Home | Community | Message Board


Edabea
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: NordVPN NordVPN   PureVPN PureVPN

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay?
    #2267196 - 01/24/04 01:56 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)



--------------------
  -I'd rather have a frontal lobotomy than a bottle in front of me

CANADIAN CENTER FOR POLICY ALTERNATIVES


Edited by carbonhoots (01/24/04 01:57 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2267464 - 01/24/04 04:22 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

right to overtime pay?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,085
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 4 minutes
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2267717 - 01/24/04 08:31 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Wait wait wait wait wait. I don't understand this. Is overtime pay over for everyone or what?

This is the biggest slap in the face to the working man if even one person is denied time and a half for working over 40 hours.




--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAnnapurna1
liberal pussy
Female User Gallery
Registered: 05/21/02
Posts: 5,646
Loc: innsmouth..MA
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2268111 - 01/24/04 01:44 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

im actually impressed that kerry..edwards..and lieberman abstained from the vote...at least they are showing a minimal amount of political intelligence...


--------------------


"anchor blocks counteract the process of pontiprobation..while omalean globes regulize the pressure"...


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2268134 - 01/24/04 01:58 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

personally i love getting overtime. i almost never put in just a 40 hour week at work just because i know that for the extra time i work above that, i'm getting time and a half... it's nice. it really is... but come on... a right to overtime pay?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: ]
    #2268166 - 01/24/04 02:10 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Your spitting hairs over the definition of right. Right or no it is the law which make it a legal right to overtime pay.


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #2268195 - 01/24/04 02:30 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

if your employer has pledged to pay you overtime, then you of course have a right to it... even if they were forced to pay overtime by the government. on this i would agree. but short of that, there is no fundamental right to overtime pay... the government shouldn't be forcing employers to pay overtime unless they've said they'll pay overtime. if an agreement between an employer and employee does not include overtime pay, that's no business of the state.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,085
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 4 minutes
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: ]
    #2268289 - 01/24/04 03:09 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

For some reason I always thought an employer had to pay you time and a half after 40 hours of work in a week.





--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: ]
    #2268293 - 01/24/04 03:11 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Agreed. It will be very important to cover these things in detail when negotiating employment contracts in the future. Perhaps the need for this law has passed or not. Of course employers could always hire people on a salary basis and overtime would not be an issue. What are the pros and cons in a comparison between hourly pay and salary from the employers perspective? What is the need to change the law when they can hire a salaried employee and avoid the issue from the start?


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBaby_Hitler
Errorist
 User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 22,840
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 4 days, 20 hours
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: Learyfan]
    #2268415 - 01/24/04 04:09 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Not if you're on salary.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,085
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 4 minutes
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: Baby_Hitler]
    #2268529 - 01/24/04 05:01 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

So this isn't about people not on salary?




--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: Learyfan]
    #2268644 - 01/24/04 05:41 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

they have to pay you overtime because there is a law. if there wasn't a law, they wouldn't have to.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: ]
    #2268676 - 01/24/04 05:53 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

I'm not to worried for myseft but what about the fast food workers or other enry level positions? An employer could reduce his workforce by a third if he didn't have to pay overtime. He would avoid all the costs of benies for that lost third aswell. Are you ready to see unemployment jump up?

Are they just talking about the 40 hrs a week OT or does it include the 12 hrs in a day OT aswell?

If this happens it might bring back the need for unions.


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfan
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 30,085
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 2 hours, 4 minutes
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #2269420 - 01/24/04 10:53 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

mntlfngrs said:
I'm not to worried for myseft but what about the fast food workers or other enry level positions? An employer could reduce his workforce by a third if he didn't have to pay overtime. He would avoid all the costs of benies for that lost third aswell. Are you ready to see unemployment jump up?

Are they just talking about the 40 hrs a week OT or does it include the 12 hrs in a day OT aswell?

If this happens it might bring back the need for unions.




That's a great point.

This is fucked up. Did they say when or if this was going to take effect?




--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: Park Avenue Playground - The Trip



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblez@z.com
Libertarian
Registered: 10/13/02
Posts: 2,876
Loc: ATL
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2269998 - 01/25/04 01:42 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

My father owns a business (about 4.5 million dollars in sales a year). He has employees who want to work extra hours. He can not afford to let them work extra hours because of forced overtime pay therefore they are limited to 40 hours a week. The employees are forced to take on second part time jobs for lower hourly pay because of this. Doesn't sound fair does it? I say get rid of forced overtime pay.


--------------------
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." - C.S. Lewis

"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniencies attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblecarbonhoots
old hand

Registered: 09/11/01
Posts: 1,351
Loc: BC Canada
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: z@z.com]
    #2270203 - 01/25/04 02:52 AM (13 years, 4 months ago)

To bad for your father, and his employees hopefully business will improve to the point where he can afford overtime.  At last you guys still affford your internet connection!.  :laugh:  However I'm sure his case is not representative of the majority of owners/workers.  And I think that the right to overtime is fair and has helped the condition and position of the working man in America much more than it has hurt it.

