socialism and communism work at the tribal level because every member of the tribe is accountable for their contributions. my opinion is that it wouldn't work for a nation; at least not yet. i prefer regulated capitalism with the hope of coming up with something better.
Link please. I don't believe you.
This is a false statement.
Is this normal for you?
I don't believe anyone should be simply "entitled." If you don't like the job benefits, find a better job!
There are several factors. Is this the limitation of your critical thinking?
No, in the US we have restrictions on govt. They cant choose statutory guidelines about anything unless we allow it. They can only protect their human resource in the way that we allow. All rights and resources belong to the individuals. We only loan govt some power to protect them.
Why should we pay for other people's disregard for the costs?
This is where blood samples come into play for triglycerides, and other indicators of how someone treats their body.
There is no perfect solution. To maintain the level of care available here is too costly without changing tort laws and removing many regulations.
Have to sacrifice some things for universal care, else pay so much more than we do now.
Well even in the United states Capitalism doesn't really exist in a pure form. Just in 2008 we saw many eamples of that point when our government bailed out big investment companies and banks. Corporations want to privatize their profits but Socialize their losses. Also according to the Kato institute in 2006 the government gave out 92 billion in corporate subsedies. A subsedy is a government hand out for nothing to corporations.
as for subsidies, some are ok. for example, the subsidy that resulted in the construction of a lot of wind farms is a good idea, in my opinion.
I thjink you'll change your mind on that in 20-30 years, when there are no more than ugly boneyards.
they can be maintained. that creates jobs in the communities like my own hometown.
They will be too expensive to maintain vs. solar and other power generation methods.
After only 10 years, several will require extensive and expensive overhauls. As time progresses, maintenance will get more and more expensive.
Job... yes... but at too high of cost. PV solar or something better will take over, especially once we have viable methods of storing such power.
I've been working maintenance since 1975. I will really be surprised if I am wrong on this.
i'm ok with it taking a while for the renewable energy grid to become profitable. i think that it will eventually. energy is a national security issue, and we'll be better off depending less on fossil fuels for multiple reasons. i also support more nuclear power; preferably thorium, if that's doable.
So, quit your job and start your own business instead of whining. That's what I did -- years ago. It was a lot of hard work at first, 60-80 hour weeks, but now, I take off for a month at a time if I like and I've traveled to all the places I wanted to travel. You can do that when you get off your butt and realize that your life is in your hands, not the hands of some employer.
It takes initiative but the rewards are great.
It is stated that way in the constitution and our Decalration of Independence talks about the government of the people. But when we look at how legislation that in some way benefits the people actually gets eneacted we see it actually follows some tragic event. For instance OSHA was a result of a tragic fire in lower Manhatten where women and girls worked in a textile factory where fire exit doors were deliberately blocked by their employer who felt the women were steeling fabric from him. Since the building was an eight story building women and girls jumped to their deaths in front of horified witnesses of which one partitioned the FDR administration for work place safety rules which resulted in OSHA.
But if all the resources all belong to the people as you say and as one might assume given the language in our constitution and our Declaration of Independence, then why are we not consulted or even considered when huge pipe lines carrying tar sands crude across our sovereign boarders and across state lines in direct opposition to what we the people want. We the People do not want that across sacred lands and under rivers and into acquifers but we got it.
I didnt say resources all belong to 'the people'. I said "individuals". Those individuals who own the land that the huge pipe lines cross were consulted. To the extent that such activity endangers other people, their representatives were consulted.
As for workplace safety, protecting peoples lives is in the constitution. Wages are not.
Pipelines: Where Even Conservatives Support Eminent-Domain Abuse
Utility companies shouldn’t be able to take private citizens’ land.
Where is the conservative commitment to property rights? At first, this might seem a silly question.
Of course conservatives defend the right to private property, arguably the single most important principle upon which the nation was founded. But it’s not so silly in light of what’s happening in Virginia — my home state, as well as that of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison.
