When you sort the comments by "best," this comes up on top:
To answer the writers question, we dont want you to work all the time, we dont give a flying shlt what you do.. We just dont want to have to pay for your life of leisure. Do what you want, leave me alone.
पोस्ट्स
२३७ टिप्पण्या:
«सर्वात जुने ‹थोडे जुने 237 पैकी 201 – 237This is getting more amusing by the day. Ellison said more people will now be able to work reasonable hours, better life/ work balance and be able to cook dinner instead of eating out?
Let's see, staying home raising children, home cooked meals, helping with their children's homework?
Bwaaaaaa
Whats up is down and down is up.
garage - how is the diet coming along?
Sorry dude, I'm taken.
Does somefeller think that all righties are responsible for those who think that Obama is a Muslim or was born in Kenya, but lefties in general are not responsible for those who think Bush allowed Katrina and 9-11 or even planned them? I do believe he does. Again, his hypocrisy is so obvious it makes him look like a moron.
He seems to have forgotten that one of the people saying Obama was born in Kenya was . . . Obama himself, for many years, in the author blurb for one of his books.
So Dems denounce being "job-locked"! Being employed is no longer intrinsically desirable.
And in addition, from now on a thing is judged good or bad, wholly based on whether it tends to discredit Obama and Obamacare.
It really is amazing. Reducing job lock has always been a conservative goal and entirely consistent with individual economic freedom. Obamacare can still suck without conservatives arguing against their own principles. And yes people, Hayek would most definitely be opposed to job lock. Conservatives would do well to listen to Paul Ryan on this issue instead of betraying long held principles of individual economic freedom. Were people to decide to stop working, medicaid provides that incentive. Reduction of job lock increases entrepreneurship and stable families - which is of course why it has always been a conservative ideal. Can we please stop contradicting our own principles for short term political theatre?
Are there updated welfare cliff charts that incorporate Obamacare? I need to decide at what salary point it makes better sense for me to just give up and become trailer trash.
Medicine is memory
Exactly. It is acquired and retained over time through repetition. The same way other knowledge becomes familiar and useful. The distinction may be that medical knowledge has an above average information density. Still, recall is aided less by studying, than through practice. It may be improved with a reference, but that is not a widely accepted practice during tests.
Oh, kentuckyliz, you'll always be trailer trash to me, no matter how much money you make!
(Sorry, couldn't resist.)
Is what we are discussing job lock or unemployment?
"Why do they want us to work..."?
Because somebody has to pay for the fucking moronic policies you propose?
And anyway, isn’t that supposed to be a good thing?"
Yes, earn less and produce less wealth and take more gov't money instead.
What can possibly go wrong?
There might be people who think we can learn a little about ourselves by studyin and thinking about how we choose to spend our time, how we define "leisure" in our own moment, and how we have done so historically.
Well, when the college bubble pops ---- and it has to based on costs --- I bet he'll be stunned.
Is there any evidence that Europeans have built thriving "communities" around their families, hobbies, & faiths vis-a-vis Americans?
It's the opposite, actually. 10,000 elderly died in France because a heat wave hit during "vacation time".
Yes, let's do more of THAT.
Subsidies for the already fabulously wealthy motivates them like you wouldn't believe.
Ironically, Dems are huge on that. They subsidize their friends well. God knows Buffett has made a KILLING off the government doing what he asked when he passes a few bucks around.
Ditto Soros.
Why does basically every Congresscritter leave office FAR richer than they were when they got there? Why are their investments better, by a large margin, over the best financial minds out there?
Cliff said...
It really is amazing. Reducing job lock has always been a conservative goal and entirely consistent with individual economic freedom. Obamacare can still suck without conservatives arguing against their own principles. And yes people, Hayek would most definitely be opposed to job lock. Conservatives would do well to listen to Paul Ryan on this issue instead of betraying long held principles of individual economic freedom. Were people to decide to stop working, medicaid provides that incentive. Reduction of job lock increases entrepreneurship and stable families - which is of course why it has always been a conservative ideal. Can we please stop contradicting our own principles for short term political theatre?
This is all stupid bullshit.
There have been actual studies on whether or not there is "job lock" and guess what?
Everything you've typed is wrong.
Another thing: notice you can not even bother to respond to the fact, not opinion, but fact that ObamaCare discourages work through a tax on labor and that taxpayers are making a reduction in "job lock" possible.
That is not a "conservative principle" no matter how many times you type it.
Reduction of job lock increases entrepreneurship and stable families
No it doesn't.
And, Medicaid is neither good for health outcomes, the economy, nor is it a viable program.
Conservatives would do well to listen to Paul Ryan on this issue
No thanks.
I'm not going to go on the record saying working is not worthwhile or some sort of misery.
By the way, I'm old enough to remember when COBRA was supposed to do everything you're saying.
Anyway:
. A relatively large literature has examined job lock and found somewhat mixed results – some studies have estimated that job lock may be responsible for a 25-50% reduction in job mobility whereas others have found small or no effects.
...
We find no evidence of an increase in job mobility after workers become eligible for Medicare.
Cliff is our newest resident concern troll.
If only Johnson had declared war on gravity instead of poverty, we'd all be lighter and have more freedm to move around. A lot of health problems are rooted in gravity. Win the war on gravity and we'll all be healthier and better off,
Althouse must buy the lefty posts here in bulk.
Next time, pay for the quality stuff.
