Nancy Pelosi: Death of 40 Hour Work Week Frees Americans to Pursue Happiness

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


Perhaps the Banks will see to it that any excess Loans could be crossed off accordingly....

For example if you lose 10 Hours per week or £100 per week due to the Government saying do less Hours, then its not really your fault, so the Banks can't really expect you to still have that £100 per week.

Another thing is... if Cost of living stopped rising then maybe everyone would be better off instead of struggling!

Simple Mathematics.

DrEugeneFixer
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

If you bother to watch the video it's obvious that Pelosi is referring to Obamacare when she says, "“Overwhelmingly, for the American people, this is a liberation,” and certainly not to the issue of the 'end of the 40 hour work week'.

The linked article is a great example of propaganda with its careful use of ellipses to obfuscate the meaning of the quotation. The idea that a politician would refer to employers cutting workers' hours and wages as liberating is ludicrous.

Do any of you bother to read the articles and watch the video before commenting, or am I alone here?

Not to mention that the linked article is published by a political action committee, Bizpac. They are quite literally paid shills whose goal is to influence public opinion. apparently, their stock in trade is deceptively quoted articles!

edit on 9/30/2013 by DrEugeneFixer because: add final paragraph

she was asked a SPECIFIC question, and she answered...if she was trying to redirect, then she failed hard....

either this was a gaff, or she meant what she said...

i watched the vid, and so did a lot of us....she answered the question she was asked

AlienScience
reply to post by Daedalus

 

my job offered health insurance, and i had it for a while, but it was the lowest tier, and it was worthless, and i rarely found myself actually needing it, so i canceled it, because i couldn't justify the expenditure....i needed the money. now, with this latest example of federal meddling in the affairs of the citizenry, i will no longer have the option to NOT take the company plan, and the associated hit to my pay.....no matter how badly i need the money.

so tell me how you believe it works to make minimum wage, work less than 40 hours, and have no options for insurance.....tell me how that works, frees anyone up for anything more than another job or two, and how it's supposed to make anyone happier

No, you are not forced to take your employer offered health insurance. You can still get a plan off the exchange. And if you are struggling as you say you are, I'm sure you will qualify for subsidies to help you buy insurance.

If people are working for minimum wage and less than 40 hours, their insurance will almost all be paid for them.

oh, because that's really an option....take the overpriced company plan, or take the overpriced government plan....that's not an option, that's getting screwed by a different colored version of the same sex toy...

i can't opt to not have insurance, keep my money, and pay my doctor when i need him...because god forbid we make our own choices, or exercise any kind of fiscal or personal responsibility...

and then the cherry on top...government assistance....sure, let's get MORE people hooked on government handouts...FANTASTIC idea...

People are really this ignorant or just love to complain...

The end game is companies and other producers will have to lower their prices...

What is being done is they are attempting to change the American work model from one where you are basically a slave for your employer (though a paid slave), to a person who has time for themselves.

In this thread alone, I've read accounts where people were talking about they worked 50-90 hours just to have what they have. What type of sense does that make? There's a lot more to life than work...though some of you well programmed people don't know. The reason the country is so messed up is because American's have been too busy working to pay attention. Our kids are out of control because both parents are working and can't be home. And all some of you can yell is that you "need more hours so you can buy more stuff".

What is happening is they are attempting to place the proper price on things we consume! It's going to take a while and some pain to get back to when a single person could take care of a family. The corporations and other producers have gotten out of hand. Businesses are asking/demanding for more payment than their service or product is worth. And yes, some of you are about to fly in here and state, "Someone can charge WHATEVER they want...get out of here you commie". But that is what has gotten us where we are currently.

So we are being weaned off of being used to working 40+ hours per week to survive and buy all we want...the next step is companies and producers will have to lower their prices.

I'm wondering how on God's green earth does this woman ever get re-elected?!

I know Californians live in their own little planet but even the most ultra mega uber left wing liberal would hear this and think.... "W.....T.......F"

Aazadan

Daedalus
reply to post by Aazadan

 

prices go down, because people have less money?

minimum wage drives up costs?

what in the HELL are you talking about?

minimum wage has no impact on the cost of anything, and if it were true that people having less money, reduced prices on stuff, almost everything would be free...

where do you get this stuff?

