Should work be able to dictate your life?

Demiurge

F1nut wrote:

BINGO!!!


Yeah, I'm not so sure that the Feds have a place in telling a business what they can or can not do as far as trying to regulate their employees private lives. One would hope that the business would realize what a bad idea that is all by themselves. If not, there's always a lawyer looking to make a name and a buck.

I'm self employed, but use outside contractors when needed. As I was also looking to lower the stress levels in my life/work, I didn't and don't want any employees.

Right on, see that's where I think the market corrects itself. I'm under the impression 60 minutes wasn't walking down the street with camera in tow going from business to business where this is happening. I've never heard of it.

I would imagine that any company that would try this isn't doing too well unless they're paying gobs of money people don't want to walk away from. Greed is a 2 way street.

I don't know what you're doing for Health Insurance, Jesse, but would you agree that these crazy measures talked about in the 60 Minutes show are probably linked to the cost? There are lawsuits for everything, which has driven the cost of insurance through the roof. I don't think business in the general sense is interested in controling anyones life choices. That's why I have an issue with how this whole question was presented. I think they could care less what you're doing so long as you show up and do a good job.

Here's an interesting stat, behind employee theft, insurance costs are the #1 reason small businesses are shutting down.

reeltrouble1

We absolutely need government to regulate business practices, all of them. God Bless our government and give our government worker's strength. BTW did you know strength is the longest word in the English language with one vowel, Great for Probe. Well, maybe their is some new hip-hop sort of word I don't know about?

Government for the people, by the people, of the people, what Idealism, anyway, it was something like those words if not exact.

RT1

Demiurge

reeltrouble1 wrote:

Government for the people, by the people, of the people, what Idealism, anyway, it was something like those words if not exact.

RT1

Notice it's not government above the people? It means we're not socialist.

PhantomOG

Steve (and others), I just wish you would start to see "business" for what it truly is--people. Almost every single "business" out there can be attributed to one or a few "people" sitting down, creating a plan, executing on it, and being successful.

I know for a fact you are the last person in the world who would want the government to step in and tell you what you can and can't do. You are against gun laws, helmet laws, smoking laws, etc. And that's great. I'm also a believer in less government is better government. But, businesses are made up of people too. If I decide to start a business tomorrow where I pay Joe Schmoe $50 an hour to hop around in a bunny suit and promise me he'll never smoke, drink, or ride a motorcycle without a helmet on his free time, what is the harm in that? I'd say it doesn't even matter WHEN I hired him. There are laws in place to protect 401k's etc. so he is still protected if he chooses not to follow my new "business" plan. Unless Joe signed an explicit contract stating "Joe will only lick envelopes from now until eternity and no changes to policy will ever take place" then Joe doesn't have a leg to stand on. Joe can quit on any given day even without two weeks notice and I can't do crap about it. Are you saying after hiring Joe I'm not allowed to make any changes to his job forever?

Now with all that said, there DOES need to be some government regulation. That's why we have OSHA, rules about overtime, 401k's etc. Of course things will need to be fine tuned over time, but our current system is in no way "broken" at the moment.

scottnbnj

just curious, has anyone that has sharpened their pitchforks here spent any meaningful time reading and trying to decipher things like case law (law made by judges in rulings and opinions), the actual text of legislation, executive orders, the code of federal regulations and the federal register?

it's really fascinating stuff and going directly to the source is a heck of alot cooler than trusting someone else to interpret it for you.

findlaw is a really good source. if you've never tried this approach and you give it a whirl, don't overlook the annotated constitution and following the links in the footnotes.

)

reeltrouble1

Government has a social contract with the people, who agree to be governed as long as government provides a social safety net of services to them.

Every employer has a social responsibility to its employee. The employee has a responsibility to work as directed and then puts back what has been taken from the employer in terms of dollars and services to the society.

