• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Jeb Bush: People Need to Work Longer Hours [W: 64]

You only pay a tax if you don't have health care.

I suggest you take your own advice to avoid looking foolish.

The only person here who's looking foolish is the one who persists on believing that the Supreme Court didn't rule that the mandate under the ACA is a tax and that's the only reason the ACA wasn't trashed and remains the law.

If ignorance is bliss, you must be as giddy as a pig in ****.
 
Today, Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush, who as of-late has gone relatively gaffe-free, uttered a phrase that may not go over too well with the constituency he wishes to reach.

Read the article here: http://new.yahoo.com/jeb-bush-people-longer-hours-235206730.html

Does anyone on this forum agree with Mr.Bush?

I don't. I'm retired now but most of my life I worked 7-days on, 7-days off, 12 hours a day. That's an 84 hour week. How many more hours does this guy think that I should have worked?

:lol:




"Better days are coming." ~ But not for today's out of touch, running out of time, GOP.

Mr Bush was referring to the need for people to have full time jobs not part time jobs.
 
Are you sure he's not referring to people working past 65?

Hours, lol. He may be a supporter of working past 65 years old too, I don't know. I'm no fan of John Ellis, don't misunderstand me, and we can defeat him on so many issues. But I listened to what he said, and his statement a few hours later at another rally stop. He very clearly was referring to peoples need to have full time employment by today's definition which is a 40 hour work week.
 
The only person here who's looking foolish is the one who persists on believing that the Supreme Court didn't rule that the mandate under the ACA is a tax and that's the only reason the ACA wasn't trashed and remains the law.

If ignorance is bliss, you must be as giddy as a pig in ****.

I don't pay that... Do you understand what i'm saying?

It doesn't cost me a dime. My employer provides health care, they pay for it on my behalf.
 
Hours, lol. He may be a supporter of working past 65 years old too, I don't know. I'm no fan of John Ellis, don't misunderstand me, and we can defeat him on so many issues. But I listened to what he said, and his statement a few hours later at another rally stop. He very clearly was referring to peoples need to have full time employment by today's definition which is a 40 hour work week.

^ this, he was specifically referring to working longer hours. He explicitly stated it.

Which is strange because Germany works only 26 hours a week and has a powerhouse of an economy. Also it's strange because our economy is more productive than it's ever been, it's just that laborers have had compensation basically stagnate for 40 years. Also it's strange because many of those part time workers do want to work more, so it seems even more obvious that the problem is elsewhere.
 
^ this, he was specifically referring to working longer hours. He explicitly stated it.

Which is strange because Germany works only 26 hours a week and has a powerhouse of an economy. Also it's strange because our economy is more productive than it's ever been, it's just that laborers have had compensation basically stagnate for 40 years. Also it's strange because many of those part time workers do want to work more, so it seems even more obvious that the problem is elsewhere.

I didn't deny that. I just pointed out that the longer hours was not over 40 as he himself clarified just hours latter when asked about it at his next campaign stop.
 
You can interpret it any way you want but Bush previously advocated that Americans workers should not be allowed to retire until they're 68-70 and that it's obvious that that's what he meant by working more hours.
 
You can interpret it any way you want but Bush previously advocated that Americans workers should not be allowed to retire until they're 68-70 and that it's obvious that that's what he meant by working more hours.

If your speaking to me with that reinoe, I agree that John Ellis wants to increase the retirement age. But his comments the other day were about weekly work hours. And your requiring me to defend him, something I'm not inclined to want to continue!
 
Back
Top Bottom