Prices always go up right after a minimum wage increase, it's because corporations pass the costs on to the customer.

Minimum wage has plenty of impact on the cost of things, I don't feel like debating it in this thread though (though I will say, I'm in favor of having a significantly higher wage... it's completely beside the point though).

The median wage in the US is $50,000, people have plenty of money even though wages are in decline. Furthermore, we put things on credit cards which make peoples purchasing power a bit more liquid. Credit will eventually dry up and that will cease.

Back to my point though, when everyone is earning less, goods sell for less money. Have you ever bought items in poor countries? You can get the same electronic gadget that costs $700 in the US for $50.

If the work week declines (which I'm entirely in favor of) the prices of goods will shift to accommodate peoples new income levels because we have the productivity to still produce to excess. It will also do wonders for unemployment.

What this is an example of is producers trying to squeeze every penny they can out of someone. The common phrase is 'what the market can bear". That phrase has gotten us in a lotta trouble. Because what is happening is producers is basing their prices off what someone working 70 hours per week can bear when it should be what someone working 30 hours per week can bear!

THAT is where the greed is coming in at!

Bluesma
I found the information on this page to seem accurate-
www.numbeo.com...

In conducting an overall comparision between the US and French averages, it looks like the cost of living is a bit higher in France, and the salary is a bit lower. But style of living is pretty different too, with much less consumerism in general, so that is why I wonder if the same systems would be effective in the US, even if they are here.

Average Monthly Disposable Salary (After Tax) US- 3,200.00 $ France- 2,704.90 $

Once you bring home your paycheck, you don't have to pay for medical insurance or bills... that makes a difference. Depending upon your income level, there are lots of aid people get- especially if you have children, you get a certain amount from the state, for school expenses and such. Basically, it is easy to have the necessities for living (a roof over your head, food, basic medical care, basic education).

Some people do just feel that is all they need, and they stick with that. Job security is really well protected by laws too, so those people end up staying in the same job all their life.
Many of us americans tend to feel a lack of ambition is shameful, so we wouldn't be content with that?

In my personal case, my husbands income is way above that average, I do not need to work. (living with an american wife cultivates ambition and taste for luxuries...) but I work anyway, for pleasure. We pay a LOT of taxes, and are aware they are going to aiding other people. But we used to be the ones receiving that aid before, so we feel okay doing so. We couldn't have gotten where we are without that support in the beginning.

I think most americans don't like that idea. The french in general feel that aiding them to have employment is done through legislature they vote for. Americans don't like the idea of the government having any power over corporations, so that wouldn't work either.

I don't know... my family in america seems to struggle and have a difficult time, and yet when I see how much they make monthly, I don't get it. Until I note little things like that they have huge payments on their car and house, and getting a coffee each day means a huge 7 dollar thing, they'll pay 100 dollars monthly to get their dog washed and trimmed.... I realize all is relative, and "necessity" doesn't indicate the same thing for everyone!

thanks for the info.

that disposable income thing kinda blew my mind...even working as much as i used to, i wasn't pulling that kind of money after tax...my disposable income wasn't even half that, and i was making more than minimum.

7 bucks for coffee is a travesty...i'm guessing they go to starbucks, or something. am i right?

see, it's not that we believe that the government should have NO power over corporations...we (a lot of us) just think the government should only have enough power to keep corporations from doing bad things...abusing consumers...

at the end of the day, they are two very different cultures, and i'm glad the system you have over there works well for you.

darkbake
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Okay, what I have to say about her is that she is right - kind of. It does sound nice to live in a society where people are able to work part-time and afford healthcare, a place to live, a car, internet, food, gas, and have hobbies and friends. It really sounds nice!

Implementation. That is where it falls massively apart.

Implementation will be a problem because people who should be for it...are against it. They are so brainwashed! Also, you already know the corporations will fight this!

DZAG Wright
So we are being weaned off of being used to working 40+ hours per week to survive and buy all we want...

No dude. A lot of people need that 40 hours a week to just survive ... not 'buy all we want'.
That's silly.

Famouszor
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

How many (USA) people reading this post has health care (insurance) from their current job right now and how much are you paying for it per month?

Personally I'm covered for most everything at 100% after my co-pay and deductible. For me to have this insurance, I'm personally paying $850.00 and my employee pays the remaining $900.00.

