Total Posts:19|Showing Posts:1-19
Jump to topic:

Obama Destroys Every Job In Existence

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 6:11:49 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
CNSNews.com " "A little-known section in the ObamaCare health reform law defines "full-time" work as averaging only 30 hours per week, a definition that will affect some employers who utilize part-time workers to trim the cost of complying with the ObamaCare rule that says businesses with 50 or more workers must provide health insurance or pay a fine.
"The term "full-time employee" means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week," section 1513 of the law reads." (Scroll down to section 4, paragraph A.)
That section, known as the employer mandate, requires any business with 50 or more full-time employees to provide at least the minimum level of government-defined health coverage to those employees."

http://nation.foxnews.com...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
inferno
Posts: 10,556
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:14:35 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 6:11:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
CNSNews.com " "A little-known section in the ObamaCare health reform law defines "full-time" work as averaging only 30 hours per week, a definition that will affect some employers who utilize part-time workers to trim the cost of complying with the ObamaCare rule that says businesses with 50 or more workers must provide health insurance or pay a fine.
"The term "full-time employee" means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week," section 1513 of the law reads." (Scroll down to section 4, paragraph A.)
That section, known as the employer mandate, requires any business with 50 or more full-time employees to provide at least the minimum level of government-defined health coverage to those employees."

http://nation.foxnews.com...



False. This is the work of the economic hitmen and the Jesuits. You know better than this.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:30:09 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 7:28:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
HOHOHOHOHO
http://www.myfacewhen.net...

lmao where do you find this stuff
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:35:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 7:30:09 PM, 000ike wrote:
At 10/25/2012 7:28:57 PM, FREEDO wrote:
HOHOHOHOHO
http://www.myfacewhen.net...

lmao where do you find this stuff

http://www.myfacewhen.net...

It's a goldmine.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:37:25 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
*looks at title*

*looks at content*

I don't get it.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 7:38:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 7:37:25 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
*looks at title*

*looks at content*

I don't get it.

you forgot to look at who authored the thread.

...now do you get it?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 11:10:16 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/25/2012 6:11:49 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
CNSNews.com " "A little-known section in the ObamaCare health reform law defines "full-time" work as averaging only 30 hours per week, a definition that will affect some employers who utilize part-time workers to trim the cost of complying with the ObamaCare rule that says businesses with 50 or more workers must provide health insurance or pay a fine.
"The term "full-time employee" means, with respect to any month, an employee who is employed on average at least 30 hours of service per week," section 1513 of the law reads." (Scroll down to section 4, paragraph A.)
That section, known as the employer mandate, requires any business with 50 or more full-time employees to provide at least the minimum level of government-defined health coverage to those employees."

http://nation.foxnews.com...



So? The government has different numbers of hours for "full-time" status. What should it be? Unemployment kicks in at 32 hours, and the bureau of labor statistics uses 35 hours.

I don't like Obamacare, but we don't need to nit-pick how many hours one works. Besides, it needs to be low, otherwise employers would hire two part-timers to work one full-time position (probably more like 7 for 6). At 30 hours, it isn't as beneficial; people might take a 10% hit in pay by working 36, but they won't lose 25%. Remember, Obamacare only works if people are paying in...
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/25/2012 11:22:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
This does use 2008 numbers...

If Obamacare only affects businesses that have over 50 employees, this law does NOT affect at least 17.8% of employees who work at, at least, 89.3% of companies that have employees, which doesn't take into count the 21 million self-employed with no workers. At most it is 34.9% of workers at 98.2% of businesses.

This does not even come close to say it will destroy ALL jobs.

http://www.census.gov...
My work here is, finally, done.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 7:41:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
So nobody watched the video. (It's not that long.)
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,731
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 7:45:12 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

people need an income...
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/26/2012 9:20:46 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 7:45:12 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

people need an income...

Far be it from me to speak for another, but I think he means that a job =/= a job. Something like creating 500 jobs that make $50k a year is better than creating 600 jobs at minimum wage.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 1:25:47 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 9:20:46 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:45:12 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

people need an income...

Far be it from me to speak for another, but I think he means that a job =/= a job. Something like creating 500 jobs that make $50k a year is better than creating 600 jobs at minimum wage.

Well we could be looking at it in terms of gdp, but rob1billion doesn't really care about gdp.

What he cares about whether the jobs are "useful" to society or not. He doesn't believe that most jobs are helpful to society and some destructive to society.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Ore_Ele
Posts: 25,980
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 1:40:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/27/2012 1:25:47 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/26/2012 9:20:46 PM, Ore_Ele wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:45:12 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

people need an income...

Far be it from me to speak for another, but I think he means that a job =/= a job. Something like creating 500 jobs that make $50k a year is better than creating 600 jobs at minimum wage.

Well we could be looking at it in terms of gdp, but rob1billion doesn't really care about gdp.

What he cares about whether the jobs are "useful" to society or not. He doesn't believe that most jobs are helpful to society and some destructive to society.

Well, I tried to find some good in it.
"Wanting Red Rhino Pill to have gender"
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 4:30:10 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 7:41:17 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
So nobody watched the video. (It's not that long.)

Did we need to? You said the relevant part.

Did you read my stats and acknowledge your hyperbole?
My work here is, finally, done.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 3:35:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

This is not about job creation. This is about jeapordizing people's current full-time jobs. People who are working 40 hours a week and don't want to accept any less will have their jobs threatened by people who are willing to just work 30 hours a week.

It's basically turning the 40 hour work week into 30 so now everyone will just have part time jobs and not full time.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
blameworthy
Posts: 431
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 3:44:53 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/27/2012 3:35:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

This is not about job creation. This is about jeapordizing people's current full-time jobs. People who are working 40 hours a week and don't want to accept any less will have their jobs threatened by people who are willing to just work 30 hours a week.

It's basically turning the 40 hour work week into 30 so now everyone will just have part time jobs and not full time.

The government also spoiled everyone's jobs by ensuring that they did not work for cans of soup.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/27/2012 4:13:06 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 10/27/2012 3:35:33 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 10/26/2012 7:42:52 PM, R0b1Billion wrote:
Job creation is not purely good... the types of jobs are what's most important.

This is not about job creation. This is about jeapordizing people's current full-time jobs. People who are working 40 hours a week and don't want to accept any less will have their jobs threatened by people who are willing to just work 30 hours a week.

It's basically turning the 40 hour work week into 30 so now everyone will just have part time jobs and not full time.

1. Benefits can be offered to those working part-time, as there is no law (except Obamacare) stating that benefits must be offered to full-time employees.
2. Do you really think the approximately 10.7% of businesses affected are going to opt to add one employee for every three (think of the training costs and turnover due to low morale)? Do you think the businesses will retain employees? Do you think these employers don't already offer health insurance?
My work here is, finally, done.