There should be a provision that if a company is truly destitute, workers could waive the right.


Edited by carbonhoots (01/25/04 05:20 AM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Anonymous

Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: mntlfngrs]
    #2271389 - 01/25/04 01:23 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

I'm not to worried for myseft but what about the fast food workers or other enry level positions? An employer could reduce his workforce by a third if he didn't have to pay overtime. He would avoid all the costs of benies for that lost third aswell. Are you ready to see unemployment jump up?

this guy says it better than i can:

"Spread-the-Work Schemes

I have referred to various union make-work and featherbed practices. These practices, and the public toleration of them, spring from the same fundamental fallacy as the fear of machines.

This is the belief that a more efficient way of doing a thing destroys jobs, and its necessary corollary that a less efficient way of doing it creates them.

*Allied to this fallacy is the belief that there is just a fixed amount of work to be done in the world --

and that, if we cannot add to this work by thinking up more cumbersome ways of doing it, at least we can think of devices for spreading it around among as large a number of people as possible.

This error lies behind the minute subdivision of labor upon which unions insist. In the building trades in large cities the subdivision is notorious. Bricklayers are not allowed to use stones for a chimney: that is tile special work of stonemasons. An electrician cannot rip out a board to fix a connection and put it back again: that is the special job, no matter how simple it may be, of the carpenters. A plumber will not remove or put back a tile incident to fixing a leak in the shower: that is the job of a tile-setter...

* It is true that a few persons can profit at the expense of the rest of us from this minute arbitrary subdivision of labor -- provided it happens in their case alone.

But those who support it as a general practice fail to see that it always raises production costs; that it results on net balance in less work done and in fewer goods produced.

* The householder who is forced to employ two men to do the work of one has, it is true, given employment to one extra man. But he has just that much less money left over to spend on something that would employ somebody else.

Because his bathroom leak has been repaired at double what it should have cost, he decides not to buy the new sweater he wanted.

* "Labor" is no better off, because a day's employment of an unneeded tile-setter has meant a day's disemployment of a sweater knitter or machine handler. The householder, however, is worse off. Instead of having a repaired shower and a sweater, he has the shower and no sweater.

And if we count the sweater as part of the national wealth, the count is short one sweater. This symbolizes the net result of effort to make extra work by arbitrary subdivision of labor.

But there are other schemes for "spreading the work," often put forward by union spokesmen and legislators. The more frequent of these is the proposal to shorten the working week, usually by law. The belief that it would "spread the work" and "give more jobs" was one of the main reasons behind the inclusion of the penalty-overtime provision in the existing Federal Wage-Hour Law...

What is the actual effect of such plans, whether enforced by individual unions or by legislation? It will clarify the problem if we consider two cases.

The first is a reduction in the standard working week from forty hours to thirty without any change in the hourly rate of pay.

The second is a reduction in the working week from forty hours to thirty, but with a sufficient increase in hourly wage rates to maintain the same weekly pay for the individual workers already employed...

[Let's assume that] the working week is cut from forty hours to thirty, with no change in hourly pay. If there is substantial unemployment when this plan is put into effect, the plan will no doubt provide additional jobs. We cannot assume that it will provide sufficient additional jobs, however, to maintain the same payrolls and the same number of man-hours as before, unless we make the unlikely assumptions that in each industry there has been exactly the same percentage of unemployment and that the new men and women employed are no less efficient at their special tasks on the average than those who had already been employed. But suppose we do make these assumptions. Suppose we do assume that the right number of additional workers of each skill is available, and that the new workers do not raise production costs. What will be the result of reducing the working week from forty hours to thirty (without any increase in hourly pay)?

Though more workers will be employed, each will be working fewer hours, and there will, therefore, be no net increase in man-hours. It is unlikely that there will be any significant increase in production. Total payrolls and "purchasing power" will be no larger.

*All that will have happened, even under the most favorable assumptions (which would seldom be realized) is that the workers previously employed will subsidize, in effect, the workers previously unemployed.

For in order that the new workers will individually receive three?fourths as many dollars a week as the old workers used to receive, the old workers will themselves now individually receive only three-fourths as many dollars a week as previously.

It is true that the old workers will now work fewer hours; but this purchase of more leisure at a high price is presumably not a decision they have made for its own sake: it is a sacrifice made to provide others with jobs.

The labor union leaders who demand shorter weeks to "spread the work" usually recognize this, and therefore they put the proposal forward in a form in which everyone is supposed to eat his cake and have it too. Reduce the working week from forty hours to thirty, they tell us, to provide more jobs; but compensate for the shorter week by increasing the hourly rate of pay by 33 1/3 per cent.

The workers employed, say, were previously getting an average of $80 a week for forty hours work; in order that they may still get $80 for only thirty hours work, the hourly rate of pay must be advanced to an average of $2.66 2/3.