So this is about the cost for me to have health insurance with out obamacare.

$850.00 out of pocket per month via pay check.
($50.00 per medicine, then $15.00 x2 - $56.00 x1 $1200.00 x1)
$50.00x4= $200.00 (one time charge per year )
$1286.00 every 30 days I pay this to the pharmacy to get my medicine (these are co-pays)

Per month I pay out of my own pocket $2136.00. This is just for 1 person. Lucky for me, the wife and two kids don't get sick too much.

How much would I pay if I had Obamacare? ALOT less. But I'm one of the lucky ones that don't need Obamacare to survive.

personally, I can careless regarding Obamacare.

Now take into account of if you lose your job. Currently your healthcare is tied to A JOB...which is ridiculous...if you lose your job you have no healthcare. What about if you want to start a small company where you are a contractor. As it is now you would not be able to do so and have healthcare.

With obamacare, you can quit your job, start your dream little project which doesn't make much money and still have healthcare!

FACT - Pelosi was addressing the statement about the 40 hour work week going away when she said it was 'liberating'. So all you far left folks who are trying to spin it that she was talking about Obamacare ... NOPE.

FACT - OWS has big money backing from SOROS. So those trying to say that the Tea Party is evil but somehow the OWS bunch are a group of angels ... your partisanship is showing. Both the Tea Party and Occupy groups started out good but both got hijacked by special interests with $$$.

FlyersFan

DZAG Wright
So we are being weaned off of being used to working 40+ hours per week to survive and buy all we want...

No dude. A lot of people need that 40 hours a week to just survive ... not 'buy all we want'.
That's silly.

You're half way there...

Just ask yourself WHY we must work 40 hours per week to survive? With the automation and tech we have there is no reason!

The problem is that the supply side has gotten accustomed to charging us what someone who works themselves as a dog! We have to reel them back in.

Bluesma

FlyersFan
She said cutting the hours would liberate people and give them freedom to pursue their happiness. YES, that's what she said. Less hours and less money somehow equates to 'freedom to pursue happiness' in her twisted mind.

I actually LOL'd to read the way you wrote this!

If you don't mind, I want to copy and save it. It would really help me to illustrate to foreigners the American mentality (because they do ask me about it a lot).


A walk in the forest, a long afternoon meal in the garden with the family and friends is considered happiness, but not long hours in the office and a lot of money in the bank!

They have trouble believing me when I say americans LIKE working- it makes them HAPPY- the knowledge that they possess money makes them happy- and it is all tied up in self esteem. We judge our worth by how much we work, not what kind of parent, spouse, friend, son, daughter, aunt or uncle we are. Those roles are secondary.

see, i think you have it a bit wrong here...

yes, there are people who enjoy their work..i used to be one of them, until they started abusing me....

i'm pretty sure a lot of us would like to work less...we'd like to have more free time to do other things, but unfortunately, as i said to someone else; money makes the world go round.

it's not a self esteem thing, it's a matter of being able to afford what we need to live....housing, food, clothing, medical expenses, transportation, and if we're lucky, luxuries....

less hours means less money, which means less ability to afford these things. how would you feel as a parent if you couldn't adequately provide for your family? my dad used to kill himself working overtime, to make sure he could provide for us when i was a kid...that was his motivation...doing whatever he needed to do to provide for his family. it wasn't fun for him, but it was necessary. for some people, the knowledge that you have money to burn makes you feel good, makes you feel like you've accomplished something, because you can afford things you want, and you can handle emergencies when they come along....for a lot of us though, it's just a matter of making enough money to survive, and you hafta work, to make money.

i mean, you can't have a long afternoon meal in the garden with family and friends if you can't afford a garden to sit in, or food to serve...

Aazadan
Prices always go up right after a minimum wage increase, it's because corporations pass the costs on to the customer.

that's a result of corporate greed, not the amount of the minimum wage.

