125
Meet the Welfare Queens of the Percent - The Moochers Mitt Missed Work for the Pentagon : Swingers Discussion 209456
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsMeet the Welfare Queens of the Percent - The Moochers Mitt Missed Work for the Pentagon
TOPIC: Meet the Welfare Queens of the Percent - The Moochers Mitt Missed Work for the Pentagon
Created by: TheGhost_and_MrsMuir
Original Starting post for this thread:
GoTo Page: 1 2 3
 1 to 10 of 27   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Is this an original writing of yours ghost? Swear I read the same thing about a week ago on truth-out, by Mike Lofgren.

Just thought people should know where this post came from. Truthout is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, progressive organization.

Peoria AZ
 
 
Username hidden
(2322 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Obama Administration Tells Contractors Facing Sequestration to Not Warn Employees About Potential Layoffs

Administration issued a memorandum (White House link) late Friday, instructing Federal contractors that they should not provide WARN Act notice to employees facing sequestration. The WARN Act is designed to protect “workers, their families, and communities by requiring most employers with 100 or more employees to provide notification 60 calendar days in advance of plant closings and mass layoffs.” This White House directive follows a July 30, 2012 guidance letter from Jane Oates an Assistant Secretary at the Department of Labor, who concluded that no notice was necessary, specifically stating “As long as the likelihood and timing of contract cancellations remains speculative, an employer is not obligated to provide WARN notifications.”

While the Department of Labor guidance was consistent with existing precedent, it seems to be inconsistent with The WARN Act Guide for Employers, issued by the Department of Labor. That guidance provides only three exceptions to a WARN Act notification. The exceptions are: 1) a faltering company that is actively seeking capital or business and believes notification would prevent it from obtaining such capital, 2) a natural disaster and 3) unforeseeable business circumstances. Unforeseeable business circumstances are defined as “a business circumstance that is caused by some sudden, dramatic, and unexpected action or conditions outside the employer’s control, like the unexpected cancellation of a major order.” None of these three exceptions seem to apply to sequestration. Therefore, at least according to the Department of Labor’s guidance for employers, WARN notifications would be appropriate in light of sequestration. Of course, the Guide is merely best practices, and is not a statement of the law.

If defense contractors were to issue WARN notifications, they would need to be issued just days before the election as the sequestration cuts would occur on January 1st (and the law requires at least 60 days notice). Any notifications would create a huge political risk for the Obama administration. According to a report in The Hill, this recent White House memorandum “raised the stakes” by telling “telling contractors that they would be compensated for legal costs if layoffs occur due to contract cancellations under sequestration — but only if the contractors follow the Labor guidance"

Saint Louis MO
 
 
Username hidden
(12439 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country.

--Thomas Jefferson

This from the 'First Republican'

I'll say it again; We have failed miserably at what our founders envisioned....

East Fishkill NY
 
 
Username hidden
(2788 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
TBR, everybody misses your incoherent points.

Everybody works the system even if they do not like it. Very few people are martyrs. Except maybe Bobby...

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
And FJ misses the point again...

Rand "fought" socialism until it was advantageous for her to not fight it. When someone invents an ideology, maybe it is just me, but I expect them to at least pay some passing lip service to said ideology.

Lakeside CA
 
 
Username hidden
(17246 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
fjep, good point.

Avondale AZ
 
 
Username hidden
(36 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"But for some reason Tbr, reading your post made me think of Noam Chomsky (or chommy as I refer to that piece of "work." ) "

One protects his own money because THAT is the system he has been given to work with. This is completely consistent with what you neocons excuse Romney for doing though..The other denigrates and dismisses the system all her life and then moves to take full advantage of it, not with a admittance that it was socially useful but by trying to hide her actions altogether.

That the right cannot see the material difference in this is a strong indicator of how completely disconnected they are from society at large.

In MHO an ongoing display of pathetic self aggrandizement and greed.

Now, can we please get back on topic?

East Fishkill NY
 
 
Username hidden
(2788 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
"What is the first thing Rand did when she was diagnosed with a serious disease? "

Obama is anti handgun, yet he is surrounded by people with handguns. People deal the hand they are dealt. Michael Moore laments wealthy making money, yet where does MM's wealth come from?

Very few people will not use what is there even if they are not morally on board for it. Including you.

Sanford NC
 
 
Username hidden
(19231 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Those who raise their heads above the crowd are the most likely to have it chopped off...

Lakeside CA
 
 
Username hidden
(17246 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Hmmm

(I'm no fan of Ayn Rand)

But for some reason Tbr, reading your post made me think of Noam Chomsky (or chommy as I refer to that piece of "work." )

The very same Chommy that rallies against the concentration of wealth in "trusts" by the 1% His claim is that the US tax code is rigged with "complicated devices for ensuring that the poor pay off the rich."

Chommy who's worth is around US2MM, created a trust himself, imagine that! He contacted Palmer and Dodge, A well known respected Boston law firm, and with the help of a tax attorney specializing in income-tax planning, set up an irrevocable trust to protect his assets from Uncle Sam, with his daughters and tax attorney as the trustees :).

Chommy loves massive income redistribution, just not his income :)

Colts Neck NJ
 
 
Username hidden
(16526 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3
 1 to 10 of 27   End
TOPIC: Meet the Welfare Queens of the Percent - The Moochers Mitt Missed Work for the Pentagon