Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman
OMG, I can't answer it, its impossible. I have been beaten by you, painted into a corner and trapped by your Superior Intellect and Amazing Internet Prowess....Kirk to Bridge, Get us out of here. 
You posted a question and people here are trying to give you there take on it....but everytime they post something you don't agree with you come back w/ the "Can't Anybody answer a simple question" argument.
I'll Answer them for you and then maybe we can move on.
Difference in What? I stated that Private Sector Employees receive time and a half for overtime worked also.....so in that case the answer is No....No difference at all. Overtime is Overtime
Yes.....but note that your "Simple Direct" Question is really 3 questions
Its Not....Ask Away. No law says you can't ask
They Could
They Could
There....now can we move on. |
Dad -
"OMG, I can't answer it, its impossible. I have been beaten by you, painted into a corner and trapped by your Superior Intellect"
You said it, not me. I make no claims to have any special intellect. What I have is common sense, intellectual curiosity, honesty, and the desire to debate other similar individuals, especuially those who disagree with me, since that's how you learn. Unfortunately, it only works if the other folks are as willing to answer direct questions as I am, and on this issue, they keep dodging.
"Overtime is Overtime"
In the private sctor, customers can easily and freely choose to refuse to pay the costs of employee overtime. In the public sector, if unions want overtime, they take it from taxpayers with force of law. You claim you see no difference between money that is voluntarily traded and money that is confiscasted with force of law? Those 2 things are identical to you?
You did answer part of my question, in that you admit there is no reason why they can't live with 401(k)s. So, given how burdensome current tax rates are, don't you think they SHOULD live with 401(k)s, given that you concede that they COULD? Seems to me that the only answer to that question is "yes", unless you believe that public employees are somehow more entitled to wealth than taxpayers.
Dad, I admit I'm asking tough questions, these are not softballs.