News Stories

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

25 days, plus a handful of holidays at fixed dates (don't know how they're called in English. Things like Christmas or New Year and stuff.)

25 federally sponsored paid vacation days PLUS holidays!? Jesus. You have no idea how lucky you are.

That's definitely a drain on your government's tax budget.

[ChainLegacy]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Thatcherism = Reganism = Trickle Down Economic = Voodoo Economic

= Moronic Economics, with the current poster boy of stupidity, Ben Bernanke, who is in a race to see how fast he can bankrupt the US.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by aohige

25 federally sponsored paid vacation days PLUS holidays!? Jesus. You have no idea how lucky you are.

That's definitely a drain on your government's tax budget.

We only have fourteen here! Dammit I wish mine was that long!

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by aohige

25 federally sponsored paid vacation days PLUS holidays!? Jesus. You have no idea how lucky you are.

That's definitely a drain on your government's tax budget.

Uh, no. 25 days paid by your employer. It's only paid by the government if you happen to work for the government. (Same for the holidays. They're mandated by the state, but the employer's the one paying for them.)

[aohige]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Uh, no. 25 days paid by your employer. It's only paid by the government if you happen to work for the government. (Same for the holidays. They're mandated by the state, but the employer's the one paying for them.)

Regardless, you have no idea how lucky you are to have 25 guaranteed days.
Anywhere else, it's two weeks if you're lucky.

But I guess you're right on it not having anything to do with government money then

[Anh_Minh]

It is pretty good, but not extraordinary, for a European country. (And not the 3 months Xellos claimed.)

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Uh, no. 25 days paid by your employer. It's only paid by the government if you happen to work for the government. (Same for the holidays. They're mandated by the state, but the employer's the one paying for them.)

You mean it is under the Employment Act or something over there?

[Bri]

Originally Posted by aohige

Anywhere else, it's two weeks if you're lucky.

Not really, I have 37 plus holidays. Also I know people in the civil service who have well over 40. So it's not just France

[Anh_Minh]

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

You mean it is under the Employment Act or something over there?

Labor Laws, yes.

Bri: where do you live, and how are the job market and immigration laws there?

[Bri]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

Labor Laws, yes.

Bri: where do you live, and how are the job market and immigration laws there?

Netherlands, job market is fine and it's in the EU so no problem there. Think by now we have the lowest hours worked per year in the OECD. The catch however is that work pressure is high, the amount of work that needs to be done does not decrease.

[Xellos-_^]

Originally Posted by Anh_Minh

It is pretty good, but not extraordinary, for a European country. (And not the 3 months Xellos claimed.)

not 3months but still better then anyone outside of Europe has.

[SaintessHeart]

Originally Posted by Bri

Netherlands, job market is fine and it's in the EU so no problem there. Think by now we have the lowest hours worked per year in the OECD. The catch however is that work pressure is high, the amount of work that needs to be done does not decrease.

I thought that census was done long time ago. Netherlands still has the lowest work hours per day?

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Xellos-_^

Thatcherism = Reganism = Trickle Down Economic = Voodoo Economic

I've never known a poor person who hired anybody. But I've known more than a handful of rich people who hired dozens if not more employees. That's all I have to say on this subject.

[aohige]

[rageofjealousy]

........................................DAMN LAZY EUROPEANS!!!

[/rageofjealousy]


I kid, I kid.

[Joojoobees]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

I've never known a poor person who hired anybody. But I've known more than a handful of rich people who hired dozens if not more employees. That's all I have to say on this subject.

Yep, because Trickle-down economics has been destroying the ability of small businesses to get off the ground since the 80s. It didn't used to be that way though. There used to be a middle class of people who were able to have small businesses (corner stores, neighborhood diners, a woman with a cleaning service that consisted of a van and couple of vacuum cleaners) who were able to hire people. Ever since the 80s these small businesses (which used to be the norm) have been replaced by large corporations. Now, the rich people are the only ones left able to hire people (if they should choose to do so).

[Mr. DJ]

http://www.slate.com/id/2257213/

[justinstrife]

Originally Posted by Joojoobees

Yep, because Trickle-down economics has been destroying the ability of small businesses to get off the ground since the 80s. It didn't used to be that way though. There used to be a middle class of people who were able to have small businesses (corner stores, neighborhood diners, a woman with a cleaning service that consisted of a van and couple of vacuum cleaners) who were able to hire people. Ever since the 80s these small businesses (which used to be the norm) have been replaced by large corporations. Now, the rich people are the only ones left able to hire people (if they should choose to do so).

Meh. This post isn't really worth responding to. Poor people will always be poor. Even if you took all the money in the world and redistributed it equally among everyone, within a few short years, everything would go back to the way it is currently. Those who were wealthy, will build their wealth back up again, and the poor people will piss the money away and be poor again.

[Kamui4356]

Originally Posted by justinstrife

Meh. This post isn't really worth responding to. Poor people will always be poor. Even if you took all the money in the world and redistributed it equally among everyone, within a few short years, everything would go back to the way it is currently. Those who were wealthy, will build their wealth back up again, and the poor people will piss the money away and be poor again.

So basically, you're saying poor people are meant to be poor and rich people are meant to be rich and any efforts to change that are doomed to failure?

[JMvS]

Originally Posted by Kamui4356

So basically, you're saying poor people are meant to be poor and rich people are meant to be rich and any efforts to change that are doomed to failure?

Actually, when things reach this point, usually what happens is that the poors get angry and start killing the richs, with ensuing reworking of society and redistribution of riches.

That's called a Revolution, and the fact that it did happen several times in Europe and elsewhere is what usually prompts politicians to design a system to avoid it, usually betting on a strong middle class, and in some case promoting the reshaping of their society into a whole middle class.

That was part of the American Dream if I recall. And now this dream is slowly fading over, not only in America of course, as more than one 1st World has seen relative pauperisation these last decades.

It's maybe only a disillusion of mine, but now as I travel across some so called 1st World Country, I cannot help but seeing them as more and more similar to some so called 3rd World Countries, and not only in the sense of a development of those latter ones.

[Bri]

Originally Posted by aohige

[rageofjealousy]
........................................DAMN LAZY EUROPEANS!!!
[/rageofjealousy]

I kid, I kid.

hehe, in fairness it's not as good as it sounds. Due to high taxes here employers generally give extra days off or other secondary benefits like lease cars as incentives. Wage increases and financial bonuses are taxed too heavily to increase worker efforts. That's the main reason why Europeans prefer leisure over extra income.

Originally Posted by SaintessHeart

I thought that census was done long time ago. Netherlands still has the lowest work hours per day?

Latest data I have seen is from 2008. Should be somewhere in labor productivity sheets from the OECD statistics portal.

Originally Posted by Joojoobees

Yep, because Trickle-down economics has been destroying the ability of small businesses to get off the ground since the 80s. It didn't used to be that way though. There used to be a middle class of people who were able to have small businesses (corner stores, neighborhood diners, a woman with a cleaning service that consisted of a van and couple of vacuum cleaners) who were able to hire people. Ever since the 80s these small businesses (which used to be the norm) have been replaced by large corporations. Now, the rich people are the only ones left able to hire people (if they should choose to do so).

How does that work? I've seen members like Vexx and yourself comment on the decline of the middle class in the US. AFAIK trickle down economics is just another word for supply side economics. The lower tax rates, reduced regulation and reduced cost of capital resulting from that type of policy would seem beneficial to starting up new small firms. What is different in the US situation or what makes you say that this policy destroyed the ability of the middle class to start up new companies?