AerchAngel (07-15-2013)
Obamacare is going to force businesses to keep workers hours under the requirement so they can keep their bottom line and stay in business.Originally Posted by BedellBrave
This has been going on for years. In 1976 when I was working at Sears/Roebuck, we could not work more than three 40-hour weeks in a row, because if we did, they'd have to designate us as full-time. I just love the way that the current President is responsible for trends that predate the Reagan administration.
Ah have nuthin' to contribute, except hiya Beds.......
Yeah, and ACA isn't responsible for any of this most recent shift to PT workers. Good grief.
What's up pfiggy? Good to see you in these parts.
You know Bedell, you're infernal hand-wringing gets a little bit old. The lower and middle classes have been under full-scale assault in this country since the mid-1970s and the recent trends are just extensions of that. What has happened with the ACA has contributed, but it's the tip of the iceberg given the loss of purchasing power due to bad tax policy and a full-scale retrenchment on wages and benefits by private sector employers.
Yeah, dude, save the crocodile tears, unless you want to get on the picket lines and protest Wal-Mart, for whom managing worker hours to avoid paying benefits has been SOP forever.
I've got an idea! Allow workers to collectively barg—nah, never mind.
It seems really strange to me that corporate profits are at an all-time high, and unemployment simply is not moving.
With all the free pieces of paper the fed is giving to the economy, you would think the unemployment rate would have moved by now. But nope, just the steady devaluation of our money.
But I don't think anyone can deny O's utter failure of ending the corporatism in this country and turning the economy around.
I'd deny it, since you have to actual attempt something to fail at it.
Also, this is my thought on this thread:
drewdat (07-15-2013), nocalgirl10 (07-15-2013)
Fair enough...
He seemed to campaign a lot about it though
Good. ACA has contributed to more and more folks looking at PT employment. Of course there are other factors and longstanding ones that play into the employment makeup of the American economy. But I do think all legislation is up for critique don't you? When legislators push these monstrous bills you can be certain there will be unintended negative consequences. I believe ACA seems especially fraught with them, don't you?
Call it hand-wringing if you'd like. By why call a pig a gazelle?
No tears here. Would you prefer that I throw a pep-rally for this bit of legislation? Are you happy that the ACA has exacerbated the problems?
ACA hasn't even been fully implemented. I am not convinced that in the long term part-time workers won't be better off.
I can say that ACA has tripled my health insurance premiums....
Which part of the ACA made that happen?
I dont understand why its ok for Corporations to earn the same, if not more...but workers are the ones who must sacrifice? Corps are probably extremely excited that they can increase their greed and have someone to blame for screwing the bones of the company.
Why do health insurance companies insist of charging hundreds of dollars a month for "insurance"...then charge a co-pay for a visit...run your insurance, get a procedure done...then when its time to pay the bill they say, uh...no we arent paying that.
So 4 months of my insurance cost could have covered the cost of the procedure(probably less considering cash payment is "discounted")...instead I just get screwed.
Yes, it is not fully implemented but can't the legislation generate problems before full implementation? Maybe it has long-term benefits, but at this rate, will the legislation actually ever get there? Or might the better option be to go in the more radical direction that I believe you favor? Or scrapping as much of the current legislation as feasible and start over?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote