Total Posts:46|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Corporations blame ACA (Affordable Care Act)

F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 6:54:04 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
i'm utterly shocked that corporations would reduce hours to avoid paying the ACA. Its almost as if they respond to incentives.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:06:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 6:54:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
i'm utterly shocked that corporations would reduce hours to avoid paying the ACA. Its almost as if they respond to incentives.

Just because they are responding to incentives doesn't mean it is justified. Shoplifters can respond to detectors by sneaking past the sides of them.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:09:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:06:10 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:54:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
i'm utterly shocked that corporations would reduce hours to avoid paying the ACA. Its almost as if they respond to incentives.

Just because they are responding to incentives doesn't mean it is justified. Shoplifters can respond to detectors by sneaking past the sides of them.

Wait! Isn't Obamacare supposed to be the choice when employers do not pay for your insurance?
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:12:10 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

Are you kidding me!
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:21:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:06:10 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:54:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
i'm utterly shocked that corporations would reduce hours to avoid paying the ACA. Its almost as if they respond to incentives.

Just because they are responding to incentives doesn't mean it is justified. Shoplifters can respond to detectors by sneaking past the sides of them.

but it should be expected. Saying that they are acting "immoral" isn't going to stop the act from occurring.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:29:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

How about we blame the democrats for forcing a flawed health care system down the throats of the people.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:31:05 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

Lol, it woulda driven private insurers out of business. Who are you kidding?
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:31:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:31:05 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

Lol, it woulda driven private insurers out of business. Who are you kidding?

You mean like how the Post Office drove Fedex and UPS out of business?
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:33:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:29:54 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

How about we blame the democrats for forcing a flawed health care system down the throats of the people.

I don't understand why you have a problem with the coercion in this case. I've seen you advocate coercion in other threads.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:33:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:31:40 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:31:05 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

Lol, it woulda driven private insurers out of business. Who are you kidding?

You mean like how the Post Office drove Fedex and UPS out of business?

Obamacare has yet to prove incompetency like UPS.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:34:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:33:08 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:29:54 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:27:16 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:11:11 PM, FREEDO wrote:
You can blame Republicans for blocking the public option.

This. That would have ended this nonsense and would have cost us less. It would also have driven the cost of private insurance down so that they could compete with the government.

How about we blame the democrats for forcing a flawed health care system down the throats of the people.

I don't understand why you have a problem with the coercion in this case. I've seen you advocate coercion in other threads.

What coercion in other threads?
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
Posts: 18,324
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:37:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:21:44 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:06:10 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:54:04 PM, darkkermit wrote:
i'm utterly shocked that corporations would reduce hours to avoid paying the ACA. Its almost as if they respond to incentives.

Just because they are responding to incentives doesn't mean it is justified. Shoplifters can respond to detectors by sneaking past the sides of them.

but it should be expected. Saying that they are acting "immoral" isn't going to stop the act from occurring.

Sure, in the same way that we should expect shoplifters to sneak past the detectors through the sides. To draw an anology, my argument is that I advocate the detectors be placed over the entire section of the exit to close the loophole.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:50:29 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.

Since when does tax-n-spend become 'self-evident' "humanity?"
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:51:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:50:29 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.

Since when does tax-n-spend become 'self-evident' "humanity?"

More like borrow n spend
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:57:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:50:29 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.

Since when does tax-n-spend become 'self-evident' "humanity?"

If you're referring to the healthcare bill (I'm not really hip to the latest jive political slang), then it isn't "humanity." That's the point. It has to be forced on companies. Just like minimum wage, child labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, etc. etc.

Historically, companies and corporations really don't have a good track record in treating people like ... well ... people. If they did, we wouldn't be in this spot, would we?
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 7:59:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:57:15 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:50:29 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.

Since when does tax-n-spend become 'self-evident' "humanity?"

If you're referring to the healthcare bill (I'm not really hip to the latest jive political slang), then it isn't "humanity." That's the point. It has to be forced on companies. Just like minimum wage, child labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, etc. etc.

Historically, companies and corporations really don't have a good track record in treating people like ... well ... people. If they did, we wouldn't be in this spot, would we?

Why should they treat people humanely, they are there to make money.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 8:03:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 7:59:24 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:57:15 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:50:29 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:45:53 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:40:35 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 7:36:11 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:51:10 PM, tmar19652 wrote:
At 1/10/2013 6:42:41 PM, F-16_Fighting_Falcon wrote:
http://finance.yahoo.com...

The intent of the ACA was to have better health care for US Citizens. One of its provisions is that workers with more than 30 hours logged must be offered health insurance. Wendy's gets around this by reducing the number of hours of its workers to 28. An ingenious way to find a loophole.

I propose that further provisions must be added to the ACA to prevent abuse such as this. Corporations must not be allowed to simply reduce the amount of hours of their workers to get around the law. It undermines the real intent of the ACA while also giving workers a raw deal while using loopholes to justify it.

We should not have aca in the first place. Wendy's is not abusing the system, but simply making smart financial moves.

Abusing the system and making smart financial moves aren't mutually exclusive. In fact, abuse committed by companies toward the goal of smart financial moves is why we have a majority of our labor laws in the first place.

This is not abuse though, if the idiot democrats thought through their bill, Wendy's could not do this.

Again, the fact that they can do it doesn't make it not abuse. One could respond to your statement by saying that if greedy, heartless corporations treated people with some modicum of humanity, then bills like this would not be necessary.

Since when does tax-n-spend become 'self-evident' "humanity?"

If you're referring to the healthcare bill (I'm not really hip to the latest jive political slang), then it isn't "humanity." That's the point. It has to be forced on companies. Just like minimum wage, child labor laws, anti-discrimination laws, etc. etc.

Historically, companies and corporations really don't have a good track record in treating people like ... well ... people. If they did, we wouldn't be in this spot, would we?

Why should they treat people humanely, they are there to make money.

I didn't say that they should. I've simply noted the consequences of them not doing it. Yes, they are there to make money. And, in their haste to do that, they've trampled on plenty of basic human rights.

Guess what? Humans don't like that. And now we have laws to keep them in check. And now they can be fined, and sued, and penalized for violating those laws. How much money could they have saved if they looked at the bigger picture and considered the financial consequences of their actions? Is it worth it to squeeze a few cents an hour out of an employee when the result is a multi-million dollar class-action lawsuit? One needn't argue ethics or morality here, it's clear that abusing people, while profitable in the short run, is likely to bite you in the a$$ in return.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 8:05:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 8:03:09 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
And here I was thinking people enter into job 'contracts' to make money- not to have their "humanity" pampered.

The existence of a primary goal does not exclude the existence of secondary goals, or conditions on the primary one.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 8:07:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I find this discrepancy odd. Corporations using their power to exploit people is fine, because their only goal is to make money. But people using their power to fight back, that's ... bad? Explain that.

Note that I'm not even arguing that corporate abuse is "bad," but rather it is not in their best interest, even if you factor their only goal as being to make money.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/10/2013 8:09:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/10/2013 8:05:44 PM, drafterman wrote:
At 1/10/2013 8:03:09 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
And here I was thinking people enter into job 'contracts' to make money- not to have their "humanity" pampered.

The existence of a primary goal does not exclude the existence of secondary goals, or conditions on the primary one.

Though, the "primary" goal is to be able to live a life worth living, for which having a job to make money is secondary and supportive of that goal. Kind of defeats the purpose if your work demoralizes you.