|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 25, 2007 6:47:16 GMT -5
Im glad Rudd won. Howard took all the workplace agreements and wrecked them. Because of him, no paid holidays. Standard pay for overtime, rather than 1 and a 1/2 times pay, no payed sick days. It strikes me as strange that your government would be involved in workplace stuff like that to begin with. It's unheard of here. There are basic laws that say you have pay a certain minimum wage (though it sometimes differs by state) and laws against child labor. Beyond that it is entirely up to the employer. There are some places who give you the holiday off unpaid, some who pay you to work it and some who give it off with pay. There are places who pay time and a half for over time and places that pay double time and places who pay straight time. There are some places I've seen that don't give sick time. You can take time off, but it's unpaid. It's almost all up to the employer, but most places tend to offer the best benefits they can because otherwise they'll lose employees. |
|
ra24sabu
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
BRING THIS BACK!!!!
Joined on: Aug 29, 2007 22:31:11 GMT -5
Posts: 2,086 
|
Post by ra24sabu on Nov 25, 2007 12:49:35 GMT -5
Watch out US too, Rudd will back us away from the War, him and Bush arent the 'best of friends'. In 423 days, it won't matter anyway. YES!!!!!!! F*CK BUSH!!!!!!!! |
|
Does that make me bad?
POSSIBLE BAD TRADER
I AM A BAD TRADER WOO!!
Joined on: Jul 25, 2007 14:04:20 GMT -5
Posts: 2,143
|
Post by Does that make me bad? on Nov 25, 2007 13:26:57 GMT -5
In 423 days, it won't matter anyway. YES!!!!!!! F*CK BUSH!!!!!!!! Thank god theres more of us!!! |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Nov 25, 2007 13:41:04 GMT -5
He said most, gay people that like Hillary aren't most, and not that everyone that likes Hillary are gay, it's just that they're complete and utter tools. America needs to stop voting in relatives and start with something fresh. We don't need another Clinton who can't answer the same question the same way every time it's asked. We don't need another Bush who is war hungry. We need a Giuliani or a Obama (I'm sad to say we need him but he's better than every other demy) that will actually do something for the citizens. What does Hillary and gay people have to do with his statement that most support Rudy Giuliani? What he said was a lie. I don't see how a last name can damage so much or not bring change. Giuliani will do what is good for himself and his next wife and try to get in the good graces of the Christian Conservatives so that he is elected. Giuliani doesn't have a pray when it comes to winning. Obama doesn't have the experience. Hillary does. To quote someone from Chris Matthews show this morning. "Barack is about putting forth ideas. Hillary is about delivering on ideas." |
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 25, 2007 13:49:55 GMT -5
He said most, gay people that like Hillary aren't most, and not that everyone that likes Hillary are gay, it's just that they're complete and utter tools. America needs to stop voting in relatives and start with something fresh. We don't need another Clinton who can't answer the same question the same way every time it's asked. We don't need another Bush who is war hungry. We need a Giuliani or a Obama (I'm sad to say we need him but he's better than every other demy) that will actually do something for the citizens. What does Hillary and gay people have to do with his statement that most support Rudy Giuliani? What he said was a lie. I don't see how a last name can damage so much or not bring change. Giuliani will do what is good for himself and his next wife and try to get in the good graces of the Christian Conservatives so that he is elected. Giuliani doesn't have a pray when it comes to winning. Obama doesn't have the experience. Hillary does. To quote someone from Chris Matthews show this morning. "Barack is about putting forth ideas. Hillary is about delivering on ideas." Honestly Slappy, what experience does Hillary have? She's been Senator for the last 4-5 yrs. That's about it. She has way more experience than Obama for sure, but beyond that she's not nearly as experienced as someone like Bill Richardson. I doubt you'll find me voting for a Democratic candidate next year, but Bill Richardson would tempt me based solely on his experience. Hillary does nothing for me just because of her left-wing, semi-socialist policies and lack of experience to boot. |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Nov 25, 2007 14:43:24 GMT -5
7 years. She was elected in 2000.