Things swing on a pendulum, The Nation is formed with its system of government, very complex, very ineffecient in terms of getting things done, also very smart, very effective system of rule. We have a period of growth, of settlement, war and taming of lands, a major disruption occurs and we fight a civil war mostly about the right of a state to govern itself in the face of a Federal Government. We then have another stronger period of growth, we begin to industrialize to a greater extent, more complicated machinery, more capital is poured into the system, banking system becomes more crystalized, we have a tremendous depression period, the nation suffers as a whole, enter the new deal full of social services provided by the people's government, union's become so strong more law's are passed by the people's government limiting Union power, we continue to industrialize, fight major wars, grow, the first of the boomers enter the picture, we continue to become more affluent it is however, the time of Labor, of social unrest, of distrust, civil right and disobediance gain momentum, our reliance on oil to power things along begins to really take hold. The population begins to age, all is good, it is the time of Business, traditional monopolies are dissolved, strong periods of growth, those with the ability (grouped as the middle class), experience sharp growth on the coatails of the trickle down effect, The country is finally attacked in such a way that the world begins to question its Power and Ability to do things, huge companies default on debts to their employees, the rights of the shareholders overshadow other issues, laws are broken, personal freedom's erode under law as power shifts to protect the society overall, and you know the rest of the story.

Right now the pendulum is swung to the side of big business and their interests, the present generation entering the workforce is the first that will do so without being more affluent than their parents. Christian principles are devauled, other Religion's and ideologies gain in popularity, the Ideological vision of being your brother's keeper erodes. So called Generation X enters with strong feeling's about their right to individuality. Generation Y follows closely, representative of a new phenomenom, so named grouped individuality.

Societies are judged in terms of there poorest not their richest, accordingly we are in a period of decline, the pendulum will swing again, I have faith.

God Bless America and our Leaders, give them Wisdom, whether it be Political or Business as our Nation moves forward.

RT1

Demiurge

Government has a social contract with the people, who agree to be governed as long as government provides a social safety net of services to them.

The role of the United States government since it's founding is to protect our rights, protect our lives, liberty, and property. Government involvement beyond that is usurpation of power and an oppressive bent against it's people.

You guys are creating rights that don't exist, and in turn taking your rights away as granted to you by our founding fathers.

Just because we've piled **** on top of **** over the years doesn't make it frosting. We've gone the right way on many things, and the wrong way on many others.

The real scary thing is the Marxist regulations people are in favor of in a capitalistic society.

jdhdiggs

Did you know that the average American is taxed more today and an individual has more government restrictions on their actions than colonists had before July 4, 1776?

The founding fathers we be appalled at the BS our government has become and now we are talking about giving them more power to control jobs? We are slowly becoming a communist state in everything but name...

steveinaz

PhantomOG wrote:

I know for a fact you are the last person in the world who would want the government to step in and tell you what you can and can't do. You are against gun laws, helmet laws, smoking laws, etc. And that's great. I'm also a believer in less government is better government. But, businesses are made up of people too. If I decide to start a business tomorrow where I pay Joe Schmoe $50 an hour to hop around in a bunny suit and promise me he'll never smoke, drink, or ride a motorcycle without a helmet on his free time, what is the harm in that? I'd say it doesn't even matter WHEN I hired him. There are laws in place to protect 401k's etc. so he is still protected if he chooses not to follow my new "business" plan. Unless Joe signed an explicit contract stating "Joe will only lick envelopes from now until eternity and no changes to policy will ever take place" then Joe doesn't have a leg to stand on. Joe can quit on any given day even without two weeks notice and I can't do crap about it. Are you saying after hiring Joe I'm not allowed to make any changes to his job forever?

Now with all that said, there DOES need to be some government regulation. That's why we have OSHA, rules about overtime, 401k's etc. Of course things will need to be fine tuned over time, but our current system is in no way "broken" at the moment.

I don't like government over-seeing either, but some of these recent practices by companies is ludicris. Unfortunately you always have some people who have to take advantage of the situation, see how well they can screw someone else, and ONLY think about the bottom line. If corporate America had its way, aside from upper management positions, we'd all be making minimum wage--anyone who doesn't believe that is naive.

Sure, policies change--no problem. It's impossible to run a business successfully without changes. However, policies at work should be "work policies." They have no business telling me what I can and cannot do in the privacy of my castle.

