House passes SARS-CoV2 bill

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Guess you didn't read my response

Rage on man

"I dontthave problem with this bill other than langues about abortion and not making this bill time sensitive. No expiration date is a no go for me."

That is a direct copy/paste of your opening statement about the Bill with the exception of my bolding part of it.

"other than language about abortion" was the clear exception about the bill but there was no such language whatsoever. Republicans misinformed about there being such a thing and I voiced an objection that turned out to be based on a misunderstanding propagated by the Republican nonsense about the Hayes Amendment, where there was no such thing.

Understanding the language of the FDA and regs, I find nothing at all unless one also thinks that having a glucose monitor and strips is an opening or language endorsing abortion.

No.

So why not just say "I was mistaken" as I was initially until more was learned? It is not weakness to reassess and do so on this forum.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVrolok

nickqt

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2015
7,695
8,095
136
"I dontthave problem with this bill other than langues about abortion and not making this bill time sensitive. No expiration date is a no go for me."

That is a direct copy/paste of your opening statement about the Bill with the exception of my bolding part of it.

"other than language about abortion" was the clear exception about the bill but there was no such language whatsoever. Republicans misinformed about there being such a thing and I voiced an objection that turned out to be based on a misunderstanding propagated by the Republican nonsense about the Hayes Amendment, where there was no such thing.

Understanding the language of the FDA and regs, I find nothing at all unless one also thinks that having a glucose monitor and strips is an opening or language endorsing abortion.

No.

So why not just say "I was mistaken" as I was initially until more was learned? It is not weakness to reassess and do so on this forum.
Admitting a mistake is like punching a hole in a dam with the collaborators. Once they admit that not only have then been lied to, but that they're just rubes being used by their thought leaders to make their thought leaders richer and more powerful, they'd have to admit that they've been gullible rubes for their entire political lives.

The dam bursting wouldn't just be embarrassing; it would be life-changing. And, you know, tradition is their "strong suit", for whatever reason.

So they double down on the stupid and continue ignoring objective observable reality for the safe space their thought leaders have thought into existence for them.

Rinse, repeat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheVrolok

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Sick leave aside, this is in all honesty a turd of a bill IMHO.

Oh joy, some unpaid sick leave. How generous and helpful to your average American during these fun times. Hope you don't need to eat, pay utilities, or pay rent.

Incorrect. The bill calls for paid sick leave.

 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Incorrect. The bill calls for paid sick leave.

Deliberate deception worthy of Fox and this Administration.


From the NYT, that Fox clone/s


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday night celebrated the coronavirus legislation that passed early Saturday as providing paid sick leave to American workers affected by the pandemic.
She neglected to mention the fine print.
In fact, the bill guarantees sick leave only to about 20 percent of workers. Big employers like McDonald’s and Amazon are not required to provide any paid sick leave, while companies with fewer than 50 employees can seek hardship exemptions from the Trump administration.
“If you are sick, stay home,” Vice President Mike Pence said at a news conference on Saturday afternoon. “You’re not going to miss a pay check.”
But that’s simply not true. Sick workers should stay home, but there is no guarantee in the emergency legislation that most of them will get paid.

The White House and congressional Republicans, who insisted on the exemptions as the price of bipartisan support for the legislation, bear the primary responsibility for the indefensible decision to prioritize corporate profits in the midst of a public health emergency.

Instead of pressing executives to support a comprehensive sick leave law, President Trump held a Rose Garden pep rally for corporate America on Friday afternoon, showering praise on the chief executives of big employers including Walmart, Target and Walgreens.


But House Democrats also failed to act in the public interest. Paying sick workers to stay at home is both good policy and good politics. Why not pass a bill that required all employers to provide paid sick leave and then force Republicans to explain their objections to the public?
The bill does require some employers to provide full-time workers with up to 10 days of paid leave. But the requirement does not apply to the nation’s largest employers — companies with 500 or more workers, who together employ roughly 54 percent of all workers.
After a Waffle House employee tested positive for the coronavirus earlier this month, the company refused to promise it would pay other sick workers to stay home. Now, under the new bill, it would qualify for the big-company exemption. Would Ms. Pelosi please explain why the House decided not to require Waffle House to protect its workers and customers by paying for sick leave?


The legislation also provides some compensation for workers who need to take longer leaves under the Family and Medical Leave Act — but this too excludes workers at big companies.
And the bill allows the Labor Department to grant hardship exemptions to businesses with fewer than 50 employees. That category includes another 26 percent of the work force, meaning that fully 80 percent of workers may not be able to cash in on Ms. Pelosi’s rhetoric.
Democrats began this process in the right place. The first draft of the coronavirus legislation included a permanent change requiring employers to allow every worker to earn up to seven days of paid sick leave, and a temporary change allowing any worker to take up to 10 days of sick leave during a public health emergency. The final draft includes only a pale shadow of those sensible requirements. The paid sick leave requirement is narrowly focused on the coronavirus; it does not even require paid sick leave during future pandemics — a contemptible signal that political leaders are already committed to not learning the lessons of this one.
Some large employers have announced voluntary grants of paid sick leave for workers affected by the coronavirus. After a Walmart employee in Kentucky tested positive for the coronavirus, the company announced it would provide up to two weeks of paid leave for workers who fall ill or are quarantined because of a confirmed exposure to the virus. Other large employers, including Target, Gap and Wawa, have made similar announcements.
But such voluntary policies are an inadequate substitute for legislation. Many large employers have not announced any changes, many of the policies that have been announced are considerably less generous than the requirements of the House legislation, and employees at those firms can hardly enforce corporate compliance with a news release.
It’s also true that big employers are generally more likely to offer standard sick leave benefits. Roughly 86 percent of workers at big companies get some kind of paid sick leave, according to federal statistics. But few workers in the United States are eligible to take 10 days of paid sick leave. And the low-wage workers who can least afford to stay home without paid leave are precisely the workers who are least likely to qualify for those standard corporate benefits.
Companies should be required to provide paid sick leave to every worker as a standard cost of doing business, and they certainly should be required to do so in the midst of a pandemic.

The House’s failure to require universal paid sick leave is an embarrassment that endangers the health of workers, consumers and the broader American public.

Yes formatting.

Literally true, for some, but for politic's sake don't mention what this really means.

Unacceptable deception.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Deliberate deception worthy of Fox and this Administration.


From the NYT, that Fox clone/s


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on Friday night celebrated the coronavirus legislation that passed early Saturday as providing paid sick leave to American workers affected by the pandemic.
She neglected to mention the fine print.
In fact, the bill guarantees sick leave only to about 20 percent of workers. Big employers like McDonald’s and Amazon are not required to provide any paid sick leave, while companies with fewer than 50 employees can seek hardship exemptions from the Trump administration.
“If you are sick, stay home,” Vice President Mike Pence said at a news conference on Saturday afternoon. “You’re not going to miss a pay check.”
But that’s simply not true. Sick workers should stay home, but there is no guarantee in the emergency legislation that most of them will get paid.

The White House and congressional Republicans, who insisted on the exemptions as the price of bipartisan support for the legislation, bear the primary responsibility for the indefensible decision to prioritize corporate profits in the midst of a public health emergency.

Instead of pressing executives to support a comprehensive sick leave law, President Trump held a Rose Garden pep rally for corporate America on Friday afternoon, showering praise on the chief executives of big employers including Walmart, Target and Walgreens.


But House Democrats also failed to act in the public interest. Paying sick workers to stay at home is both good policy and good politics. Why not pass a bill that required all employers to provide paid sick leave and then force Republicans to explain their objections to the public?
The bill does require some employers to provide full-time workers with up to 10 days of paid leave. But the requirement does not apply to the nation’s largest employers — companies with 500 or more workers, who together employ roughly 54 percent of all workers.
After a Waffle House employee tested positive for the coronavirus earlier this month, the company refused to promise it would pay other sick workers to stay home. Now, under the new bill, it would qualify for the big-company exemption. Would Ms. Pelosi please explain why the House decided not to require Waffle House to protect its workers and customers by paying for sick leave?


The legislation also provides some compensation for workers who need to take longer leaves under the Family and Medical Leave Act — but this too excludes workers at big companies.
And the bill allows the Labor Department to grant hardship exemptions to businesses with fewer than 50 employees. That category includes another 26 percent of the work force, meaning that fully 80 percent of workers may not be able to cash in on Ms. Pelosi’s rhetoric.
Democrats began this process in the right place. The first draft of the coronavirus legislation included a permanent change requiring employers to allow every worker to earn up to seven days of paid sick leave, and a temporary change allowing any worker to take up to 10 days of sick leave during a public health emergency. The final draft includes only a pale shadow of those sensible requirements. The paid sick leave requirement is narrowly focused on the coronavirus; it does not even require paid sick leave during future pandemics — a contemptible signal that political leaders are already committed to not learning the lessons of this one.
Some large employers have announced voluntary grants of paid sick leave for workers affected by the coronavirus. After a Walmart employee in Kentucky tested positive for the coronavirus, the company announced it would provide up to two weeks of paid leave for workers who fall ill or are quarantined because of a confirmed exposure to the virus. Other large employers, including Target, Gap and Wawa, have made similar announcements.
But such voluntary policies are an inadequate substitute for legislation. Many large employers have not announced any changes, many of the policies that have been announced are considerably less generous than the requirements of the House legislation, and employees at those firms can hardly enforce corporate compliance with a news release.
It’s also true that big employers are generally more likely to offer standard sick leave benefits. Roughly 86 percent of workers at big companies get some kind of paid sick leave, according to federal statistics. But few workers in the United States are eligible to take 10 days of paid sick leave. And the low-wage workers who can least afford to stay home without paid leave are precisely the workers who are least likely to qualify for those standard corporate benefits.
Companies should be required to provide paid sick leave to every worker as a standard cost of doing business, and they certainly should be required to do so in the midst of a pandemic.

The House’s failure to require universal paid sick leave is an embarrassment that endangers the health of workers, consumers and the broader American public.

Yes formatting.

Literally true, for some, but for politic's sake don't mention what this really means.

Unacceptable deception.

Nobody has claimed it's universal sick leave. It's an improvement. Your claim of deception is therefore dishonest.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Nobody has claimed it's universal sick leave. It's an improvement. Your claim of deception is therefore dishonest.

No it is not. Not once did you mention the reality and this is your SOP. Dems rolled over only to let Mitch kick them like a dog.

This is completely acceptable to you, roll over and play dead, which 80% of the nation should thank you for?

Nope.
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
"I dontthave problem with this bill other than langues about abortion and not making this bill time sensitive. No expiration date is a no go for me."

That is a direct copy/paste of your opening statement about the Bill with the exception of my bolding part of it.

"other than language about abortion" was the clear exception about the bill but there was no such language whatsoever. Republicans misinformed about there being such a thing and I voiced an objection that turned out to be based on a misunderstanding propagated by the Republican nonsense about the Hayes Amendment, where there was no such thing.

Understanding the language of the FDA and regs, I find nothing at all unless one also thinks that having a glucose monitor and strips is an opening or language endorsing abortion.

No.

So why not just say "I was mistaken" as I was initially until more was learned? It is not weakness to reassess and do so on this forum.

Ive read soo many articles about this over the last 3 weeks, and just spent about an hour searching. My conclusion, I know I read a bill proposal, linked from a website other than Breitbart of Fox, because I rarely visit those sites. But now I cant find it.

That said, I now believe the whole "The Republicans are trying to sneak in anti abortion language" and "The Democrats are trying to sneak in abortion expansion" news, which is ABUNDANT, is all bullshit. I dont believe the Dems or the Republicans attempted to do this.

I often get trolled for playing both sides (because I often do) but in this specific case, both sides in the news media are fake news.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Ive read soo many articles about this over the last 3 weeks, and just spent about an hour searching. My conclusion, I know I read a bill proposal, linked from a website other than Breitbart of Fox, because I rarely visit those sites. But now I cant find it.

That said, I now believe the whole "The Republicans are trying to sneak in anti abortion language" and "The Democrats are trying to sneak in abortion expansion" news, which is ABUNDANT, is all bullshit. I dont believe the Dems or the Republicans attempted to do this.

I often get trolled for playing both sides (because I often do) but in this specific case, both sides in the news media are fake news.

Thanks for responding :)
 

TheVrolok

Lifer
Dec 11, 2000
24,254
4,090
136
Ive read soo many articles about this over the last 3 weeks, and just spent about an hour searching. My conclusion, I know I read a bill proposal, linked from a website other than Breitbart of Fox, because I rarely visit those sites. But now I cant find it.

That said, I now believe the whole "The Republicans are trying to sneak in anti abortion language" and "The Democrats are trying to sneak in abortion expansion" news, which is ABUNDANT, is all bullshit. I dont believe the Dems or the Republicans attempted to do this.

I often get trolled for playing both sides (because I often do) but in this specific case, both sides in the news media are fake news.

A whole lot of back pedaling. You originally said you didn't like the abortion language and also said you read the proposal, implying that you read abortion language in the proposal you read. Are you still saying that, and now just saying you can't find it? Or are you saying you based your opinion of the abortion language on the reporting you read?
 

blackangst1

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
22,902
2,359
126
A whole lot of back pedaling. You originally said you didn't like the abortion language and also said you read the proposal, implying that you read abortion language in the proposal you read. Are you still saying that, and now just saying you can't find it? Or are you saying you based your opinion of the abortion language on the reporting you read?

Um...reading my entire post will answer your question. Try again.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Incorrect. The bill calls for paid sick leave.

I'm talking of the unpaid portion to care for others.

Paid sick leave is only 2 weeks and assumes:
1. The person is employed obviously
2. That they actually get sick with the virus

That means it's basically show up to work and hope you don't get it. How useful.
 

Ajay

Lifer
Jan 8, 2001
16,094
8,109
136
It's a start in the right direction, one where the GOP is already trying to welch.
SOP for the GOP. Claim that big things are going to be done. Force the Dems to accept lesser terms. Claim "Mission Accomplish". Fox News disseminates GOP success and cowering pathetic big government democrats into submission. Game over.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ch33zw1z

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
No it is not. Not once did you mention the reality and this is your SOP. Dems rolled over only to let Mitch kick them like a dog.

This is completely acceptable to you, roll over and play dead, which 80% of the nation should thank you for?

Nope.

Standard concern troll routine to make the perfect the enemy of the good. We'll take what we can get now & come back for more. Or we can have nothing for working people.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
SOP for the GOP. Claim that big things are going to be done. Force the Dems to accept lesser terms. Claim "Mission Accomplish". Fox News disseminates GOP success and cowering pathetic big government democrats into submission. Game over.

I'm reminded of the visit by ghosts Richard III had in the play which all ended with "dispair and die".

Can we just do that already?
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
Standard concern troll routine to make the perfect the enemy of the good. We'll take what we can get now & come back for more. Or we can have nothing for working people.

My goodness, it's a bot with poor coding