• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your passion

Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

Youve never actually run a business have you?

3 in fact, and i learned a lot about it from helping with the family business when a child.
Oh I DO love more of that mindless liberal rhetoric. If ONLY we could all be more like liberals and build business models after liberal mindsets. Then we too would all be as successful as them.

I notice you have no actual rebuttal but an ad hom. Please do explain why I am wrong, if you can.
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

As Vance noted, you really don't understand why a business exists, do you?

Actually I do, and i do also understand supply and demand a little more than you do. It is not profitable for a business to have people standing around idle. if you only have demand for a certain level of production or service over a specific time frame than that equalls a certain number of man hours to accomplish that task. If you use automation to increase the productivity of individual workers you lower the number of man hours required to accomplish a finite task and it becomes a loss to have the other workers standing around to get paid for nothing. My critics seem to think that businesses hire people to stand around doing nothing because they have nothing better to do, and that is why they love throwing money at them and thinking that just because they have money they will hire people. That is the stupidest most incompetent strategy for creating jobs i have ever heard.

They don't exist to create jobs for people. They exist to provide a profit for those who created them, while providing a service or product people need or want.

That works exactly into what i have said. If there is no need for further production or service they will not hire more people. If you reduce the man hours an employee performs while maintaining the man hours an employer needs to do what demand dictates the employer will have to hire another person to fill the available hours. It is very simple math.
In order to do this, they hire people to help them. It's called a job. It is not the job creator's responsibility to make sure he pays the employee enough money for them to live on, it is the employees responsibility to make sure they earn enough to support themselves and family, if any. They are completely separate things.

The problem that you run into here is that system only works in a supply heavy employee environment. because We keep the hours of work longer before having incentives to hire more people due to overtime and limit hours to say 30 a week we lower the number of full time non-overtime employees needed. If we reduced the hours for an employee to be available we would increase the number of employees needed. You have not actually proven that does not work.
Not liking what falls out of Pelosi's mouth has nothing to do with Fox news. Some of us live beyond what the media puts out there, since the media paints pictures with tainted oils. ;)

And some people follow faux news like lost puppies and parrot what they say.
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

I think the Liberals here are starting to believe their own lies and false narratives.

Its a bit pathetic.

What is pathetic is your baseless, linkless assertion. I exposed a false narrative, maybe that's what you meant.
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your p

Several employers are not limiting the per day hours as much as the total hours worked. If a worker only has 29 hours available to them, to keep the flow going and the productivity up, a 3 and a half day work week has the best productivity. Depending on what the job is, such as retail, three 8 hour shifts and then a short shift, then do the same with another worker.

It seems they feel it is more reasonable for travel time and expense to the employee, scheduling purposes and still getting the best productivity from each.

In Germany the workers are paid for 40 hours and only work an average of 30. Perhaps that is where this is going. It would give the workers more time with their families. That would be a good thing.
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

Campbell, meet iguanaman.
iguanaman, meet Campbell.

For dutifully regurgitating leftist talking points, Ms. Pelosi has prepared a prize for you both in the back and will tell you what it is - as soon as she finishes reading it... :thumbs:

You have it wrong. I was eviscerating a Right wing talking point that turned out to be e bald-faced lie. One that only buffoons could keep repeating after they see the truth below.

071113aca-600x425-thumb-570x403-130033.jpg
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

3 in fact, and i learned a lot about it from helping with the family business when a child.


I notice you have no actual rebuttal but an ad hom. Please do explain why I am wrong, if you can.
The plethora of businesses run with that liberal mindset proves you are wrong. or rather...lack thereof. And if you ran '3' there is a reason why they didnt survive.
 
Re: Pelosi: Obamacare Killing the 40 Hour workweek means more time to follow your pas

The plethora of businesses run with that liberal mindset proves you are wrong. or rather...lack thereof. And if you ran '3' there is a reason why they didnt survive.

massive market change. The first was a same day data swap locally which ended when HS internet came about. The other two were killed off by a rise in FPS games and an end to the market. All were quite profitable and i got out in time to avoid pissing away money on a dying market. But still you have yet to make any valid argument about anything, and have just shown yourself to be just about one line rhetoric parroting. Tell me why I am wrong, and explain it to us. If it is so easy you should be able to provide some explanation as to your opinion. Just you think so is not much to go on considering.
 
Back
Top Bottom