Socialized healthcare

  • Thread starter Thread starter COPLAND_3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yeah they did a lot of stuff, now they have cradle to grave govt.

Govt mandated 6 weeks vacation. Can you imagine the chaos? Large and small companies would hafta scramble just to get everybody off work in a year. Entire crews would have to be added to the payroll just to work for the guys that are out on vacation.

Each parent gets maternity leave - paid, don’t hafta to use any of your 6 week vacation leave, thats seperate. I’m thinking when a couple has a baby, grandparents, in laws and cousins get a couple weeks of also LOL.

Mandatory 35 hour work weeks or is it 38? Definately NOT 40. Overtime? Are you kidding? I’m sure some kind of law governing that.

It is virturally impossible to lay off or phase out a French worker. All kinds of hoops have to be jumped through by a company to get rid of a incompetent employee. In 2006. the govt seeing the hand writing on wall wanted to amend the lay off law, so you could do something to a guy in his first 2 years if he was a dud. The French rioted in the streets! “What!? We demand our lifetime employment gurantees!” LOL. The French system has basically taken the incentive out of getting up every morning and going to work.

And of course the golden fleece of all socialists-govt healthcare.

And all that makes France the economic power it is! The average French worker forks over more than 50% of his salary to the govt. No wonder he doesn’t wanna get out of the house and go to work! How depressing that must be.

You can read more about what happens when a once proud people turn their welfare, hopes, and dreams over to the govt here in the Washingon Post. Linky below.

washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/03/27/AR2006032701301.html
 
rlg94086 said:
If you would go out and work at least 40 hours and support a family, we would have more respect for your opinion on the subject. 😛

Ditto for LCMS…it is fine that you aren’t called to a vocation as a family man, but it doesn’t put you in a very good position to be an authority on a proper work week for raising a family, does it?
Click to expand...
My dad did it and so did his. I had a pretty middle-class upbringing. Why can’t we today?
I do try to avoid overworking, but more than 40 hours makes me a workaholic Protestant??
Click to expand...
You really have to be trying to make that conclusion from what I said. The issue of the protestat mindset refers to VH’s “there are only two kinds of people…people who “work to their potential” (which seems to mean never taking days off and those who are liberals.”
Puhleeze… Working more doesn’t mean I don’t value my family. I’m doing my best to balance my time. Most Catholic dads do, and most of them that I know put in more than 40 hours.
Click to expand...
Could that be due to an economy in which, with few exceptions, it is darn near impossible to raise a family on 40 hours/week anymore? Even when things are “good” since the 1980’s, it’s been tough to do so. I wonder why.

By the way, few people, on their death beds, say “I wish I spent more time at the office!” No. It’s almost remorse at not spending enough time with the people they cherished.
 
LCMS_No_More said:
Could that be due to an economy in which, with few exceptions, it is darn near impossible to raise a family on 40 hours/week anymore? Even when things are “good” since the 1980’s, it’s been tough to do so. I wonder why.
Click to expand...
Two words, excessive taxation. Due to the government taking over everything (and making a pig’s breakfast out of most of it.)
LCMS_No_More said:
By the way, few people, on their death beds, say “I wish I spent more time at the office!” No. It’s almost remorse at not spending enough time with the people they cherished.
Click to expand...
My parents regretted not leaving their children and relatives better off, and not doing enough for their fellow man.
 
vern_humphrey said:
Two words, excessive taxation. Due to the government taking over everything (and making a pig’s breakfast out of most of it.)

My parents regretted not leaving their children and relatives better off, and not doing enough for their fellow man.
Click to expand...
There are two aspects to the taxation issue: one is the money that goes to the government taking a large chunk from the budget. The other aspect is the horrendous amount of paperwork … totally unproductive in terms of the time and energy that gets absorbed filling out tax forms, gathering data that serves no useful management purpose.

I’ve been reading Boortz & Linder’s book, “Fair Tax” … in which ALL Federal income and payroll taxes would be replaced by a retail sales tax. This is different from a VAT. The issue of taxing poor people would be resolved by everyone getting a “prebate”.

amazon.com/FairTax-Book-Neal-Boortz/dp/0060875410

amazon.com/gp/product/0061540463?ie=UTF8&tag=fairtorg-20&linkCode=as2&camp=1789&creative=9325&creativeASIN=0061540463

After a lot of consideration, it would appear the only opposition would be from the legion of bureaucrats and lobbyists.

johnlinder.com/

fairtax.org/site/PageServer

boortz.com/
 
I have said before, you can’t talk about taxes without talking about spending. As long as the people’s money is being squandered, no system of taxation is fair.

Get spending under control, and then we can talk about restructuring the tax system.
 
vern_humphrey said:
I have said before, you can’t talk about taxes without talking about spending. As long as the people’s money is being squandered, no system of taxation is fair.

Get spending under control, and then we can talk about restructuring the tax system.
Click to expand...
And we can get the spending under control without cutting back on any services to the poor. We just have to stop giving Congress and the Pres their pay raises. They make plenty enough as it is. Then there are all those pork barrel projects that every congressman tries to get for his district. Let’s stop those. And the most sensitive one. Stop spending on a stupid war we shouldn’t have been in in the first place.
 