The only reason America has a "middle class" is because of labor laws, minmum wage laws, and yes, UNIONS. Love'm or hate'm, anyone would be hard pressed to deny that unions, even if you are not in one, have benefited ALL OF US. Anyone who doesn't believe that, go talk to an economics professor at your university of choice. Oh wait, I know one...and he's 3 times published, sat on the commitee that helped restructure Russia's economy, has made numerous trips to China for the same reasons...my older brother.

Yeah, I'm proud of the 'ol boy: http://www.friedmanfoundation.org/resources/publications/advocate/davidrosearticle092002.pdf#search='David%20C.%20Rose'

Demiurge

steveinaz wrote:

I don't like government over-seeing either, but some of these recent practices by companies is ludicris. Unfortunately you always have some people who have to take advantage of the situation, see how well they can screw someone else, and ONLY think about the bottom line. If corporate America had its way, aside from upper management positions, we'd all be making minimum wage--anyone who doesn't believe that is naive.

Sure, policies change--no problem. It's impossible to run a business successfully without changes. However, policies at work should be "work policies." They have no business telling me what I can and cannot do in the privacy of my castle.

If everyone made minimum wage, Steve, we could buy LSi15s for $100 a piece. It's all relative.

The free market works every time it's tried....

PhantomOG

steveinaz wrote:

If corporate America had its way, aside from upper management positions, we'd all be making minimum wage--anyone who doesn't believe that is naive.

It's called capitalism and I think that's a good thing. If you were a business owner I'm sure you would pay your employees the minimum you could to attain the level of employment you desire. That's how you maximize your profits. Its no different than shopping around for the best deal on anything you buy as a consumer. As an employee, you combat this by obtaining a skillset that is more valuable than the next guy who is willing to make minimum wage.

steveinaz wrote:

However, policies at work should be "work policies." They have no business telling me what I can and cannot do in the privacy of my castle.

That's your personal "employment" policy. And any company who wants to pay for your services as an employee will have to adhere to that. The thing is, I'm sure 90%+ percentage of the population also feels the exact same way. Do you think any company will be able to be run successfully with the less than 10% of the population that is ok with it? I don't. Beyond that, I think I that if the <10% of the population is willing to enter into a contract like that, then the government shouldn't step in and say otherwise. Of course, this isn't without bounds as I do agree with current employment laws, but I don't think there is an urgent need to make the government step into people's live even moreso than already.

brettw22

I just made a poopie

PhantomOG

The more I think about this, the more it seems like less of a business law issue, and more of someone else pushing their beliefs onto me.

For example...

Let's say my boss came into my cube today and told me this:
"You are not allowed to smoke, drink alcohol, or become overweight or you will be reprimanded/fired. You will be tested everyday to see that you adhere to this new policy."

I'd quit right there on the spot and find work someplace else.

Now, let's say he said this:
"You are not allowed to smoke, drink alcohol, or become overweight or you will be reprimanded/fired. You will be tested everyday to see that you adhere to this new policy. BUT... as a result of the anticipated reduced healthcare costs and presumed better productivity on your behalf, we will be DOUBLING your salary."

I would have to seriously think about it, but as of right now for that much money I would not quit on the spot. Now, you are saying the government should create a LAW preventing me from taking a deal like this. I say that is totally unwelcome and just as bad as the government telling you that you are not allowed to smoke and own a gun.

cfrizz

We ALL know that this proposal would never happen! Thinking up fantasies to try to prove your point is...pointless!

PhantomOG wrote:

The more I think about this, the more it seems like less of a business law issue, and more of someone else pushing their beliefs onto me.

Now, let's say he said this:
"You are not allowed to smoke, drink alcohol, or become overweight or you will be reprimanded/fired. You will be tested everyday to see that you adhere to this new policy. BUT... as a result of the anticipated reduced healthcare costs and presumed better productivity on your behalf, we will be DOUBLING your salary."

I would have to seriously think about it, but as of right now for that much money I would not quit on the spot. Now, you are saying the government should create a LAW preventing me from taking a deal like this. I say that is total unwelcome and just as bad as the government tell you that you are not allowed to smoke and own a gun.

