By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - If the 22nd Amendment didn't exist, would you vote for Pres. Bush?

akuma587 on 02 November 2008
SamuelRSmith said:
akuma587 said:
A law of the biggest law firms in the U.S. expect you to work 60-80 hour weeks.

 

 12-16 hour long days? That's nuts! Seriously, the amount of people that moan about 8 hour days here. Considering that in the UK you're also entitled to 20 minutes break for every six hours work, 11 hours break between each working day, and atleast one day off a week. Again, these are minimum, and are usually considered bad breaks, especially the one day a week one.

What for minimum wage, national insurance, and long term illness in the US?

It is supposed to be $6.55, but I think I was only getting paid $5.75 once the raise took effect over the summer, but it is about to get bumped up over the summer to $7.25.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

National insurance?  We don't even know what that is here.  We do get unemployment benefits though (if you qualify).

Long term illness coverage?  We don't know what that is either.



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson

Around the Network
SamuelRSmith on 02 November 2008
akuma587 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
akuma587 said:
A law of the biggest law firms in the U.S. expect you to work 60-80 hour weeks.

 

 12-16 hour long days? That's nuts! Seriously, the amount of people that moan about 8 hour days here. Considering that in the UK you're also entitled to 20 minutes break for every six hours work, 11 hours break between each working day, and atleast one day off a week. Again, these are minimum, and are usually considered bad breaks, especially the one day a week one.

What for minimum wage, national insurance, and long term illness in the US?

It is supposed to be $6.55, but I think I was only getting paid $5.75 once the raise took effect over the summer, but it is about to get bumped up over the summer to $7.25.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

National insurance?  We don't even know what that is here.  We do get unemployment benefits though (if you qualify).

Long term illness coverage?  We don't know what that is either.

 

 National Insurance goes towards your pension, contributes to the NHS, contributes towards benefits, pays for sick pay, maternity leave, etc. Long term illness is basically covered by National Insurance. Long term pay pay essentially means that if you come under long term illness, you still have the right to full payment. If you become diabled whilst employeed, the employer also needs to allow them to work for as long as possible (no churning out of a factory because you've lost your arm, or something).

Minimum wage in the UK is currently £5.73 ($9.22)



Hawkeye on 02 November 2008

Another advantage of Britian over the U.S. is that they all have better accents and the drinking rules are more lax.



SamuelRSmith on 02 November 2008
Hawkeye said:
Another advantage of Britian over the U.S. is that they all have better accents and the drinking rules are more lax.

 

 As are the prositution laws, baby.



whatever on 02 November 2008
Kasz216 said:
whatever said:
Kasz216 said:
akuma587 said:

Bush's record is largely void of accomplishments. He did a pretty good job keeping the country secure, although he handled it about as poorly as possible, and the American public hates him for it. He pretty much tarred and feathered America's good name across the world as well. At least Obama might undo some or all of that damage.

But other than that he has done very little good for America unless you are in the top tax brackets. His education reforms have been a joke, ask anyone who works in education. He rolled back a lot of the advances in environmental reform. He did little or nothing to fix the Social Security and healthcare problems. He turned the Supreme Court further right (which is a good or bad thing depending on how you look at it). He handled Katrina very poorly, (but at least handled the most recent hurricane adequately well).

But the worst thing he did was how he tried to usurp so many powers of the other branches of government. Such levels of "cronyism" in his appointments to judicial positions and his abuse of power over the U.S. Attorney's office has been unprecedented. Bush tried to circumvent the Constitution at every step of the way.  He turned the federal government into his own political plaything.

Bush is a perfect example of what not to do as a President unless you want the American people to hate you. He went from record approval ratings to record approval ratings (highest approval to lowest approval). I am not sure if he has bottomed out to Nixon's nadir yet, but he is within 1-2% points if he hasn't already.

Completly untrue.  The Gini index under Bush has had the lowest growth rates since reagan.

The gap between the rich and poor hasn't changed much at all.

The Bush tax cuts actually made the tax code MORE progressive.... according to the tax policy center.

At "best", you could say Bush did almost nothing for everybody... and the least for the rich.

When it comes to the Gap between the rich and poor.  Bush has been a better president then either Carter or Clinton.