Hillarycare in the 90's. Been campaigning ever since she started with Barry Goldwater. Being First Lady and actually doing something around the world. Honestly, if it wasn't for Hillary, Bill never would have gone far. When she campaigned with/for him, he won. When she was caring for Chelsea after she was born and didn't campaign, he lost his governorship. And when she decided not to campaign during his run for the House, he lost.
I've heard people call her a socialist and a fascist. Which is it?
Richardson is the most experienced candidate.
|
|
BigT
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 20, 2004 23:10:09 GMT -5
Posts: 3,491
|
Post by BigT on Nov 25, 2007 20:47:55 GMT -5
Ok, before this gets overtaken into a US political debate, I'll just put forth my opinion. I missed out on voting by about 4 months, but I'm not overly dissapointed, because none of the parties really put forth enough to make me think they are the right choice. I think Rudd overall was the better choice, but it was more or less a choice between economy or services...so in the end Labor would have got my vote (Although I prefered the Liberal candidate in my area).
I just wish either party would be willing to try and stop the Pulp Mill. Tasmania bigest selling point, it's natural tourism, is in danger of getting screwed over in my opinion. Bloody Paul Lenin. If the Greens didn't have so many other wack ideas, I would definently have voted their way.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hulkamaniac on Nov 25, 2007 23:03:26 GMT -5
7 years. She was elected in 2000. Hillarycare in the 90's. Been campaigning ever since she started with Barry Goldwater. Being First Lady and actually doing something around the world. Honestly, if it wasn't for Hillary, Bill never would have gone far. When she campaigned with/for him, he won. When she was caring for Chelsea after she was born and didn't campaign, he lost his governorship. And when she decided not to campaign during his run for the House, he lost. I've heard people call her a socialist and a fascist. Which is it? Richardson is the most experienced candidate. I stand corrected on the 7 years. I don't consider First Lady to be experience. My mom has been married to a stock broker for 25 years. You'd be crazy if you took investment advice from her because she doesn't have a clue about the market. Her healthcare plan she put together was a failure. She's no more qualified than any other former First Lady IMO. Personally, I would've loved it if Condoleeza Rice had ran. Buckteeth and all I think she has more experience than Hillary (who is a socialist IMO). |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Nov 25, 2007 23:34:39 GMT -5
It only failed, because it was too left for the Congress.
You have to be crazy if you don't think that Hillary helped Bill at all with important decisions. I'm sure this is going to make her sound horrible and put you off more. But, I read that she said "We are President." I don't doubt that she played a major role.
I'd love to see Condi run. However, I don't know her stances on issues, socially or economically.
|
|
|
|
Post by ● kaneisdaman ● on Nov 26, 2007 1:18:58 GMT -5
Ok, before this gets overtaken into a US political debate, I'll just put forth my opinion. I missed out on voting by about 4 months, but I'm not overly dissapointed, because none of the parties really put forth enough to make me think they are the right choice. I think Rudd overall was the better choice, but it was more or less a choice between economy or services...so in the end Labor would have got my vote (Although I prefered the Liberal candidate in my area). I just wish either party would be willing to try and stop the Pulp Mill. Tasmania bigest selling point, it's natural tourism, is in danger of getting screwed over in my opinion. Bloody Paul Lenin. If the Greens didn't have so many other wack ideas, I would definently have voted their way. To tell you the truth, it may have been predominately economy vs services but when it comes down to it, the economy is the driving force behind everything else. Economic management is essential to provide better services.  To be honest, i hate the greens. They only clog votes and i believe they have a Labor preference. I dont know much about the Pulp Mill issue so i dont have anthing to say on that. |
|
BigT
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 20, 2004 23:10:09 GMT -5
Posts: 3,491
|
Post by BigT on Nov 26, 2007 3:05:15 GMT -5
