Wow: so once again another trademark Rush Limbaugh phrase ends up in the Politics forum.
Interesting......
As for the paid leave, I am rather astonished that anyone would be against this.
As for it being abused, did anyone notice the amount of money that will be paid?
Regards SALTCITYBAPTIST, hope all is well with you and yours,
BiR
Here's another bombshell: many families cannot afford to relinquish a second income.
Where are the good schools?
Where are the best neighborhoods to raise families?
They are out in the suburbs.
Have you seen what the average home costs out in most suburbs?
Try going up to Washington, DC and look at the housing prices in the NorVA and Maryland areas.
Any bargains are in the most extreme outlying areas of the cities.
Now look at gasoline prices.
I am lucky enough to be an urban dweller (no kids) and I cannot imagine having to pay at the pump to drive in from the outlying areas.... and this is Richmond.
We aren't exactly a large city.
Hope all is well, Pastor Larry,
BiR (still praying for you and your ministry every day)
Rush's disdain for women comes across loud and clear. He never misses an opportunity to bully them and make up cutely little derogatory names. I wonder if this is why this so-called "family values" loudmouth can't seem to stay married.
Pastor Larry,
I have seen the light!, thanks to Magnetic Poles and Filmproducer!
Soon, when Mrs Saltys cats are sick (they are getting older) and need more care, I will be able to take time off work (with pay of course) to be with them every moment.
Since my Dad left a large collections of firearms, I need to take a few days off once a year to take care of them, as they are so important to my mom.
Naturally, I would expect my employer to pay me at least one week a year, so I can take care my church family as I am a Bi-voc pastor.
Of course, I now subscribe to Hillary's "It takes a village" so I will request another week to go out had help children who live in my neighborhood
By all means, I am part of the local Christian Radio station family.
Now I can take a week (courtesy of my employer) to help with the annual Care-a-thon fund raiser.
I would never want to forget to give a week of my self (and my boss) to be a counselor at Camp Bayouca.
Well, thats all I can think of all for now
Salty
PS, Pastor Larry since we on the BB are a family, if you ever need any help in your church, just let me know and I will be glad to come and help (for up to twelve weeks)
So Salty, you view cats and guns as having the same value as children or parents? Interesting view, but neither I, nor FilmProducer, have espoused such a position.
Let me add that I am always amazed at how so-called "pro-lifers" are all over protecting "babies" at the point of conception, but once they are born, to heck with them. They don't need health insurance, they don't need government assistance to eat or go to school, and they sure as shootin' don't need their moms & dads to have a few weeks off work at reduced pay to take care of them while they get settled into their homes.
First, the "I" was used generically as someone who is being charged to give benefits to someone else. Secondly, the fact that people are paid to take time off should not be a government mandate. If a company wants to offer that, then fine. Offer it. But don't force them to.
Sure it is. It is about the role of families and parents. Think about it. A mother needs 12 weeks of leave so she can keep her job. why not give up her job for the sake of raising a family? Again, it is about a fundamental issue in the way we think about families.
Of course grandparents are family. Why would you think that I don't consider them that? You need to read more closely. But grandparents are not given the responsibility to raise children.
Not at their current standard of living they can't. But what demands that standard of living? Think about it realistically. I have no issues with anyone's standard of living. But that is not a right. I bet that women work to afford a bigger house, a second car, and better stuff. They could get by on what their husband makes, if they are willing to step down their standard of living.
Where mom and dad take their children and their responsibility seriously.
Where parents take their responsibility to their children seriously.
They actually don't, but it is good to have it. It is available for all children.
They don't. Kids grew up for millenia without government assistance. Why are we so weak as to think we need it now?
Mom and Dad don't need a few weeks off of work. They need to decide who is going to stay home and raise the family. Why get settled into a home that you are not going to spend much time in? Many children spend more waking hours with their daycare worker than with their parents. That is a problem.
So, don't make up what people say. And pay attention to real issues. We don't need more income in this world. Successful parenting can take place with a lot less income and a lot lower standard of living than we are used to.
Not exactly, but that's not my point. We all make choices about what is important to us. What requires someone to live in that area? It is not unheard of for someone to move, to take a new job, to do something different. People all over the world do it.
It means that children are best raised where parents take their responsibility seriously. Many parents do not. They farm their kids out to day care in exchange for a bigger house, a second or third car, nicer stuff, etc.
It is a realistic expectation all over for people who make changes in their priorities. No one can live beyond their budget for very long. If you decide to live on one income, you adjust your budget and your living accordingly.
Is someone forcing a person to live in a two income lifestyle? I doubt it. We have choices and we set priorities. When I was growing up, we were not rich by any stretch. We could have used two incomes, but my mom made the choice to be home when the kids were home. When we were in school, she took a part time job. But when we were home, she was home. It affected the way that we lived. And it was well worth it.
It looks like we havent learned anything from the "War on Poverty'
All we do is to keep throwing money at the probem when we need to get to the root of the problem
The same thing will happen with this paid leave. Initally, it was unpaid leave. But didnt some kook by the name of Rush Limbaugh predict that soon it would become paid leave. For now, it will be 12 weeks. Whats next, 15, 20, 26, weeks, then a full year. Where will it stop? Probally, when all the jobs end up in Mexico.
When our son was born, my wife and I, for reasons that don't need exploring at this juncture, had to both work.
I was at home in the daytime while she was at work, we spent the evening together as a family, then I worked at night.
After a while, the schedule changed slightly, and we occasionally had to get help from family (we were blessed that at one point, we were offered the opportunity to make about 3 months' pay in three weeks, but we had to work a lot of hours, and our son got to spend some quality time with his grandparents), but we were there to take care...
Ding!
It just dawned on me!
Spurned by quality ideas of BiR and MP, I have the solution!
Simply give everyone 11 months' of paid leave per year.
Then, pass a law raising minimum wage to $120 per hour.
Then, mandate housing prices.
Then, food prices.
Then, gas prices.
Oh, and we can't forget health care.
Simply make it free.
Then, pass laws that determine who is required to become a doctor since very few will now want to.
Give everyone a free car.
Anything else we need that we can give away while we're at it?