They didn't say anything like that when they told everybody how great it was did they ?

The issues were clear then, and the issues are VERY clear now.

Sooo CLEAR in fact, we can hardly see anymore.

I think even Sorcha Faal could have written a better fairy tale.

reply to post by xuenchen


Hey Nevada,

We know this. It is however nice to see you catching up to what we were pointing out in 2009.

Just goes to show that this piece of legislation has bipartisan opposition.

Unions are typically in the bag for democrats. But at the end of the day they too have to suffer the consequences for the legislation they help bankroll. They have to explain to their members why this is so. It's either take a stand now, or watch your membership evaporate.

reply to post by lernmore


20 years?

Hell, if you got pregnant at that concert you'd be making plans for the child's 21st birthday. :p

Originally posted by projectvxn
Just goes to show that this piece of legislation has bipartisan opposition.

Unions are typically in the bag for democrats. But at the end of the day they too have to suffer the consequences for the legislation they help bankroll. They have to explain to their members why this is so. It's either take a stand now, or watch your membership evaporate.

It had bipartisan opposition when they PASSED it.

That's why the GOP took the House in 2010.

reply to post by aoxomoxoa

The Nevada AFL-CIO is slamming Obamacare because it is too conservative. It doesn't do enough to reign in the greedy practices by big businesses snd insurance companies.

What else do you want to do to them? Hell, the ACA is already going to put them out of business!

Obamacare is about to get real for the middle class hard working Americans. My neighbor, Insurance Agent, just got back from a class last week and was told that this next year the insurance rates will go up 3 to 4 times the amount we pay now because of Obamacare.

reply to post by neo96


I take it you would never settle for a union job then?

reply to post by projectvxn


Well, the unions did have a closed door meeting with the POTUS before the ACA passed. I was under the impression that the unions had waivers.

Originally posted by MystikMushroom
reply to post by neo96

 

I take it you would never settle for a union job then?

Nope funny thing there my contempt of unions was EARNED.

NEVER AGAIN.

The union first,the union only, and if you don't have seniority your nothing, where the mantra is ' I get paid by the hour'.

reply to post by neo96


LOL, well at least you have experience dealing with them.

I've seen the potential good, as well as the bad with unions. Most of the time they are in bed with the employer's HR department anyway, so grievances aren't adjudicated fairly whatsoever.

Like many things in this world, unionization looks pretty and nice on paper -- but doesn't work out as neatly and properly in reality.

The problem was a "compromise" for conservatives who never agreed in the first place.

Suppose Social Security taxes and Medicare taxes went to zero at 30 hours a week, contrary to fact. Would all the employers try to keep everybody under 30 hours? You betcha. Would the right wing be screaming about how socialism destroys jobs? You betcha.

Suppose if instead the contribution were prorated, just like SS and Medicare.

Originally posted by mbkennel

The problem was a "compromise" for conservatives who never agreed in the first place.

Suppose Social Security taxes and Medicare taxes went to zero at 30 hours a week, contrary to fact. Would all the employers try to keep everybody under 30 hours? You betcha. Would the right wing be screaming about how socialism destroys jobs? You betcha.

Suppose if instead the contribution were prorated, just like SS and Medicare.

Wild.

How would you propose to do that ?