- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
- Messages
- 28,134
- Reaction score
- 15,023
- Location
- Canada's Capital
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Sure, sure. These are the laws enforced by the police with the special mind-reading powers? I couldn't speak to Canada, but In Britain:
A third of managers would rather employ a man in his 20s or 30s over a woman of the same age for fear of maternity leave, according to a new study. A survey of 500 managers by law firm Slater & Gordon showed that more than 40% admitted they are generally wary of hiring a woman of childbearing age, while a similar number would be wary of hiring a woman who has already had a child or hiring a mother for a senior role.
A quarter said they would rather hire a man to get around issues of maternity leave and child care when a woman does return to work, with 44% saying the financial costs to their business because of maternity leave are a significant concern....
Mandated Maternity Leave Reduces The Likelihood That Women Will Get Promoted And Increases Gender Wage Gaps.
Nor is it just conservatives saying this sort of thing
Again, it is, absolutely, good for families. It just also stacks the deck against women in the workplace.
I admire Sanders conviction and believe that he feels what he is proposing would help American families but I have to disagree somewhat. Sometimes you have to look beyond intent and look at the bigger picture. I feel that such legislation (among some of his other proposals) will only spur more US businesses to outsource or move overseas into countries that do not place such a financial burden and inconsistent worker onto the business. It also makes investing in employee replacing technologies more appealing.
While I do not believe Sanders bill will push us over the edge I do believe it will further erode our competitive business environment when frankly we need to spur more incentive to run a business here and not drive more away. Parental leave, sick leave, and vacation time are great but those are not going to do a lot of good if the jobs are not there to be had.
And that my friends is how it's done. Don't ever concede BS talking points put forth by your opponents... own it yourself.
And the majority of Americans agree with Sanders quite populist message.
Beg to differ all you want, but he knows something you apparently haven't thought about. After running in the primaries and losing as a Democrat, he wouldn't be registered in enough, if any at all, states to win the generall election as an independent. Ross Perot ran as an independent from the beginning to the end.
I'm a big fan of gridlock. With our propensity to gravitate toward the Unitary President however, as we've seen recently, the office of president has become too powerful.
Does that help business grow the economy?
It's his messy hair. Makes him looks craaaaaaaaazy, I tell ya! :2razz:
I would find that any normal, rational-thinking person would think that Bernie is just what Americans need right now.
A congress with both houses of the opposing party can fix that if they want to.
I can tell you that I have never personally felt slighted when looking for a job, nor do I know of anyone who was not hired because they were of child-bearing age. Not saying it's never happened, but personally -- nor through the news cycle -- have I ever heard of a case (or do not recall) in Canada where a woman was not hired for a job because she could potentially have a child. Heck my workplace just hired a woman who was pregnant, because she was the best candidate (like it should be!). As I said before, we have strong laws against such things, and a business is taking a great risk if they choose to practice such misogyny.
On another note, I failed to mention that here in Canada, there is a guaranteed year of mat leave. However, if the father chooses to take some time off, he can. For instance, the woman could take 8 months and the man 4.
and what are people who don't believe Bernie is what we need?...
the US has FMLA... which give 12 weeks of leave.... though small businesses are exempt
a few states offer benefits under temporary disability laws, but it's not a national ting
I think in most cases, blindly partisan. Victims of not knowing the facts. People who are afraid of change.
If Sanders wants to win conservative voters, he should just talk about legalized gun ownership, because the only reason 99% of conservatives vote against Dems is because they're afraid that Dems will take away all their guns.
Bernie Sanders on Gun Control
Voted YES on allowing firearms in checked baggage on Amtrak trains.
Voted YES on prohibiting foreign & UN aid that restricts US gun ownership.
Voted YES on prohibiting product misuse lawsuits on gun manufacturers.
Voted YES on prohibiting suing gunmakers & sellers for gun misuse.
https://votesmart.org/candidate/evaluations/27110/bernie-sanders#.VXxJB85-8U0
NRA gave him 8% on gun rights.
NRA hates lefty's no matter what. I posted his actual voting record so you can assess rather than reading someone else's assessment.
That's the thing about cherry picking information on the internet. Other people can find the same info. I suspect you got your information from "On the Issues" because they listed the same things you did.
You didn't include the last couple one of which was this: "Rated F by the NRA, indicating a pro-gun control voting record.
Sanders scores F by NRA on pro-gun rights policies
While widely recognized today as a major political force and as America's foremost defender of Second Amendment rights, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has, since its inception, been the premier firearms education organization in the world. But our successes would not be possible without the tireless efforts and countless hours of service our nearly three million members have given to champion Second Amendment rights and support NRA programs.
The following ratings are based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionaire sent to all Congressional candidates; the NRA assigned a letter grade (with A+ being the highest and F being the lowest)."
How's that working out now? The strongest measure Congress has is impeachment and Obama and Congress both know he is immune from that because history will never record the impeachment of our first minority President. It's given Obama the ability to push constitutional limits and expand his power.
I am not a fan of one party governance but in the upcoming election I think it would be good for one party to have a couple years to fix what democrats have managed to break under Obama.
In the very least, it makes for a happier people.
I think in most cases, blindly partisan. Victims of not knowing the facts. People who are afraid of change.
Yes. I believe I linked it in my post. So "finding it" was a matter of clicking on the link I provided you.
Yes. The NRA's rating based on ?... hating lefty's I suppose.
I didn't try to hide it at all. I was simply posting that his actual voting record can appeal to gun owners to a degree. I wasn't implying in any way that he was an NRA poster boy. I just know that gun enthusiasts would outright dismiss him without even looking at any of his policies because he's a lefty so I put what, of his actual record, gun owners could relate to and might surprise them.
Congress needs to be willing to do what it needs to do. Congress has single digit approval ratings for a reason. It is corrupt, incompetent and disinterested.
The federal government hasn't improved life one bit during my lifetime whether it has had one party in power or not. The only hope to slow down the destruction of our freedom and way of life is to slow down the growth and intrusiveness of government. The idea of having one party replace another in order to change the mismanagement is hysterical. It has happened over and over again in my lifetime and neither has improved.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?