Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 29, 2012 22:40:37 GMT -4
My post was sarcasm, you know that's what I like to do. It was related with the notion that so many people feel there is nothing government ever does right...ever.
If it was 1966 right now.....that mandate of safety requirements would never pass.....just my opinion.
This one isn't sarcasm.....have you read about the "think tanks" that are saying if Obamacare is struck down by the Supreme Court.....that it could potentially set a precedent to challenge the constitutionality of Social Security and Medicare.....you know, the whole requirement of having to pay into it thing...like the main argument before the Supreme Court that is going to kill Obamacare.
Yep, Social Security and Medicare would never be passed in today's political climate either.....IMO.
Interesting times we live in.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on Apr 30, 2012 8:41:55 GMT -4
You say that like it is a bad thing.
If I were free to save / invest the money I have to put in to SS, I'd be better off after I retire.
|
|
|
Post by Water Lady on Apr 30, 2012 17:52:54 GMT -4
You say that like it is a bad thing. If I were free to save / invest the money I have to put in to SS, I'd be better off after I retire. Yes...because that way you would actually "have" the money when you retire...
|
|
|
Post by grova on Apr 30, 2012 22:18:50 GMT -4
You say that like it is a bad thing. If I were free to save / invest the money I have to put in to SS, I'd be better off after I retire. You would? Tell that to the folks who were just about to retire when they lost everything in their 401k. When the real estate and the stock market tanked. If all they had were "investments" they would be in serious trouble. Those Government backed safety nets (albeit small) offer a safety blanket.
|
|
|
Post by dej on May 1, 2012 4:44:33 GMT -4
Those Government backed safety nets (albeit small) offer a safety blanket. But only until 2036 (or sooner). That safety net has some pretty big holes for people my age & younger.
|
|
|
Post by tomc on May 2, 2012 7:12:49 GMT -4
I hate when lawmakers use isolated incidents to appeal to the emotional, and create laws to govern those that don't need it. They hurt more people than they help. Kids shouldn't be EMPLOYED on farms. Period. www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/aginjury/Approximately 1,783,000 full-time workers were employed in production agriculture in the U.S. in 2009. During this same year, 440 farmers and farm workers died from a work-related injury for a fatality rate of 24.7 deaths per 100,000 workers. An estimated 1.03 million children and adolescents under 20 years of age resided on farms in 2009, with about 519,000 of these youth performing work on the farms. In addition to the youth who live on farms, an additional 230,000 children and adolescents were hired to work on U.S. farms in 2009. On average, 113 youth less than 20 years of age die annually from farm-related injuries (1995 -2002), with most of these deaths occurring to youth 16-19 years of age (34%). Of the leading sources of fatal injuries to youth on U.S. farms, 23% percent involved machinery (includes tractors), 19% involved motor vehicles (includes ATVs), and 16% were due to drowning. In 2009, an estimated 16,100 children and adolescents were injured on farms; 3,400 of these injuries were due to farm work.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on May 2, 2012 7:34:47 GMT -4
According to your own stats, youths stood a 0.0015% chance of a fatal accident, with adults having a 0.0025% chance.
They must be doing something right.
|
|
|
Post by freefallin on May 2, 2012 12:21:48 GMT -4
Based on the stats above, you have a better chance of a fatality just by walking across the street. I would rather have the safe job of working on a farm making a living.
|
|
|
Post by tomc on May 2, 2012 14:20:37 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by highlander73 on May 2, 2012 15:34:23 GMT -4
Kids shouldn't be EMPLOYED on farms. Period. Just curious - what jobs are 16-19 year old young adults allowed to have then? Are there any other age groups we should be restricting to non-working lifestyles or to the select jobs you determine?
|
|
|
Post by tomc on May 2, 2012 16:17:41 GMT -4
Just curious - what jobs are 16-19 year old young adults allowed to have then? Are there any other age groups we should be restricting to non-working lifestyles or to the select jobs you determine? I suppose if one is a conservative 16-19 year olds should be dodging bullets in a foreign war. So maybe working on a farm is a better choice.
|
|
|
Post by RobMoore on May 2, 2012 16:23:28 GMT -4
You have to be 18 for that.
|
|
|
Post by dej on May 4, 2012 1:48:32 GMT -4
Would a ban on children doing farm work also prevent teachers unions from using them to help spread manure (A certain dairy state came to mind here ;D)
|
|
|
Post by Water Lady on May 4, 2012 8:06:44 GMT -4
Would a ban on children doing farm work also prevent teachers unions from using them to help spread manure (A certain dairy state came to mind here ;D) I'm guessing yes...but only if they turn over their lunch & milk money.
|
|