(. . .)
a consortium of companies — led by Dominion Energy — is attempting to force a major natural-gas pipeline down the throats of our people, whether or not they agree to yield their land. The final decision lies in the hands of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), an unelected body whose board consists of five presidential appointees drawn from the very industry the agency is supposed to “regulate.” It essentially never turns its thumbs down. This is not what Madison had in mind when he wrote that no person could be “deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
I do luvs this statement from the FERC, which admits that there will be "adverse effects"The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the $5 billion 600-mile Atlantic Coast Pipeline, designed to transport gas from shale fields in Pennsylvania to Southern Virginia and eastern North Carolina, with one of the three commissioners dissenting.
In the order, the divided commission finds that the controversial project’s benefits “outweigh any adverse effects on existing shippers, other pipelines and their captive customers, and on landowners and surrounding communities.” And, it affirms the staff’s July finding that the pipeline “will result in some adverse and significant environmental impacts, but that these impacts will be reduced to acceptable levels.”
You should try reading more conservative publications - such as the National Review
Guess what, the FERC did grant Dominion and Duke the right to seize private property for their pipeline
I do luvs this statement from the FERC, which admits that there will be "adverse effects"
Why would the energy companies spend any money to reduce the impact of construction and any future leaks? The present administration is already erasing regulations governing pollution.
Statutory meaning (decided or controlled by laws) is the means by which people in the labor force in most other nations and perhaps all Industrialized nations,except the United States receive their annual vacation time. Why is statutory requirements an important fact when it comes to employee annual leave? Because the statutory requirement, requires all companies doing business in that country to comply with that basic law in order to continue to do business in that particular country. For instance even people who work at McDonald's in France are entitled to receive a minimum of five weeks of paid vacation time. (30 days with Saturdays but not Sundays counted as holidays) plus up to 22 days of RTT (Reduction of working time) for employees who choose to work more than the standard 35 hour work week with the limit being 39 hours. Further additional hours will be compensated monetarily.
In addition Bonus days are given to people who choose to take part of their annual time during the winter with one bonus day given for every three days taken during the winter time. The combination of all the rules could result in 9.5 weeks vacation time. To be fair I haven't as of this writing determined if these rules or any part of these rules apply to PART TIME EMPLOYEES. If any of you know for a fact one way or the other ,please enlighten me.
The point why I bring this subject up however, is for us to ponder how can (companies succeed) in a country and quite frankly 100s of countries who do the same, while claiming they will go bankrupt in America if America does anything like this. How can a country like France have a have an income tax rate bracket as of 2017 that looks like this,
1) to eu 9807 zero tax
2) eu 9807 to eu 27086 14 %
3) eu 27086 to eu72,617 30% Personal income tax is high but they get Universal healthcare. So they get something for their money. If there is no
healthcare and you
4) eu72617 to eu153783 41% you very ill, you loose your home and go bankrupt in America.
5) eu 153783 and over 45%
and a corporate tax rate of 33.33% .The corporate tax rate in the U.S with the G.O.P. Bill is close to France's so should we expect to see better social
reforms as a result? AT&T since the passage of the bill has announced some bonuses and firings.
While there a lot of factors to analyze when trying to compare the social apparatus of various countries I have only brought forth but a few. Others would be Median income and cost of living. The median income inf France as of 2016 was eu 42,992 while in the U.S it was $60,164
The cost of living excluding rent in France was 11.8% higher than the U.S. while rent was 28.23% lower in France as compared to the U.S. where one euro equals 1.19 U.S.dollars.
I only brought these later facts into focus was in the spirit of fairness to the two systems. These later facts really wasn't germane to my focus of this writing. My Focus is, Why are WE NOT GETTING WHAT WE ARE PAYING FOR? We are the RICHEST country in the world. WHY CAN"T WE AFFORD TO DO FOR OUR CITIZENS WHAT SO MANY OTHER COUNTRIES MANAGE TO DO WITH LESS? My God Afghanistan has STATUTORY ANNUAL LEAVE. The United Arab Emirates has STATUTORY ANNUAL LEAVE. Another question , why aren't more Americans angry. This is supposed to be a government of the people. But all we hear is let's give the poor Billionaires a well deserved break. Please let's talk fairly with one another on this one.
First of all, your message is right on. You the risk-taker create jobs, albeit with the help of labor, which makes wealth. And western society rewards you handsomely. Those of us who would rather not take risks or don’t have the stake that allows it, who work for others and demand certain benefits, mostly to work in a safe environment withacertain income, since we get fewer rewards. It works out.
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?