jeb! says we all need to work longer hours :|

Post Reply New Topic

(clicky)Jeb! says we all have to work longer hours
I believe henry ford had a better idea 100 years ago- just pay people more. it will pump more money into the economy more quickly and effectively, as opposed to letting mr. moneybags haul yet more filthy lucre to his offshore accounts.

Let's let children back into the workforce, too! Just think of that untapped reservoir to grow the economy.

gosh, to think that "Jeb!" and the trump are the most "reasonable" ones the GOP has to offer. god help us.

My husband loves overtime. Sure, he wishes he were paid more as a base wage, but he also knows that he's paid the usual amount for a guy doing his job. He takes all the overtime he can get.

One thing about his job is that he's in awesome shape for a 51 year old. He's got just a little bit of a beer gut, but not much. And it's actually from beer.

Are there no prisons? And the Union workhouses ... are they still in operation?

Fortunately, the Treadmill and the Poor Law are in full vigour.

Jeb! is wrong.

Also, he's an as*hole for saying that. What does he think that the working class who have actually had jobs since 2008 been doing?

Productivity per employee usually goes way up during a recession - and did in this one - because a lot of people are required to do the work of 2 or more people.

His spindoctors are madly backpedaling, saying he meant underemployed and part-time workers.

But "underemployed" means you aren't earning at your potential.

"Underemployed" means using your CDL and hazmat transporter certification to pump gas.

OMG!! !
Jeb said something!
What if he runs in '16??
Surely the world would end!! !!

I would be pleased if he continued to make flakey-assed, goofball, political suicide statements like this.

I say that in hopes that it might lessen his chances for success; but then I may hope in vain, because being a blithering idiot did his brother little harm.

There are no poor laws in the US. They can sue you or garnish your wages but the only time you go to jail for owing money is if it's child support, court ordered payments of any sort, or fines. There is nothing wrong with enforcing payment of money owed, even if it causes a hardship. And yes, we have been and still are suffering from a hardship directly caused by a situation like that and a law that upholds it. My husband was laid off in February of 2014. He was looking for another job but we had no income and things were extremely tight. We were having to borrow from my mother and get money out of his eventual inheritance from my SIL who has power of attorney and won't come off of what he will get when his mother dies because it earns interest in the bank. We didn't have much at all to cut back on but I cut back on everything I could immediately, and it was down to monthly bills. We had power, water, natural gas, and car insurance that had to be paid every month. No cable and my daughter's fiance paid for the internet and still does because otherwise we would have none here, and he lives here too. I let the car insurance go. I had talked to the lady there and found out that the next month I could pay it and get it reinstated and there would be no problem. I took the chance because I figured that he would have a job within a few weeks.

Well, less than a week after it lapsed we got in a wreck. The sun was in my husband's eyes at the red light and he didn't see that it had turned red. In fact, nobody could see anything because the way it hits that time of year in the mornings it was a complete whiteout on the windshield. He ran into a power company truck that was turning. It dented the truck pretty badly badly but it was able to be driven. It totaled our van. Luckily, nobody was hurt. However, the power company was able to have my husband's license held suspended until they got their four thousand dollars for that big dent. They also refused to take payments on it and wouldn't release his license until every last f*****g penny was paid off. Of course this meant we couldn't get another car because we couldn't get a tag because they won't let you have a tag without insurance. We couldn't put it in my name because my license was suspended 29 years ago in Virginia when we lived in DC because I got hit by a drunk driver and I had no insurance, but at the time it wasn't required in Alabama where I was still a legal resident even though we had been up there for about a year. Didn't matter, they held mine until I paid that off, which I never did because I thought it was wrong. Later on when I tried to just pay it off and right and wrong be damned there was no way to because it was a civil suit and the lawyer's office who handled it was closed and he had retired and I couldn't pay the DMV or the state because it was civil and I couldn't find the drunk to pay him, so I was up the creek. So we got a cheap car to get by and it died, then we got another even cheaper car and it's died too so we have no car right now. We were finally able to get the money from my SIL from my husband's inheritance but only enough to pay the power company, so at the end of this month they will release his license and he can get that back but he will still have to live at the lake (where his ho is living too, but that's explained in the haven) until we find a way to get a car. We have no credit so we can't get one on payments.

So, while I understand that we owed it and should pay it, I totally disagree and think it's unfair that they wouldn't take payments and that really f****d us up in lots of ways but I completely support their right to do what they did. That kind of thing which causes hardship isn't a poor law though.

If his job had been one that required a driver's license we would have literally been ruined. We would have not been able to pay any bills, and welfare doesn't give you enough for that and it's hard to get as an adult with no little kids at home and by the time we would have gotten it things would have been cut off for at least a month. It was winter. We would have had no heat and no way to cook. So, it can cause extreme hardship but it's still something I support. I don't support the way they go about it, but it's not a poor law.

What kind of "poor law" were you talking about that you think is still lin effect? Could you give me some examples please?

From BBC News:

Both you and Jeb! are interpreting that data backwards.

Productivity is gdp vs. hours worked.

If we want more people getting full time work, some people need to give up their overtime. This was probably part of the reason Obama changed the definition of an "exempt" employee.

For a better explanation of productivity vs. Hours worked, look here:
http://blog.pgi.com/2014/07/winding-wor ... fographic/

I just posted it from the BBC article, not interpreting anything.

Actually Obama made it easier for a lot of people, especially most salaried people to get overtime for the extra hours they work.
Most of those people worked "off the clock" or free instead of getting overtime.

You'd be surprised what employers will do to "entice" their employees to put in more hours even though they aren't getting paid for it.

Easier to get *paid for it. Alternately, employers may decide to hire more people so that they don't have to pay time and a half.

This will necessarily cause a decrease in productivity, because the increase in payroll costs chips away at the product.