27 Jul 08
1 edit
It seems as though France has done away with their mandatory 35 hour work week. This was done on the grounds that such a restricition has reduced the nations competitiveness and set back economic growth. If you also add to this the fact that France has turned to nuclear power and is now exporting their energy to the rest of Europe what you have is a soon to be dominant power within Europe if not the world.
Viva la France!!
http://www.bloomberg.com/app/news?pid=2060108&sid=akfbxctX7dpM
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
27 Jul 08
Originally posted by whodeyHow does forcing people to work make a nation less competetive? Where did they get their facts??? And nuclear power? The future is not in that, hopefully. We've done enough to hurt the environment already.
It seems as though France has done away with their mandatory 35 hour work week. This was done on the grounds that such a restricition has reduced the nations competitiveness and set back economic growth. If you also add to this the fact that France has turned to nuclear power and is now exporting their energy to the rest of Europe what you have is a soon t ...[text shortened]... the world.
Viva la France!!
http://www.bloomberg.com/app/news?pid=2060108&sid=akfbxctX7dpM
27 Jul 08
5 edits
Originally posted by UzumakiAiIt is not forcing people to work longer, rather, it is only letting them work longer. No longer are they restricted from working over 35 hours a week. Generally speaking the longer you work the more work you get done and the more income you bring in. Are you disputing this assumption?
How does forcing people to work make a nation less competetive? Where did they get their facts??? And nuclear power? The future is not in that, hopefully. We've done enough to hurt the environment already.
Also, I know that nuclear fission is not the safest form of alternative energy but at least they are decreasing the fossil fuel emissions that left wingers are screaming about. In addition, they are enriching their country as they export their energy to the rest of Europe and decreasing the riches that hostile countries in the Middle East are attaining and becoming more self reliant in the process.
Edit: Show me a 100% safe alternative form of energy and I have a bridge I would like to sell ya!!
27 Jul 08
Originally posted by whodeyI don't see that "allowing" people to work longer is anything good.
It seems as though France has done away with their mandatory 35 hour work week. This was done on the grounds that such a restricition has reduced the nations competitiveness and set back economic growth. If you also add to this the fact that France has turned to nuclear power and is now exporting their energy to the rest of Europe what you have is a soon t ...[text shortened]... the world.
Viva la France!!
http://www.bloomberg.com/app/news?pid=2060108&sid=akfbxctX7dpM
People in France could work more than 35 hours, they just had to be paid 150% per hour (or something along those lines).
"Allowing" people to work longer hours basically means it's cheaper for bosses to force people to work more hours.
And I really don't think it makes the world a better place to strive for the lowest common denominator. So, they use child labour in India to make things cheaper, do we want to do that too, so that we can be competitive? I think not. The same for wages, working hours, etc.
If they want to compete in our markets, they should bloody well adhere to our restrictions. Otherwise just don't let them IN our markets.
Oh no. The rich wouldn't like that. It's one little global market, we have to keep up with the times.
Utter rubbish. If India, the US and every other crackpot regime of people-abusers want to compete in Europe, they should do so on our terms. End of story.
And if they don't, just block their bloody markets.
27 Jul 08
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirPeople have a right to put a value on an hour of their time and to trade that hour freely.
I don't see that "allowing" people to work longer is anything good.
People in France could work more than 35 hours, they just had to be paid 150% per hour (or something along those lines).
"Allowing" people to work longer hours basically means it's cheaper for bosses to force people to work more hours.
And I really don't think it makes the world so on our terms. End of story.
And if they don't, just block their bloody markets.
That is a right.
Just because that right is violated in most countries doesn't make it less of a right.
If you know of any bosses actually forcing workers, or actually threatening them with force then I suggest you take the matter up with the police, or is your "cheaper for bosses to force..." just more of your lies.
I think you'll also find that it is the poor in Europe that are the major consumers of cheap chinese/indian/philippino goods. Rich folk tend to buy higher quality goods.
ps, great news for France, people have a smidgen more freedom than they did before.
27 Jul 08
Originally posted by shavixmirSounds like a pretty conservative view to me. Isolationist even.
Utter rubbish. If India, the US and every other crackpot regime of people-abusers want to compete in Europe, they should do so on our terms. End of story.