The median wage in the US is $50,000, people have plenty of money even though wages are in decline. Furthermore, we put things on credit cards which make peoples purchasing power a bit more liquid. Credit will eventually dry up and that will cease.

i don't care what the median earnings are...i wasn't making anywhere near 50 grand....hell, my boss didn't even make that..

siting the median is siting an average....which, in a debate like this, is not a thing you wanna do...it's somewhat dishonest, because it makes things look better than they are...

most people DON'T have plenty of money, and living beyond your means is a bad idea, because credit card companies are allowed to rape the s**t out of you, because there's little to no government regulation...and they're allowed to trick you with small print, and deceptive practices....

Back to my point though, when everyone is earning less, goods sell for less money.

This is simply untrue.... again, take a look at food prices, and gas prices, and pretty much the price of everything....the cost of living is increasing, and our wages aren't....people are poor, people are broke, REAL unemployment is somewhere in the 20% range....but costs are still holding, or increasing...i wish what you were saying was true, but it isn't.

Have you ever bought items in poor countries? You can get the same electronic gadget that costs $700 in the US for $50.

that's in other countries, not this one...and a lot of those electronics, and other goods are cheap knockoffs...

If the work week declines (which I'm entirely in favor of) the prices of goods will shift to accommodate peoples new income levels because we have the productivity to still produce to excess. It will also do wonders for unemployment.

i don't know that it will....

as to the rest of it....how?

TruthxIsxInxThexMist
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

What are you saying is wrong?

Pelosi is right.... working less hours per week does allow us/you to pursue your/our happiness... it does make people more happy to do what they want to do in life!

i ask again: with what money?

how can you go do stuff with no money?

kaylaluv
reply to post by FlyersFan

 

Nope - nowhere in that interview does she actually say "losing the 40 hour workweek will allow Americans to follow their happiness ...pursue their passion". It simply wasn't said. The words "40 hour workweek" never came out of her mouth during that entire clip. She says "Overwhelmingly for the American people, this is a liberation." What is she referring to when she says "this"? You are *assuming* that "this" refers to losing the 40 hour workweek.

i can't imagine why people would think that...

could it possibly have anything to do with the fact that the loss of the 40 hour work week was what she was asked about? and that her answer did not consist of clear, specific terms, words, and phrases?

naw....couldn't be that...

she wasn't asked about healthcare, or prevention, or a healthy america...she was asked about the death of the 40 hour work week, and about loss of income, and you saw the answer she gave...."oh, but you're gonna be so healthy"

gimmie a break..

People who do not have the money use credit cards. It is very common for a middle class family to have 30-50k in Credit Card debt..and 123k home loans against the mortgage....and taking out payday loans and hitting pawn shops to pay bills. Same thing with college kids. 10-20k is nothing. Problem is, those are drying up also.

People do not want to tell the kids no...let the neighbors know...etc...and it is the selfishness of our fine country that has gotten us where we are financially. People want all the pay for half the work. Blue collar workers are a minority compared to 20-30 years ago when people learned a trade. Now, they job jump. Grads cannot get jobs. BUT...they still buy Starbucks, think cable and internet should be a necessity and want more and more for less and less.

They elect those who promise them 'things' and not prosperity. Obamaphones and not a chicken in every pot.

Groceries and Gas as doubled and tripled in 6 years. Believe it. So have those on assistance so if those prices rise and need to be covered where does it come from??? Your tax dollars and the government is broke..so enter PPACA and the bailouts. Who did it benefit? You..me..nope. And all timed in conjunction with elections.

What I now laugh at is that people still want to demonize the right. Folks, they are all corrupt on one level or another. All of them. Once you realize that you may be able to save yourself.

reply to post by Daedalus


*Sigh.* She already answered the 40 hour workweek question with her first 2 or 3 sentences. After she answered the question, she continued on to praise the healthcare bill. Sheesh.

It matters not - you all will believe what you want, regardless of what the truth is.

reply to post by Daedalus


Well, as I said before, I'm pursuing what I want to do and I am not working in a Full Time Job! Most of the work I do, I do for free and I get paid from the Government to do so...

Do you know you can live on £500 per Month?? If you are single and on benefits, that's what you will get more or less and its not a struggle, especially if you live in a Council Apartment!

BTW... I live in London, England and maybe its different to where you live.

Although having said this, the Government are making plans to make everyone work for their 'Unemployment Benefits' not 'Sickness Benefits', so if you are on 'Jobseekers Allowance', you will now have to work for that Allowance! This is down to people who were scamming the System!