What's new

Obama says US should have paid maternity leave

That was directed at E, not you. If you knew his background it would make more sense.

Any good company would cover all those different situations in their policy. Just as EOleson did when crafting non-rev policy at AA.

I think it is good policy for a company to offer that to its employees. I also think it would be good for some sort of government incentive to companies who offer it. Maybe a tax break for those that offer a certain suite of benefits? To mandate it? I am not so sure if I would support that.
 
Glenn Quagmire said:
That was directed at E, not you. If you knew his background it would make more sense.

 
if it was directed at E and only E then do it in a private message if you didnt mean or want anyone else to comment.. otherwise...
 
and my point was..
 
its not about the poster of the red herring,  its about the person reading their inanity,and thinking they have a point, the way to stop red herrings, from becoming a possibility in someones mind is to address it.  when you address only the poster, you make them want to do it more... 
 
and i know his background, i may have lurked on and off for the past several years, but that doesnt mean i didnt notice.  
 
Glenn Quagmire said:
Any good company would cover all those different situations in their policy. Just as EOleson did when crafting non-rev policy at AA.

I think it is good policy for a company to offer that to its employees. I also think it would be good for some sort of government incentive to companies who offer it. Maybe a tax break for those that offer a certain suite of benefits? To mandate it? I am not so sure if I would support that.
 
As more and more companies offer it, the creme of the crop will flock to them, to be competitive they will have to do it as well to keep up...  
 
i don't think mandating it is necessary either..  you dont have to work at the company you do, if someone else offers a better package you can go there on your own free will, no need to make everyone do what they dont want to or cant do... like health care... (i had to get that dig in there lol)
 
xUT said:
Why should we pay for a person's decision to get pregnant without the income to afford it?
Don't ask questions that have obvious answers. Libtards HATE that.
 
I don't PM anyone here.

There is an understandable gap in understanding sometimes on these forums.

What I am thinking sometimes doesn't translate well in a quick blog post.

My problem not yours.
 
delldude said:
 
Only if a man could get maternity leave....I demand equal protection.
No maternity leave for White Males will be allowed....................racist bastards, everyone of them! Of course, exceptions will be made if they're Libtard white males!
 
Glenn Quagmire said:
I don't PM anyone here.

There is an understandable gap in understanding sometimes on these forums.

What I am thinking sometimes doesn't translate well in a quick blog post.

My problem not yours.
it happens no worries 
 
Quags, call it a red herring, but the whole premise here isn't about a company coming up with their own policy. It's about setting a national policy. There were companies who had variations of family leave before FMLA came about.

If you really think that Obama's goal here is voluntary compliance, you're in need of a drug tap, because history has shown the exact opposite.
 
The whole premise here is Obama floating an idea that appeals to a constituency the Republicans can't connect with. And the Republicans proving why.
 
Dog might actually be right about something -- I'm sure most conservatives would much prefer an economy (and a culture?) that didn't require both parents having to work full-time jobs.

We managed to do it, but it required sacrifice.

The pro-choice people say that having children should be a choice, no?... So, why should my choice have to be paid for by someone else?
 
eolesen said:
Dog might actually be right about something -- I'm sure most conservatives would much prefer an economy (and a culture?) that didn't require both parents having to work full-time jobs.

We managed to do it, but it required sacrifice.

The pro-choice people say that having children should be a choice, no?... So, why should my choice have to be paid for by someone else?
 
Give all our hard earned monies to gov't and they give it to free loader programs abused like the devil and one wonders why you can't make ends meet on one salary.
 
You only need to look at the decline of the middle class salary compared to upper class. Wealth stagnation has little to do with government welfare programs.
 
eolesen said:
I'm not against the idea. I just want to know who is going to pay for it.
 
No where on the Iraq Collapsing thread did you mention the cost of that little venture.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top