And if they don't, just block their bloody markets.[/b]
27 Jul 08
Originally posted by WajomaNo particular economic system existed in the State of Nature; therefore, you don't have a "right" "to put a value on an hour of your time and to trade that hour freely".
People have a right to put a value on an hour of their time and to trade that hour freely.
That is a right.
Just because that right is violated in most countries doesn't make it less of a right.
If you know of any bosses actually forcing workers, or actually threatening them with force then I suggest you take the matter up with the poli ...[text shortened]... oods.
ps, great news for France, people have a smidgen more freedom than they did before.
Regulation of economic activity between individuals, so long as it doesn't interfere with a real right, is perfectly acceptable according to Fundamental Rights theory.
27 Jul 08
2 edits
Originally posted by no1marauderYour statement seems to imply that slavery is ok except for the "so long as it doesn't interfere with a real right".
No particular economic system existed in the State of Nature; therefore, you don't have a "right" "to put a value on an hour of your time and to trade that hour freely".
Regulation of economic activity between individuals, so long as it doesn't interfere with a real right, is perfectly acceptable according to Fundamental Rights theory.
At what point do we invoke rights? How much can we force some non-criminal individual to do against his will without violating his rights?
Don't people have a right not to work for a certain wage if they feel like it? Or can people be enslaved as long as they're given majority-determined "fair pay"?
27 Jul 08
2 edits
Originally posted by shavixmirSo if I were a worker in France and I wanted to work more than 35 hours in a week what am I going to do? For example, if I had a financial blow of some kind, which everyone does at some point, how can I make up the differnce without going into debt? My employer sure is not going to let me work over time because it would cost him a fortune.
I don't see that "allowing" people to work longer is anything good.
People in France could work more than 35 hours, they just had to be paid 150% per hour (or something along those lines).
"Allowing" people to work longer hours basically means it's cheaper for bosses to force people to work more hours.
And I really don't think it makes the world so on our terms. End of story.
And if they don't, just block their bloody markets.
You seem to think that helping the "rich" out by providing them with cheaper labor only benefits themselves, however, if you think about it, the cheaper the labor the more jobs they can then provide. So in your world you have fewer people employed who are restriced from working a certain number of hours as where in France they will provide more jobs with greater growth and afford their workers to work as hard as they want.
As for child labor, there is a huge difference between those of legal age who consent to working by CHOICE and those who are not of age legal age who have no real choice but to work. Its a little thing called FREEDOM of choice!!
27 Jul 08
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyGood point, man, I'm working every second I'm offered money for my services. What else am I going to do? I'll tell you. I'll sit here on my butt at the computer smoking pot.
So if I were a worker in France and I wanted to work more than 35 hours in a week what am I going to do? For example, if I had a financial blow of some kind, which everyone does at some point, how can I make up the differnce without going into debt? My employer sure is not going to let me work over time because it would cost him a fortune.
You seem to th legal age who have no real choice but to work. Its a little thing called FREEDOM of choice!!
But instead I'm a full time student with a full time job starting next month, with a cushy summer job to cover the rent until then.
28 Jul 08
Originally posted by AThousandYoungIronically, that is why they lost at Waterloo and in Russia. The soldiers were about to close in for the kill each time but looked at their watches and shrugged saying that their work day was over and went home. You think Napoleaon would have learned the first go round, no?
Under Napoleon the French were great, but I bet Napoleon's men worked more than 35 hours a week.
28 Jul 08
3 edits
Originally posted by AThousandYoungSomehow I would think that you would be more productive at work than sitting there smoking pot while talking to us. Of course, I am sure people like Shav would disagree. He would probably say that he does the same but feels more productive posting here while smoking pot than being at work.....that is if he works at all. 😉
Good point, man, I'm working every second I'm offered money for my services. What else am I going to do? I'll tell you. I'll sit here on my butt at the computer smoking pot.
But instead I'm a full time student with a full time job starting next month, with a cushy summer job to cover the rent until then.
28 Jul 08
Originally posted by no1marauderThe recognition of rights is a prerequisite to an economic system. Being able to freely trade an hour need not involve money either, although granted that has been a topic in this thread.
No particular economic system existed in the State of Nature; therefore, you don't have a "right" "to put a value on an hour of your time and to trade that hour freely".
Regulation of economic activity between individuals, so long as it doesn't interfere with a real right, is perfectly acceptable according to Fundamental Rights theory.