Ok, before this gets overtaken into a US political debate, I'll just put forth my opinion. I missed out on voting by about 4 months, but I'm not overly dissapointed, because none of the parties really put forth enough to make me think they are the right choice. I think Rudd overall was the better choice, but it was more or less a choice between economy or services...so in the end Labor would have got my vote (Although I prefered the Liberal candidate in my area). I just wish either party would be willing to try and stop the Pulp Mill. Tasmania bigest selling point, it's natural tourism, is in danger of getting screwed over in my opinion. Bloody Paul Lenin. If the Greens didn't have so many other wack ideas, I would definently have voted their way. To tell you the truth, it may have been predominately economy vs services but when it comes down to it, the economy is the driving force behind everything else. Economic management is essential to provide better services. To be honest, i hate the greens. They only clog votes and i believe they have a Labor preference. I dont know much about the Pulp Mill issue so i dont have anthing to say on that. Of couse without a strong economy we don't have the money for services, but our economy has been strong for a long time now, and Johnny didn't make any real efforts to improve the situation, at least not to the degree Rudd has/proprosed to do (not saying will because you never know) Well they were pushing for their preferences to go to Labor in Tasmania at least, which really doesn't make a lot of sense since the State Government down here (responsible for the Pulp Mill) is Labor, but I think it's fairly well known there was some back door dealings for their preference. I'm not sure how much influence/need the Greens have over on the mainland, but ever since the Pulp Mill they must have been secretly licking their lips, the Green swing was phenomenal for Tasmania, and with good reason. That's understandable that the Pulp Mill probably isn't a big issue on the mainland, although it was mentioned a couple of times by the legendary Chaser boys  |
|
|
|
Post by ● kaneisdaman ● on Nov 26, 2007 4:09:41 GMT -5
To tell you the truth, it may have been predominately economy vs services but when it comes down to it, the economy is the driving force behind everything else. Economic management is essential to provide better services. To be honest, i hate the greens. They only clog votes and i believe they have a Labor preference. I dont know much about the Pulp Mill issue so i dont have anthing to say on that. Of couse without a strong economy we don't have the money for services, but our economy has been strong for a long time now, and Johnny didn't make any real efforts to improve the situation, at least not to the degree Rudd has/proprosed to do (not saying will because you never know) Well they were pushing for their preferences to go to Labor in Tasmania at least, which really doesn't make a lot of sense since the State Government down here (responsible for the Pulp Mill) is Labor, but I think it's fairly well known there was some back door dealings for their preference. I'm not sure how much influence/need the Greens have over on the mainland, but ever since the Pulp Mill they must have been secretly licking their lips, the Green swing was phenomenal for Tasmania, and with good reason. That's understandable that the Pulp Mill probably isn't a big issue on the mainland, although it was mentioned a couple of times by the legendary Chaser boys C'mon BigT, the economy was Howards biggest success. The various policies and reforms introduced boosted the economy to what it is today. In 1996 we were on the back of a recession and Howard lifted us up from that. Selling telstra, gst and other various actions taken by the Howard government have built our strong economy to what it is today. Note: You may have been talking about services there but your words read it to talk about the economy. Yeah i did hear some news about the Pulp Mill but not enough to know the issue fully. However, yes the chaser boys did give it a good mention as they always do. They are so smart and great to watch. "It was a short and JOCULAR conversation"  ;D |
|
|
|
Post by King Shocker the Monumentous on Nov 26, 2007 12:50:35 GMT -5
But, I read that she said "We are President." Which means that technically, she's already been elected to two terms and is therefore ineligible to run again. |
|
|
|
Post by slappy on Nov 26, 2007 16:31:32 GMT -5
But, I read that she said "We are President." Which means that technically, she's already been elected to two terms and is therefore ineligible to run again. Technically, yes. But her name was not on the ballot, therefore she can run.  |
|
BigT
Main Eventer
Joined on: Dec 20, 2004 23:10:09 GMT -5
Posts: 3,491
|
Post by BigT on Nov 26, 2007 19:28:47 GMT -5