Just to be clear vern, you are saying that relaxing at the end of the week is a sin, right?
 
cynic said:
Just to be clear vern, you are saying that relaxing at the end of the week is a sin, right?
Click to expand...
Do you have a personal problem with Vern? If so, there is no need for that. He has never said that relaxing at the end of the week is a sin, and no Christians believe that. Your question is rude.
 
I don’t think it’s rude, it’s the clear direction of his posts. It’s not an insult or an accusation. If someone needs to work 70-80 hours a a week to be considered hardworking (or working at all) then that eliminates any time to relax or do much else. What’s rude?
 
cynic said:
I don’t think it’s rude, it’s the clear direction of his posts. It’s not an insult or an accusation. If someone needs to work 70-80 hours a a week to be considered hardworking (or working at all) then that eliminates any time to relax or do much else. What’s rude?
Click to expand...
Okay, fair enough, maybe you just have no math skills 😉 …it is possible to work 70-80 hours in 5-6 days and still relax at the end of the week. The reason I considered it rude is that, as Catholics, we believe in keeping Sunday holy. By asking someone if they don’t believe in relaxing at the end of the week, you are insinuating they believe in a non-stop, 7-day-a-week schedule. That would be against our beliefs.

In reality, I don’t know anybody that works 70-80 hours per week consistently, week in and week out, over many months or years. However, I, and many others, have worked that many hours for periods of time in our career, because it was necessary, either for our company or for our family’s financial requirements. There is no sin in that. In fact, personally, I think that if someone is unwilling to work that hard out of necessity, they may be guilty of a sin…depending on the circumstances.
 
cynic said:
I don’t think it’s rude, it’s the clear direction of his posts. It’s not an insult or an accusation. If someone needs to work 70-80 hours a a week to be considered hardworking (or working at all) then that eliminates any time to relax or do much else. What’s rude?
Click to expand...
It is both rude and snide. As well as evidence you’ve run out of arguments.
 
rlg94086 said:
Okay, fair enough, maybe you just have no math skills 😉 …it is possible to work 70-80 hours in 5-6 days and still relax at the end of the week. The reason I considered it rude is that, as Catholics, we believe in keeping Sunday holy. By asking someone if they don’t believe in relaxing at the end of the week, you are insinuating they believe in a non-stop, 7-day-a-week schedule. That would be against our beliefs.

.
Click to expand...
well considering Sunday afternoon will most likely be used for housework and laundry, I still think that leaves no time to relax or do anything else. Point taken, ‘sin’ was not a good choice of words.
rlg94086 said:
In reality, I don’t know anybody that works 70-80 hours per week consistently, week in and week out, over many months or years. However, I, and many others, have worked that many hours for periods of time in our career, because it was necessary, either for our company or for our family’s financial requirements. There is no sin in that. In fact, personally, I think that if someone is unwilling to work that hard out of necessity, they may be guilty of a sin…depending on the circumstances.
Click to expand...
Yes, because you needed to… Somebody starting up a business may have to work those hours, out of neccessity, not because it’s the ideal way to spend your entire waking life. Verns posts on the other hand, imply that to do less, or spend any significant amount of time on non-work related activities, is a sign of inadequacy. Moreso, we become a burden by failing to earn as much as we possibly could.

or perhaps I’m wrong about that, if so,… then excuse me for making sweeping generalisations about his own sweeping generalisations.
 
Al_Masetti said:
Fascinating that some folks think that a normal work week is 40 hours. I’ll go on a limb, but IMHO most folks in the private sector work a lot more than 40 hours a week.
Click to expand...
Isn’t the average working week in the U.S 46 hours? More than 40, but not *that *much more.
 
cynic said:
I don’t think it’s rude, it’s the clear direction of his posts. It’s not an insult or an accusation. If someone needs to work 70-80 hours a a week to be considered hardworking (or working at all) then that eliminates any time to relax or do much else. What’s rude?
Click to expand...
There are 168 hours in a week. How much sloth do we need?

Working half-days is fine; it doesn’t matter where you take the 12 hours from.
 
Al_Masetti said:
There are 168 hours in a week. How much sloth do we need?

Working half-days is fine; it doesn’t matter where you take the 12 hours from.
Click to expand...
We shouldn’t need to work more than 40 hours a week to not be considered lazy. There are other things necessary to be done outside of official work time.
 
goofyjim is sayin-
We shouldn’t need to work more than 40 hours a week to not be considered lazy. There are other things necessary to be done outside of official work time.
Click to expand...
yeah like hangin out on CAF.
 
BamaRider said:
goofyjim is sayin-

yeah like hangin out on CAF.
Click to expand...
Well gee whizz my parents never had to work beyond 40 hours. Why is it all of a sudden that all you conservatives require this generation to work it’s you-know-what off or be considered lazy. A pure judgement is what it is and wrong at that. It is not lazy to put in a 40 work week and get rest the remainder of the time.
 
goofyjim said:
Do you just let people die or be drastically sick without it simply because they can’t afford it?
Click to expand...
Both my stepdad and uncle, both bascially indigent, have had very expensive medical treatments paid for either by the government or by private donation. What my mother couldn’t afford of the small remaining amount in the case of my stepdad, the family picked up.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top