Paul Krugman (recent Nobel Prize winner) disagrees with you.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/12699486/paul_krugman_on_the_great_wealth_transfer/print

"Rising inequality isn't new. The gap between rich and poor started growing before Ronald Reagan took office, and it continued to widen through the Clinton years. But what is happening under Bush is something entirely unprecedented: For the first time in our history, so much growth is being siphoned off to a small, wealthy minority that most Americans are failing to gain ground even during a time of economic growth -- and they know it."

That'd be nice if he were disagreeing with me.  However he's not.  He's disagreeing with the Gini Coefficent.  Which are well... the numbers.  The cold hard facts.

Also this was written before the tax cuts came into effect.  Simply, he predicted wrong... the Gini coefficent as it stands now has barely budged during Clinton.

In the year he made this predition 2006.  It made sense since the Gini Coeeficient was at it's highest levels.  However once his tax cuts actually kicked in.. the Gini coefficent dropped for the last two years.

How rare is that?  It's only happened 7 times between 1968 and 2005.

So... yeah.  Non issue of an article.  That inequality was before Bush's economic plans really came into being... and the rise in inequality was really more of a Clinton carryover.

What are you talking about?  The tax cuts started in 2001.  Your saying that Bush's tax policies only came into effect in his SIXTH year in office?  You don't really believe that, do you?

 



Around the Network
akuma587 on 02 November 2008
SamuelRSmith said:
akuma587 said:
SamuelRSmith said:
akuma587 said:
A law of the biggest law firms in the U.S. expect you to work 60-80 hour weeks.

 

 12-16 hour long days? That's nuts! Seriously, the amount of people that moan about 8 hour days here. Considering that in the UK you're also entitled to 20 minutes break for every six hours work, 11 hours break between each working day, and atleast one day off a week. Again, these are minimum, and are usually considered bad breaks, especially the one day a week one.

What for minimum wage, national insurance, and long term illness in the US?

It is supposed to be $6.55, but I think I was only getting paid $5.75 once the raise took effect over the summer, but it is about to get bumped up over the summer to $7.25.

http://www.dol.gov/esa/whd/flsa/

National insurance?  We don't even know what that is here.  We do get unemployment benefits though (if you qualify).

Long term illness coverage?  We don't know what that is either.

 

 National Insurance goes towards your pension, contributes to the NHS, contributes towards benefits, pays for sick pay, maternity leave, etc. Long term illness is basically covered by National Insurance. Long term pay pay essentially means that if you come under long term illness, you still have the right to full payment. If you become diabled whilst employeed, the employer also needs to allow them to work for as long as possible (no churning out of a factory because you've lost your arm, or something).

Minimum wage in the UK is currently £5.73 ($9.22)

We do have Social Security which helps protect people when they are old and if they are disabled (if they qualify, which is hard to do).  But if you are sick, you get screwed.  Maternity leave?  Yeah right.  We'd rather spend out money blowing up other countries.  Sick pay?  Maybe, but only if your job gives it to you. 

The state I am in has a right to work policy (which pretty much means right to be fired for any reason).  An employer can fire you for any reason and you can quit for any reason, as long as no federal laws have been violated.  Thank goodness for those federal laws, many of which are actually pretty helpful in cases of discrimination or sexual harassment.

 



We had two bags of grass, seventy-five pellets of mescaline, five sheets of high-powered blotter acid, a salt shaker half full of cocaine, a whole galaxy of multi-colored uppers, downers, screamers, laughers…Also a quart of tequila, a quart of rum, a case of beer, a pint of raw ether and two dozen amyls.  The only thing that really worried me was the ether.  There is nothing in the world more helpless and irresponsible and depraved than a man in the depths of an ether binge. –Raoul Duke

It is hard to shed anything but crocodile tears over White House speechwriter Patrick Buchanan's tragic analysis of the Nixon debacle. "It's like Sisyphus," he said. "We rolled the rock all the way up the mountain...and it rolled right back down on us...."  Neither Sisyphus nor the commander of the Light Brigade nor Pat Buchanan had the time or any real inclination to question what they were doing...a martyr, to the bitter end, to a "flawed" cause and a narrow, atavistic concept of conservative politics that has done more damage to itself and the country in less than six years than its liberal enemies could have done in two or three decades. -Hunter S. Thompson