"Reducing job lock has always been a conservative goal and entirely consistent with individual economic freedom."
Huh ?
There has been discussion of decoupling employers from health insurance. The reason it persists is the fact that, as a group, working people are healthier. Obamacare is trying to make community rating work but I don't think it will.
To uncouple employers and insurance, we should go to another system of large groups not necessarily in the same company. France uses type of employment, such as white collar workers. It could be done but the Obamacare fiasco has ruined the best chance we will have for years.
"t was a lefty myth but you don't know any better.
Provocateurs and Mobys, all of them! "
I put that Huffington Post link in just for you somefeller. Did you notice the scenes ?
Of course not.
Blogger n.n said...
" Medicine is memory
Exactly. It is acquired and retained over time through repetition. The same way other knowledge becomes familiar and useful. The distinction may be that medical knowledge has an above average information density."
The problem, which I was trying to point out, is that medicine is an enormous body of facts and not all of them can be derived from others like you do in engineering or physics or chemistry.
I teach clinical reasoning and the student I referred to was still learning the basic science part but it is still a huge volume of facts.
One old joke in medicine is the student who accidentally gets the right answer for a very difficult clinical problem. When complimented, his answer is "what else causes splenomegaly ?"
He just knew one fact and was ignorant of all the other answers that others were thinking of.
Inga, missing the point as always:
What suddenly has become lazy about starting ones own business?
Messrs Hewlett and Packard weren't out in their garage sucking on the government teat
So how much wealth is in the Beatle tribute studio?
I don't have a problem they earned it, but lecturing me that I have to give more? Walk the talk.
That was a literary reference - is it too liberal elitist to use those in blog comments?
Not as such-- but congratulating yourself for it is about as liberal elitist as it's possible to get.
"That extra leisure time? You did not earn that. Someone else provided that."
We need to redistribute that leisure time.
@30K/yr, this reduction means $75 billion in less income for the lower economic class, a bigger piece of the pie for the rich, and a statistical worsening of income inequality. And I bet someone will complain about that and forget this was a voluntary choice.
"joblock" is the new progressive buzz word.
Medicaid or Obamacare?
When choices are reduced to just two, reasonable people will choose the one that is less painful to them.
An abundance of choices tend to reduce costs and increase efficiency.
Again. Some people are unclear on the concept.
How many additional hours would Americans work if we abolished Social Security? Medicare?
mrs. e:
That's one question that needs to be answered. Another is: How was family formation, and social organization generally, affected by Social Security, Medicare, etc.?
So, Obamacare has freed the leaches from work. What happens when all the health care workers decide to enjoy their work-free leisure?
" mrs. e said...
How many additional hours would Americans work if we abolished Social Security? Medicare?"
None.
Why aren't we allowed to invest the money as we see fit.
Also again. Why can't I just get all my money I've piad in back?
BRA...VO!
Absolutely! You wanna do your best impression of a middle-aged Frenchman living on the dole and hanging out at the Cafe all day, have at it. But find a way to finance it yourself...it's not my job.
On Marshal's example: People only "voluntarily" reduce their hours in response to getting other people's money.
If I punched you in the face every time you clocked less than a hundred hours in a week, you'd probably be more likely to work those hundred hours. If I gave up on the facepunching, you'd probably '"voluntarily" reduce [your] hours'.
I can't imagine whose money you'd be getting, though.
If this was finance, we say that the prof was talking his book
The CBO actually said that the reduction in work hours was the result of employers shifting the cost of Obamacare to employees in the form of lower wages, thereby reducing the incentive to work.
Now that's what we all want, right? Lower wages and welfare payments.
There are good and bad reasons to work less, and people have the right, if they can support themselves, to work fewer hours. But it is not a good thing that many people will find themselves in a position where if they make $1 more than an arbitrary Obamacare limit, they will lose thousands of dollars in Obamacare subsidies for which they would be eligible if they earned $1 less. That they then decide to earn less than this limit may be labeled a "voluntary" decision, but they will be responding to disincentives which the government should not have put before them.
Dust Bunny Queen said...
"A nation of a few workhorses hauling the cart and the rest of the nation riding on the backs of the few workers."
The Marching Morons by C. M. Kornbluth or as Reynolds would have it: "what can't go on, won't."
Much of the American Left seems to either have missed Orwell's "Animal Farm", think it was a blueprint to follow instead of an indictment, or believe, as on previous comment above, "This time it'll work."
It's really impossible to avoid contempt for their behavior. But, knowing most are capable of reeducation, I am trying to "separate the sin from the sinner" since I know we're all imperfect (I did vote for McAmnesty once).
Maybe after ACA finally crashes and burns we can all get back to being Americans?
Dan Hossley: The CBO actually said that the reduction in work hours was the result of employers shifting the cost of Obamacare to employees in the form of lower wages, thereby reducing the incentive to work.
This is not what the CBO says; you can see their FAQ on the estimate here. The incentives discussed are entirely due to the subsidies for purchasing health insurance, and are incident on the workers, not the employers.
Actually, I do care whether people work hard. First, I want the goods and services they will produce at reasonable cost. Second, idle hands are the Devil's workshop, and often find great mischief. Third, they will influence other people including my kids. Fourth, working people contribute to a vibrant economy that sustains our economic and military deterrence against aggression by other countries. Fifth, slothful types won't be paying taxes to support even those things the government should be doing. So, yes, I do care whether people work hard.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा