US Politics XVII: Yes, squid pro row

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
That's great and all. Let me explain that to my boss

This plan doesn't extend parents work hours. It bases it around a typical 9 to 5 work day (8 am for drop off, 6 pm pick up for the kids - which is exactly what my 5 y/o's $1,700 a month preschool is now).

It’s not a matter of explaining it to your boss. It’s a matter of leadership promoting it with facts and research, similar to how Jeb tried to promote a six day work week (@40 hours). What I’m talking about is a 32 hour work week.

So instead of pumping money into a brand new system, why don’t we reinvent what society calls a work week? No new money spent, happier workers, more productive workers, more energized workers.

https://www.inc.com/tom-popomaronis...major-breakthrough-in-employee-happiness.html


In a perfect world? Sure - job's should be more flexible with hours and allow parents to come later and leave earlier to get their kids.

That's not reality.

My bosses are actually very reasonable and understanding - and between my salary and my wife's (mostly my wife's) the issue of leaving our kids at preschool until 6 or with the nanny until 6 is doable. Expensive as all fuck, but we're in a place where we can afford it with minimal impact on our day to day. We couldn't afford it in NY anymore - which is why we moved. Alas..

This plan is a common sense approach that will give parents in middle and low income situations a little peace of mind. I see no fault in it whatsoever.


It’s not a common sense approach. It’s a needless system that further cements “grueling pace” to american working society, which favors brawn to brain.

It’s silly that you’re shrugging off a culture change as totally far fetched, and meanwhile promoting a system that would (1) make republicans heads explode and (2) put more new money (if any at all) into our public education system, as opposed to closing the tremendous gaps in it that already exist.
 
So with all the attention on Kentucky and Virginia,

I think many are missing how this was actually a real blue wave that went through last night

State Senates /Houses that flipped to blue last night

Colorado
Maine
Washington
Connecticut
New York
Minnesota House
New Hampshire House and Senate
Virginia House and Senate
 
Woah.


:scratch: i thot (my State) NYS (Asdmbly,Snt) had turned blue last year? I remember being happy something had changed for the better. Unless it was that most of the "the dinos" that got kicked out! :up: :hmm:

A "trumpyear" is sooo much longer than the usual 365! :sad:
 
Last edited:
A "trumpyear" is sooo much longer than the usual 365! :sad:

Earlier this evening, my mom and I had somehow gotten on the discussion of when Omarosa worked at the White House (remember that?), and just the mention of that had me thinking about how that seemed an eternity ago. I don't know how this administration has managed to warp time as it has, but somehow they've done it. I'm fully convinced I've aged twenty years throughout this presidency.


I don't know whether to laugh or cry at how utterly inept these morons are.
 
It’s not a matter of explaining it to your boss. It’s a matter of leadership promoting it with facts and research, similar to how Jeb tried to promote a six day work week (@40 hours). What I’m talking about is a 32 hour work week.

So instead of pumping money into a brand new system, why don’t we reinvent what society calls a work week? No new money spent, happier workers, more productive workers, more energized workers.

https://www.inc.com/tom-popomaronis...major-breakthrough-in-employee-happiness.html





It’s not a common sense approach. It’s a needless system that further cements “grueling pace” to american working society, which favors brawn to brain.

It’s silly that you’re shrugging off a culture change as totally far fetched, and meanwhile promoting a system that would (1) make republicans heads explode and (2) put more new money (if any at all) into our public education system, as opposed to closing the tremendous gaps in it that already exist.

I'm not shrugged off anything. I'm looking at things realistically.

The companies that would be most open to the kind of culture change that you're talking about are also the ones who pay enough where aftercare and beforecare pricing is an inconvenience, not a burden.

Lower paying and hourly jobs won't change without government mandate - which isn't happening. These are the people that are impacted greatly by high child care costs. These are the people who will benefit from a program like this.

And what would a 32 hour work week do to solve this issue anyways? So the parent leaves at 3/3:30. Great. School lets out at 3. In some cases 2/2:30. There's still a care gap there - where either the kid will head home to an empty house, or depending on the age, need to stay at school in some sort of for pay programing.

The person works only 4 days a week instead? Great. Still need that expensive aftercare for 4 days.

This is a real problem that is not discussed as nobody thinks about it until they have kids - and even then it's not as big and shiny and obvious as pre K child care - and cutting the work week does not immediately solve the issue whatsoever.
 
The companies that would be most open to the kind of culture change that you're talking about are also the ones who pay enough where aftercare and beforecare pricing is an inconvenience, not a burden.

Lower paying and hourly jobs won't change without government mandate - which isn't happening. These are the people that are impacted greatly by high child care costs. These are the people who will benefit from a program like this.





i hope we haven't all tossed our computers out the window.


One reason poor children learn and retain less than affluent children is that they get less support outside school. Kamala Harris has introduced a bill to give public schools that serve large numbers of low-income students extra funding to stay open during after-school hours and during the (many) days when schools are closed but workplaces are not.

The bill, a classic piece of liberal social reform, is perhaps less interesting than the unhinged reaction it immediately provoked from the left. “Kamala Harris’s proposal to provide after-school care to kids so parents can be more productive workers is neoliberalism distilled,” writes Brendan O’Connor for Vice. Albert Burneko, writing at the Outline, offers the considered opinion, “Fuck a Longer School Day.” These takes, both rendered in column form, are actually more carefully considered than the ragefest that broke out on Twitter.

What’s wrong with funding programs to increase enrichment for low-income students? O’Connor explains that the real problem is that working-class parents have to spend too many hours at work, and designing school schedules to accommodate their needs would “accelerate the already existing neoliberal response.” The real solution is to redesign working life so that parents don’t need schools to do anything for their kids after 3:15 p.m.

It’s certainly true that the left has long advocated a shorter working day and more vacation time. But even blue-sky left-wingers tend to settle on an eight-hour day as a standard, with vacation schedules still much shorter than what most schools use. Even in a world where President Bernie Sanders has successfully carried out his political revolution and mobilized a militant labor movement that encompasses the entire private-sector labor force, there is still going to be a large gap between the schedules most working parents deal with and what their local school is offering. To demand Harris address this entirely through workplace reforms is to demand she institute not only a maximum eight-hour day, but also end work for parents around 2:30 or so, plus a full day off every day school is out that isn’t a national holiday (there are a lot of them), plus ten weeks or so over the summer.

Harris’s plan is not only designed to provide child care, but to provide actual enrichment for kids — physical activity, reading, tutoring, and other beneficial activities that affluent parents can pay for through camps, private programs, babysitters, and tutors. This objective is also part of what rankles Harris’s critics. Burneko sneers at the goal of “wrangling and suppressing the emergent anarchism of 30 little kids into a job-saving standardized test results curve.”

Maybe low-income parents actually want their children to learn more, perform better in school, and have a better chance at a middle-class job? Too bad. They shouldn’t want that, Burneko argues: “Fuck school! Have you been to a school lately? Schools are prison-like, security-choked nightmares, even good ones.” Well, okay.

Harris Admits Evil Neoliberal Scheme To Educate Poor Kids
 
i hope we haven't all tossed our computers out the window.
I know pragmatism is a dirty word these days but golly gee it would be nice if our politicians actually got something accomplished rather than throw up pipe dreams that will never in a million years be accomplished in one full swoop.

I'll sit back and await the finger waiving now.
 
I know pragmatism is a dirty word these days but golly gee it would be nice if our politicians actually got something accomplished rather than throw up pipe dreams that will never in a million years be accomplished in one full swoop.

I'll sit back and await the finger waiving now.

I second, third and fourth this. You neoliberal scum!
 
I know pragmatism is a dirty word these days but golly gee it would be nice if our politicians actually got something accomplished rather than throw up pipe dreams that will never in a million years be accomplished in one full swoop.

I'll sit back and await the finger waiving now.



Well idk where peefster is to share his own thoughts... my hours at work are too long to want to address all the posts by myself. But I wasn’t finger wagging at you. I just wholeheartedly disagree that we need to bandaid systems. This is just like the healthcare point a few pages ago. Having a public option is nothing more than having a redundant system where peuple are paying more and getting less.

You’ve brought up valid points about school exit times and hourly jobs. I still think these points can be addressed in a subtractive system. The solution for hourly workers is less pragmatic I agree, but just the same whenever we make bandaid decisions like this, they impact the future. Good responses are... good. Obamacare was good. It isn’t great. We need to focus on developing better systems, not just better responses.
 
Well idk where peefster is to share his own thoughts... my hours at work are too long to want to address all the posts by myself. But I wasn’t finger wagging at you. I just wholeheartedly disagree that we need to bandaid systems. This is just like the healthcare point a few pages ago. Having a public option is nothing more than having a redundant system where peuple are paying more and getting less.

You’ve brought up valid points about school exit times and hourly jobs. I still think these points can be addressed in a subtractive system. The solution for hourly workers is less pragmatic I agree, but just the same whenever we make bandaid decisions like this, they impact the future. Good responses are... good. Obamacare was good. It isn’t great. We need to focus on developing better systems, not just better responses.

I don't disagree that more things need to be done and that this isn't the end all be all answer.

Some things are steps in the right direction. Take enough steps and you get to where you need to be. Try to jump the entire distance and you might fall down.

Obamacare wasn't great. You're right. But look at how much further down the road the conversation is now vs 8 years ago. Republicans are losing and have lost seats in red districts over Obamacare. That would have been crazy to think about 10 years ago. What Biden and Buddy gig are proposing would have been too far to the left 8 years ago, and today it's considered a centrist position. That's real progress, and it happened because someone was willing to take small steps and compromise on a controversial issue.
 
Last edited:
"I rarely get emotional, if ever. I guess you'd call me hyper-rational, stoic. Yet as we drove past the rows of white grave markers, in the gravity of the moment, I had a deep sense of the importance of the presidency and a love of our country ... In that moment, I also thought of all the attacks we'd already suffered as a family, and about all the sacrifices we'd have to make to help my father succeed — voluntarily giving up a huge chunk of our business and all international deals to avoid the appearance that we were 'profiting off of the office.'"

"Frankly, it was a big sacrifice, costing us millions and millions of dollars annually ... Of course, we didn't get any credit whatsoever from the mainstream media, which now does not surprise me at all."

-Donald Trump, Jr.

Happy Veteran's Day y'all!
 
The Daily Mail is utter trash, but we should not let the Epstein story die just because he did.

Everyone who played a role needs to be brought out into the sunshine.

Yep :(

ABC and CBS News’ Shameful Punishment of the Epstein Leaker

But ABC News then took it further, confirming to Yashar Ali that it was searching for Project Veritas’ source, saying in a statement, “We take violations of company policy very seriously, and we’re pursuing all avenues to determine the source of the leak.” Ali also reported that the person who accessed the footage now works at CBS News and has been fired.

All this makes ABC News typical, not extraordinary, in routinely pernicious ways that much of the news business has yet to fully grapple with. As it happens, ABC News employed Mark Halperin during the period when he would later be accused of harassing and assaulting a dozen women, but has somehow managed to escape the kind of post–Me Too scrutiny that CBS News and NBC News justifiably received after firing credibly accused anchors. Accountability and transparency are supposed to be journalistic values. Seeking to punish anyone who let the world know how the sausage is made, or that some journalists tried to get the real story — however ill-chosen the platform — is their opposite.

Of course I generally support companies being able to hire & fire whomever they please.

But I do find it beyond interesting when the major networks' beloved journalistic standards and pure investigative reporting chops kick in, and the other times when they're quickly forgotten.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom