I think the general welfare would be enhanced by more mandated vacation time.
Why is it the government's job to mandate vacation time? It sets a bad precedent. What next -- studies show that mid-day naps are good for you, so the government will mandate that companies have you allow you to take a nap?
The precedent already exists, so what's being set?
On the flipside, what are the negatives to mandating 4 weeks of vacation a year instead of 2?
There'd be a loss of productivity in comparison to other nations, but could it be offset by a surge in general health and well-being of the populace? Better diets, lower blood pressure, more time to get involved in the community? Stronger familial bonds and more knowledge of what's going on in your kids' lives?
The government already mandates X for the populace, so I don't really see an issue in investigating if X is the optimal value.
Then take unpaid leave. The problem is that you want to be paid the same for producing less. Are you on vacation right now, or are you being productive by posting on AT?Deadbeats don't care about only having 2 weeks vacation. It's the productive members of society that need more vacation time. I have a great salary and benefits, just vacation time to spend the salary is lacking. I could be out there creating tourism jobs right now.
you know what, shut the fuck up. This has nothing to do with self-hate (btw, I love myself), it has to do with stupidity of the progressives in Europe.
I think the general welfare would be enhanced by more mandated vacation time.
What precedent? AFAIK, the US government does not mandate X number of paid vacation days for all employed individuals in the US.
I don't know about you, but my diet is much worse when I'm no vacation than when I'm at home. Just sayin'.......and I'm not sure about you in Canuksville, but here in Redneckistan, there's no mandate for vacation time issued by our federal government.
Then take unpaid leave. The problem is that you want to be paid the same for producing less. Are you on vacation right now, or are you being productive by posting on AT?
It's how I crushed it for recycling.
OK, you made me lol there.
Ah, now I see: you want all of the perks of working in a highly competitive, productivity-based field, but not the associated drawbacks.Manager is happy with my productivity, got a bonus on last review too 🙂
I don't mind a pay cut for more vacation. Problem is not the money, it's the time, Silicon Valley managers don't want to let people go for a month and put things on hold, even in the summer, because they know the competition is not doing it. Moving up in organization doesn't really help, you get more vacation time on paper, but probably less time to actually use it.
Ah, now I see: you want all of the perks of working in a highly competitive, productivity-based field, but not the associated drawbacks.
Ah, now I see: you want all of the perks of working in a highly competitive, productivity-based field, but not the associated drawbacks.
No one wants the drawbacks. However, some people might be willing to sacrifice a bit of vacation to have your job. You don't want to compete with them. You want to have your cake and eat it too. You fail to realize that the reason all companies don't give a month of vacation, as well as great salary and benefit packages, is because they can't make any money doing that. They have to make money. If they give all of their employees a month of paid vacation, they're going to have a very hard time doing that without laying off a lot of people or jacking up prices. Thus, you'll either get canned or take a fairly large effective cut in purchasing potential.Of course I want the perks and not the drawbacks. Duh. Who WANTS the drawbacks?
The playing field is fair and balanced now. By not mandating any vacation, the government allows employers and employees to choose an arrangement which both think is fair. You want to tilt the playing field in your favor by sticking the shim of government under one side.that's why the gov't needs to mandate it... you need to make it fair and balance the playing field... that's what gov't is for...
The playing field is fair and balanced now. By not mandating any vacation, the government allows employers and employees to choose an arrangement which both think is fair. You want to tilt the playing field in your favor by sticking the shim of government under one side.
Then we can have an evil capitalist bailout in a few years when all of the companies go under...but it's not fair that the evil capitalists won't subsidize all workers to have a month off each year... the gov't needs to regulate this to improve the lot of all workers and punish the evil capitalists for not being enlightened and doing this themselves...
No one wants the drawbacks. However, some people might be willing to sacrifice a bit of vacation to have your job. You don't want to compete with them. You want to have your cake and eat it too. You fail to realize that the reason all companies don't give a month of vacation, as well as great salary and benefit packages, is because they can't make any money doing that. They have to make money. If they give all of their employees a month of paid vacation, they're going to have a very hard time doing that without laying off a lot of people or jacking up prices. Thus, you'll either get canned or take a fairly large effective cut in purchasing potential.
I dunno about paying people to go on vacation, but we do need more vacation time in the US. 2 weeks is not enough.
lol you fucking loser. Us valuable workers get way more than that. I get 25 days.
![]()