Flip Flop

[Nash]

Managers making 65 grand a year get paid overtime? News to me...

[Gnslngr]

Originally posted by Nash
Managers making 65 grand a year get paid overtime? News to me...

well how about middle management....line supervisers....


seriously though...BOOO HOOOO they are making me salery!

all this is saying is that people with certain job functions or salerys will no longer be "hourly" employes.


a working mother of 3 making labor wages in a manufacturing plant is not gonna lose her overtime.

a checker at walmart during holiday season is not gonna lose their overtime.

[Sixpence]

I cannot find a copy of the bill, do you have one?

[Sixpence]

This is what I have on what it will do

"changing the 40-hour work week to 80 hours over two weeks and from allowing private employers to legally avoid paying employees for overtime and substitute compensatory time off as long as a year later"

But I do not have a copy of the legislation. The senate has voted to halt these changes, it may have been awhile ago.

[Gnslngr]

well at least you see my point that to make a blanket statement....NO MORE OT FOR YOU does not do anyone justice.

I may not agree 100% of the bill but you have to look at all the contributing factors.  Does somone making $45 really need overtime?

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Gnslngr
I may not agree 100% of the bill but you have to look at all the contributing factors.  Does somone making $45 really need overtime?

Lol, ask the guy making that money. Using that logic is taboo, do corporations making billions need a tax cut? But all that aside, I can't believe I can't find a copy of the legislation. I find sites that have opinions on it, but I cant find it myself to read it.

[Gnslngr]

me neither....but ask yourself this.

IF and I do mean IF.  that coorporation that saves a billion dollars passes that coorporation onto the consumer.....and other businisses did busines for cheaper....do consumers really need raises?

I know very little about economics.  I take a simple approach to the subject like it is an ecosystem.  Its a big circle.  

Coorporations make money.  They pay their employees.  The employees make money and spend it giving to the coorporations.  Who make money. they pay their employees.  

catch my drift.  if people make less money thay consume less.  if corportations have to pay higher wages their products cost more.  

that's about as far as I've gotten when it comes to economics.

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by Gnslngr
me neither....but ask yourself this.

IF and I do mean IF.  that coorporation that saves a billion dollars passes that coorporation onto the consumer.....and other businisses did busines for cheaper....do consumers really need raises?

The person making the money puts that money right back into his community, helping the economy. You cannot say the same about the corporation, they can take that money and send it overseas for all you know, they are not thinking of community, they are thinking bottom line.

I know very little about economics.  I take a simple approach to the subject like it is an ecosystem.  Its a big circle.

I agree, the person makes more money, he spends more money.
 
Coorporations make money.  They pay their employees.

Well, they will be paying them alot less by not having to pay them O.T.
 
The employees make money and spend it giving to the coorporations.

Not as much as you think, alot of it goes right back into the community, your local insurance agent, your local butcher, your local credit union, any local business that relies on consumer spending.

they pay their employees.

Less money due to the new legislation

if people make less money thay consume less.

Right on, and local business suffers, if workers get their wages cut, the whole community suffers.

if corportations have to pay higher wages their products cost more.

If legislation like that passed, and prices went down, i'de eat my hat.

Ya see, this is where we get hoodwinked, if you get a tax cut and get a 600 dollar check, but due to new labor laws you lose 1200 that year, what have you gained?

[Sixpence]

That was a long post, i'll try to make it simple. What you describe is called "trickle down" economics. And it doesn't work. I'll quote Bush Sr. "Trickle down economics is voodoo economics"

http://nwcitizen.com/usa/voodoo.html

http://www.wpi.edu/News/TechNews/010410/taxcut.shtml

Since tax reductions are immensely popular, Congress jumped on the bandwagon, even though then-Vice President George Bush previously had called supply-side "voodoo economics." A feeding frenzy occurred, with cliques of Congress members giving special write-offs to their favorite industries.

The result was the biggest tax cut in U.S. history: $1.8 trillion over the next nine years. But since Reagan also demanded an expensive military buildup, the federal government soon was heading for bankruptcy. Therefore, the biggest tax increase in U.S. history, $98 billion, had to be passed to try to curb the deficits. But it wasn't enough. Deficits soared, and the national debt quadrupled.

Reagan's tax increases fell mainly on consumers, low- and middle-income people. Sales and excise levies. Reagan didn't call these taxes.' They were, in his euphemistic lexicon, user fees' and revenue-enhancers.'

[lazs2]

I work for the city.  mid managers and all salaried workers do not get overtime.   what they get is executive leave..  this is usually 2 weeks paid leave over and above their vacation and holiday leave.. they also get car allowances to drive to council meetings and such.

regular, hourly workers are not effected and would not be by this new law.

You are crying for people who are contract workers and mostly getting either comp leave or a fixed executive leave... they are mangers making big money.

no hourly worker will be getting a 50 hour work week without overtime.

lazs

[lazs2]

oh... and didn't regans tax cuts bring in more taxes than ever before?   we had more tax money... they just spent even more of our money.


lazs

[strk]

Originally posted by lazs2
who ever said that "overtime" was a right?/..    
lazs

oh just a little thing called

THE FAIR LABOR STANDARDS ACT  29 U.S. Code 207(a)

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by lazs2
oh... and didn't regans tax cuts bring in more taxes than ever before?   we had more tax money... they just spent even more of our money.

lazs

Lol, what?? what are you smoking? And the legislation was to wipe out the 40 hour work week, not just for the upper bracket.

[lazs2]

How does that work for contract or salaried employees?   That act covers hourly workers doesn't it?


six... maybe I am wrong but I seem to recall seeing that more tax revenue was brought in during the Regan years than before?

lazs

[Sixpence]

Originally posted by lazs2
six... maybe I am wrong but I seem to recall seeing that more tax revenue was brought in during the Regan years than before?

lazs

No, read the links I posted.

"The result was the biggest tax cut in U.S. history: $1.8 trillion over the next nine years. But since Reagan also demanded an expensive military buildup, the federal government soon was heading for bankruptcy. Therefore, the biggest tax increase in U.S. history, $98 billion, had to be passed to try to curb the deficits. But it wasn't enough. Deficits soared, and the national debt quadrupled. "

You could say tax revenue increase after his mammoth tax increase, and alot of that was put on the working class.

" The Reagan tax cuts and military build up were approved by a Republican- controlled Senate and Democratically-controlled House. They did not deliver the promised utopia. Instead, President Reagan's river boat gamble clobbered the federal revenue base, and set off a chain of annual budget deficits unprecedented in American history. The supply side gambit is responsible in significant part -- say most honest analysts -- for an increase in the public debt since 1980, of some $3 trillion dollars"