Of couse without a strong economy we don't have the money for services, but our economy has been strong for a long time now, and Johnny didn't make any real efforts to improve the situation, at least not to the degree Rudd has/proprosed to do (not saying will because you never know) Well they were pushing for their preferences to go to Labor in Tasmania at least, which really doesn't make a lot of sense since the State Government down here (responsible for the Pulp Mill) is Labor, but I think it's fairly well known there was some back door dealings for their preference. I'm not sure how much influence/need the Greens have over on the mainland, but ever since the Pulp Mill they must have been secretly licking their lips, the Green swing was phenomenal for Tasmania, and with good reason. That's understandable that the Pulp Mill probably isn't a big issue on the mainland, although it was mentioned a couple of times by the legendary Chaser boys C'mon BigT, the economy was Howards biggest success. The various policies and reforms introduced boosted the economy to what it is today. In 1996 we were on the back of a recession and Howard lifted us up from that. Selling telstra, gst and other various actions taken by the Howard government have built our strong economy to what it is today. Note: You may have been talking about services there but your words read it to talk about the economy. Yeah i did hear some news about the Pulp Mill but not enough to know the issue fully. However, yes the chaser boys did give it a good mention as they always do. They are so smart and great to watch. "It was a short and JOCULAR conversation" ;D Sorry if I'm not explaining it to the best of my abilities, I see where you're coming from there, but I did mean it to be about services. I'm not used to political debates...I just watch and laugh as people get fired up  There is no denying Howard's importance to Australia in the grand scheme of things, but with the amount of surplus they managed to get every year and to still have left the services in the same situation it is in is a joke. Hospital's have been crying out for years for help, as has the education system. Howard has given us the money required for these things, but at the same time he just didn't use it. Kevin Rudd has already jumped into action as is making Education of the highest importance, and I applaud him for it. Will the economy drop under the Labor government...yes of course it will, but it's in the position where we can afford a drop, especially if it means at the gain of public services. I will admit that knowing Peter Garrat is now pretty much in charge of our environment is a very scary thought, the guy has no clue what he's doing...he only seems to know one decent sentence, and you've already covered it I never said Howard was not a successful Pm, hell his lengthy time in the job proves that, I'm just saying Australia did need a change. |
|
|
|
Post by ● kaneisdaman ● on Nov 27, 2007 0:29:48 GMT -5
C'mon BigT, the economy was Howards biggest success. The various policies and reforms introduced boosted the economy to what it is today. In 1996 we were on the back of a recession and Howard lifted us up from that. Selling telstra, gst and other various actions taken by the Howard government have built our strong economy to what it is today. Note: You may have been talking about services there but your words read it to talk about the economy. Yeah i did hear some news about the Pulp Mill but not enough to know the issue fully. However, yes the chaser boys did give it a good mention as they always do. They are so smart and great to watch. "It was a short and JOCULAR conversation" ;D Sorry if I'm not explaining it to the best of my abilities, I see where you're coming from there, but I did mean it to be about services. I'm not used to political debates...I just watch and laugh as people get fired up There is no denying Howard's importance to Australia in the grand scheme of things, but with the amount of surplus they managed to get every year and to still have left the services in the same situation it is in is a joke. Hospital's have been crying out for years for help, as has the education system. Howard has given us the money required for these things, but at the same time he just didn't use it. Kevin Rudd has already jumped into action as is making Education of the highest importance, and I applaud him for it. Will the economy drop under the Labor government...yes of course it will, but it's in the position where we can afford a drop, especially if it means at the gain of public services. I will admit that knowing Peter Garrat is now pretty much in charge of our environment is a very scary thought, the guy has no clue what he's doing...he only seems to know one decent sentence, and you've already covered it I never said Howard was not a successful Pm, hell his lengthy time in the job proves that, I'm just saying Australia did need a change. Well most of that is all your opinion and you are entitled to it, so i'll leave it there. ;D |
|