PhantomOG

cfrizz wrote:

We ALL know that this proposal would never happen! Thinking up fantasies to try to prove your point is...pointless!

I say thinking close to even a small percentage of businesses adopting such a policy to begin with is a fantasy. Creating laws to fend off fantasies is...

reeltrouble1

Government regulation is part of doing business, the amount of regulation is dependent upon factors present within the society at any given moment, it is variable and not fixed.

Any decided rule is going to be disliked by a percentage of citizens, at times even a majority of a population.

Personal issues are disregarded within the framework, as such this flies in the face of the individualism we associate with our Freedom. What one may say is a regulation to prevent man's innate greed, another may say prevents the accumulation of wealth.

Capitalism is not exclusive to a Democratic form of Government. However, unlike other forms when leaders either over or under regulate our Capitalistic model the people can have some say.

With regard to the poll though, I was once so sure of things and that was a nice thing, everything so black and white in my mind, now hell, its all so gray I say it Depends so much I might as well go get some of those adult diapers.

RT1

jdhdiggs

Unions helping out all of us? Same with minimum wage? Maybe back before WW2, but not anymore. In fact, they cause unemployment and artificially high prices.

Not to rag on ya too much, but most Econ profs that I''ve worked with/studied under don't agree with that position of unions helping all of us.

Most I've dealt with claim that the middle class evolved more from the US moving from an industrial based economy to one of service. That had far more effect than anything the unions have done on the benifit of middle Americans. Most Econ profs would agree with that. Unions helped form OSHA, Dept. of Labor, and a structured work week and that's about it.

Wouldn't helping Russia restructure their economy kind of like writing the business plan for Enron?

Keep the free market free!

Demiurge

Government regulation is part of doing business, the amount of regulation is dependent upon factors present within the society at any given moment, it is variable and not fixed.

Economics is a science.

I wonder how many economics PHds we have on the 90% side of this argument....;)

jdhdiggs

Actually, I can name off five or six off the top of my head, but only one is currently participating in this discussion. It does help to who ones arguing with...

reeltrouble1

Really:D , you quote then can't rebut any better than that!

Your unsureness is showing whenever you want to rely on some other party as an expert to verbalize your thoughts to be your "proof". At the very least you can quote some Econ. Guru's thoughts and expound from there.

Exactly what in the quote is untrue, specifically present an argument to the material you quote. Then we can debate if you like.

The soft sciences are not fixed if they were we all would be drinken free bubble up and eatin that rainbow stew.

RT1

Demiurge

John has a PhD in economics.

jdhdiggs

RT1, Who are you responding to?

Who the eff is the John that is being talked about?

Demiurge

I don't know...Some guy.

jdhdiggs

I saw Stasny around in another thread but he hasn't posted here. There aren't any John's that I've seen in the past several pages dumbass!

reeltrouble1

JD--You have not stated anything I disagree with in the least. Unions are not helpful to all by any means. When they grew to powerful that is when the Gov. started passing laws against them, instead of for them. Well, the founding fathers, yea, they would be pissed, let them read the Patriot Act!!! But they would likely be in awe of what has happened to the 13 colonies they brought together to form this nation.

Hell, I am just throwing it out to see what bounces back. I am gonna cool it before somebody gets pissed.

RT1

jdhdiggs

No I think you missed the point of my question: I was just curious if you were responding to me or steve or someone else in post #171. It kinda came out of the blue.

Demiurge

He was talking to me.

I'll get back to you Reel more in depth. It's not worth getting pissed off over because this is just a message board and we're not changing the world at club polk. I have enjoyed this discussion a lot.

reeltrouble1

I like Steve, he speaks his mind!!!! I like Demi too, even if he does like the Packers. Yea, I stirred the pot a bit with some heat in 171, but nobody bit.

RT1

Demiurge

reeltrouble1 wrote:

I like Steve, he speaks his mind!!!! I like Demi too, even if he does like the Packers. Yea, I stirred the pot a bit with some heat in 171, but nobody bit.

RT1

There's not much to like about them anymore I fear.

jdhdiggs

Thanks for Walker...