*What would be the consequences of such a plan? The first and most obvious consequence would be to raise costs of production.

If we assume that the workers, when previously employed for forty hours, were getting less than the level of production costs, prices and profits made possible, then they could have got the hourly increase without reducing the length of the working week.

They could, in other word have worked the same number of hours and got their total weekly incomes increased by one-third, instead of merely getting, as they are under the new thirty-hour week, the same weekly income as before.

But if, under the forty-hour week the workers were already getting as high a wage as the level of production costs and prices made possible (and the very unemployment they are trying to cure may be a sign that they were already getting even more than this), then the increase in production costs as a result of the 33 1/3 per cent increase in hourly wage rates will be much greater than than existing state of prices, production and costs can stand.

*The result of the higher wage rate, therefore, will be much greater unemployment than before.

The least efficient firms will be thrown out of business, and the least efficient workers will be thrown out of jobs.

Production will be reduced all around the circle. Higher production costs and scarcer supplies will tend to raise prices, so that workers can buy less with the same dollar wages; on the other hand, the increased unemployment will shrink demand and hence tend to lower prices.

What ultimately happens to the prices of goods will depend upon what monetary policies are then followed. But if a policy of monetary inflation is pursued, to enable prices to rise so that the increased hourly wages can be paid, this will merely be a disguised way of reducing real wage rates, so that these will return, in terms of the amount of goods they can purchase, to the same real rate as before.

The result would then be the same as if the working week had been reduced without an increase in hour wage rates. And the results of that have already been discussed.

The spread-the-work schemes, in brief, rest on the same sort of illusion that we have been considering.

*The people who support such schemes think only of the employment they would provide for particular persons or groups; they do not stop to consider what their whole effect would be on everybody.

The spread-the-work schemes rest also, as we began by pointing out, on the false assumption that there is just a fixed amount of work to be done.

*There could be no greater fallacy. There is no limit to the amount of work to be done as long as any human need or wish that work could fill remains unsatisfied.

In a modern exchange economy, the most work will be done when prices, costs and wages are in the best relations with each other. What these relations are we shall later consider."

-henry hazlitt, economics in one lesson


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibledaussaulit
Forgetful

Registered: 08/06/02
Posts: 2,894
Loc: Earth
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: carbonhoots]
    #2272064 - 01/25/04 05:31 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

This also affects police officers. They get paid overtime. Maybe we'll see less pigs on the streets.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisiblesilversoul7
Chill the FuckOut!
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/10/02
Posts: 27,301
Loc: mndfreeze's puppet army
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: daussaulit]
    #2272092 - 01/25/04 05:39 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

I have no problem with having lots of police officers on the street as long as they're going after the real criminals, instead of drug users, prostitutes, and the like.


--------------------


"It is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong."--Voltaire


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinemntlfngrs
The Art of Casterbation
Male User Gallery

Registered: 07/18/02
Posts: 3,937
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Re: George Bush recinds rights to overtime pay? [Re: z@z.com]
    #2272244 - 01/25/04 06:48 PM (13 years, 4 months ago)

Quote:

z@z.com said:
My father owns a business (about 4.5 million dollars in sales a year). He has employees who want to work extra hours. He can not afford to let them work extra hours because of forced overtime pay therefore they are limited to 40 hours a week. The employees are forced to take on second part time jobs for lower hourly pay because of this. Doesn't sound fair does it? I say get rid of forced overtime pay.




Why not pay them a salary that would be equal to 50 hrs a week?


--------------------
Be all and you'll be to end all


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | Next >  [ show all ]

Shop: NordVPN NordVPN   PureVPN PureVPN

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* George Bush was right about what?????
( 1 2 all )
Silversoul 3,304 37 03/16/05 08:39 AM
by Innvertigo
* George Bush: The Unauthorized Biography --- by Webster G. Tarpley & Anton Chaitkin Psychoactive1984 598 0 05/03/05 01:27 AM
by Psychoactive1984
* My father crapped bigger ones than George Bush fft2 581 3 06/17/04 10:44 PM
by Anonymous
* George Bush to WHO: Junk food is good for you
( 1 2 all )
carbonhoots 2,477 32 01/24/04 04:19 PM
by carbonhoots
* Compared to George Bush, Clinton was Conservative
( 1 2 all )
Skeptikos 3,470 31 01/20/06 02:11 AM
by Falcon91Wolvrn03
* Kanye West "George Bush Does Not Care About Black People"
( 1 2 all )
Anisotropic 2,182 31 09/27/05 02:27 PM
by kotik
* Michael Moore's Letter to george Bush about Katrina
( 1 2 3 all )
mjshroomer 3,759 58 09/05/05 07:34 AM
by Starter
* George Bush Causes Hurricanes 1stimer 490 3 10/28/04 01:16 PM
by Annapurna1

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil
2,637 topic views. 0 members, 3 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Marijuana Demystified
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2017 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.031 seconds spending 0.004 seconds on 19 queries.