D
Deleted member 7164
Guest
I've been saying we're in a dangerous situation, for years. The authority that should regulate and inspect workings of these global enterprises lacks both the means and knowledge to do so.
USA Politics
- Thread starter Genghis Khan
- Start date
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
Terrible accent (thank God we have subtitles) but strong content:
Emmanuel Macron ripped apart Trump's climate change denial in front of Congress — and he got a standing ovation for it.
Emmanuel Macron ripped apart Trump's climate change denial in front of Congress — and he got a standing ovation for it.
Forostar
Ancient Mariner
The average American worker takes less vacation time than a medieval peasant
Life for the medieval peasant was certainly no picnic. His life was shadowed by fear of famine, disease and bursts of warfare. His diet and personal hygiene left much to be desired.
But despite his reputation as a miserable wretch, you might envy him one thing: his vacations.
Plowing and harvesting were backbreaking toil, but the peasant enjoyed anywhere from eight weeks to half the year off.
The Church, mindful of how to keep a population from rebelling, enforced frequent mandatory holidays. Weddings, wakes, and births might mean a week off quaffing ale to celebrate, and when wandering jugglers or sporting events came to town, the peasant expected time off for entertainment. There were labor-free Sundays, and when the plowing and harvesting seasons were over, the peasant got time to rest, too.
In fact, economist Juliet Shor found that during periods of particularly high wages, such as 14th-century England, peasants might put in no more than 150 days a year. As for the modern American worker? After a year on the job, she gets an average of eight vacation days annually.
A history of dwindling vacation days
It wasn't supposed to turn out this way: John Maynard Keynes, one of the founders of modern economics, made a famous prediction that by 2030, advanced societies would be wealthy enough that leisure time, rather than work, would characterize national lifestyles. So far, that forecast is not looking good.
What happened? Read on...
Life for the medieval peasant was certainly no picnic. His life was shadowed by fear of famine, disease and bursts of warfare. His diet and personal hygiene left much to be desired.
But despite his reputation as a miserable wretch, you might envy him one thing: his vacations.
Plowing and harvesting were backbreaking toil, but the peasant enjoyed anywhere from eight weeks to half the year off.
The Church, mindful of how to keep a population from rebelling, enforced frequent mandatory holidays. Weddings, wakes, and births might mean a week off quaffing ale to celebrate, and when wandering jugglers or sporting events came to town, the peasant expected time off for entertainment. There were labor-free Sundays, and when the plowing and harvesting seasons were over, the peasant got time to rest, too.
In fact, economist Juliet Shor found that during periods of particularly high wages, such as 14th-century England, peasants might put in no more than 150 days a year. As for the modern American worker? After a year on the job, she gets an average of eight vacation days annually.
A history of dwindling vacation days
It wasn't supposed to turn out this way: John Maynard Keynes, one of the founders of modern economics, made a famous prediction that by 2030, advanced societies would be wealthy enough that leisure time, rather than work, would characterize national lifestyles. So far, that forecast is not looking good.
What happened? Read on...
D
Deleted member 7164
Guest
Even if you get meaningful number of vacation days a lot of workplaces will consider you replaceable if you do it. In Europe it is usual business to save up vacation days for a long one, two or three contiguous weeks during summer or winter. In US it could be interpreted as, hey, we could do fine whole month without X...
The minimum down here is 4 weeks, so 20 days for usual jobs. The employee gets to allocate one half, the employer other. In normal environments employer will ask you just to leave few days so they can work around holidays such as christmas time, merging weekends with holidays etc. If even that.
The minimum down here is 4 weeks, so 20 days for usual jobs. The employee gets to allocate one half, the employer other. In normal environments employer will ask you just to leave few days so they can work around holidays such as christmas time, merging weekends with holidays etc. If even that.
Onhell
Infinite Dreamer
Here's the thing. Most U.S employers only give you two weeks a year. There are some companies that if you use all your sick days, vacation days, unpaid time off days, etc, you can technically get a month off, all within company policy. BUT, if you do that it is frowned upon and like Zare pointed out they'll consider you a "slacker" and replaceable. At the same time, they push for people to work overtime. I read a couple of articles stating Sweden has officially moved to 6 hour work days after a 20 year "experiment."
Black Wizard
Pleb Hunter
Melania Trump has launched a campaign to tackle cyber-bullying among children: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-...nia-too-often-social-media-is-used-negatively
She said "Too often social media is used negatively". She has a child who uses social media negatively.
She said "Too often social media is used negatively". She has a child who uses social media negatively.
And we aren't talking about Barron.She has a child who uses social media negatively.
Black Wizard
Pleb Hunter
Precisely.
Funny, Trump does spring to mind when you consider the worst of social media culture. Melania does get some catty criticism on Twitter, though.
Black Wizard
Pleb Hunter
Trump has just pulled the US out of the Iran nuclear deal. 
D
Deleted member 7164
Guest
US were never a reliable partner. They always ask for behind the curtain favours. Allow our NGOs, change your regulations so we can enter the market, etc.
This is why Trump kept on mumbling about not getting anything in return for Iran deal. You get peace on return. Not oil concessions.
This is why Trump kept on mumbling about not getting anything in return for Iran deal. You get peace on return. Not oil concessions.
AlexS
Nomad
Not just "technically": it was not a treaty at all. President Obama never even submitted it to the Senate for ratification (which would have made it binding), because he knew it would fail.
It was a terrible deal, and good riddance to it.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
Exactly ... this is the problem with "I have a pen" governing ... you really only have a pencil and the next person up has an eraser.
bearfan
Ancient Mariner
I think he meant it would fail to be ratified
That part I'm really not sure about. Pretty well every expert on the matter says that it was a workable deal from both sides.
In the 2016 Senate? Absolutely. But you can't really accuse that Senate of being one that considered achievements rationally either. For better or for worse the Senate has turned into a place designed to hold up the other party as much as possible since around 2006, and especially since 2008.
AlexS
Nomad
It would have failed to be ratified because the American people, through their elected representatives, were against it, and the Obama administration did not do a good job convincing us otherwise.
Here is one article critical of the deal, which sets forth many of the reasons why many Americans opposed it: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/07/24/how_and_why_to_kill_the_iran_deal_127522.html
Basically, it left Iran in a position too close to being able to develop an operational nuclear weapon; didn't demand enough from Iran as far as disclosure or inspections were concerned; ended the sanctions regime that was our only real leverage; obligated the U.S. and other nations to protect Iran's nuclear assets and to help them develop more advanced centrifuges; and gave the government of Iran -- which is still sponsoring terrorism, atrocities, and the killing of Americans and our allies -- billions of dollars.
To the extent Iran hasn't developed a working bomb yet, one could say it was "working." But since the agreement left Iran about a year away from being able to develop a bomb, the deal's critics say all the deal did was to postpone dealing with Iran's nuclear ambitions for a later administration to handle -- besides all the other problems listed above and in the article I linked.