+- MacResource (https://forums.macresource.com)
+-- Forum: My Category (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: 'Friendly' Political Ranting (https://forums.macresource.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=6)
+--- Thread: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks (/showthread.php?tid=138876)
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - voodoopenguin - 07-16-2012
Avenger wrote:
So you go out and search for my post word for word. When you don't find a match in the Financial TImes then you claim there is no such thing. I expected more from you.
Europe Will Eventually Have To Face Facts: It Can't Afford 6 Weeks Of Vacation Anymore
You do make some strange assumptions, where did I claim "there was no such thing"? I also used variations on your words which is how I came up with the joke posting at the BMW chat site. Of course what threw me was that you put in the word "summer" and what you linked to didn't have that word. To see the full article I need to register so could you save us all the bother of that and quote the bit about "6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks", I realise that you might have changed the words around so it doesn't have to be exact.
Thank you, Paul
PS What did you expect of me? That would be interesting to know.
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - freeradical - 07-16-2012
Europe faces many economic challenges, but they differ by country. The countries of Western Europe not only face competition from China; they face pressure from the more efficient countries of Eastern Europe. Many of the countries of Western Europe have complained about the lower tax rates in Eastern Europe that give these countries a competitive advantage.
You also have to look at the difference between a country like Germany and Greece. Germany has a high tech export segment of their economy that is doing very well. I can't think of anything I've ever bought that was made in Greece.
However, the long term threat to the European economies is demographics. This threatens both their social programs and their GDP. They aren't having babies at anything close to the replacement rate. Long term economic growth depends upon labor, capital, and technology...
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - Avenger - 07-16-2012
voodoopenguin wrote:
[quote=Avenger]
So you go out and search for my post word for word. When you don't find a match in the Financial TImes then you claim there is no such thing. I expected more from you.
Europe Will Eventually Have To Face Facts: It Can't Afford 6 Weeks Of Vacation Anymore
You do make some strange assumptions, where did I claim "there was no such thing"? I also used variations on your words which is how I came up with the joke posting at the BMW chat site. Of course what threw me was that you put in the word "summer" and what you linked to didn't have that word. To see the full article I need to register so could you save us all the bother of that and quote the bit about "6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks", I realise that you might have changed the words around so it doesn't have to be exact.
Thank you, Paul
PS What did you expect of me? That would be interesting to know.
What is your standard? You have to find an article in New York Times with my exact post title or else I am wrong? The title is meant to convey a spirit, and it was proven correct in the linked article.
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - Black - 07-16-2012
davester wrote:
[quote=Uncle Wig]
[quote=davester]
As for the linked article, it is a fluff piece and also said nothing about lunch breaks or vacations.
And yet, you respond to it. Sucker!
You got me!
What's the difference as long as he keeps his flood of nonsense to his own thread?
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - voodoopenguin - 07-16-2012
Avenger wrote:
What is your standard? You have to find an article in New York Times with my exact post title or else I am wrong?
Maybe you are not reading my posts and the failure to do so is confusing you. I have not yet said you were wrong, what I said was I hadn't yet found the article which says the things you mentioned in your topic heading. I thought I was quite politely asking where I could find it so I could read more. The link in your first post goes to an article "Class of 2012: 5 Europe grads face rocky future" which didn't seem to be it. Your next link goes to a page where if I want to read more I have to register so I asked if you could quote it for me so I didn't have to go through the registering process, I didn't realise that this would be too much for you so I apologise for that. Where does the New York Times come into it? Previously you mentioned the Financial Times.
Avenger wrote:
The title is meant to convey a spirit, and it was proven correct in the linked article.
Is it too much to ask that you let me know where I can read about the spirit of "6 weeks paid summer vacations" and "3 hour lunch breaks"? Probably.
OK, so I registered and went to the article which seems to be over two years old. I still didn't see anything about 3 hour lunch breaks or even the spirit of 3 hour lunch breaks so have you got another link as obviously I'm looking at the wrong one?
Probably time to give up, I do try to understand everyone and give them all a chance to explain but sometimes it seems like a hopeless cause.
Paul
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - hal - 07-16-2012
voodoopenguin wrote: OK, so I registered and went to the article which seems to be over two years old. I still didn't see anything about 3 hour lunch breaks or even the spirit of 3 hour lunch breaks so have you got another link as obviously I'm looking at the wrong one?
Probably time to give up, I do try to understand everyone and give them all a chance to explain but sometimes it seems like a hopeless cause.
Paul
Did you really think that he read the FT article? Yes, well past time to give up...
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - voodoopenguin - 07-16-2012
hal wrote:
Did you really think that he read the FT article? Yes, well past time to give up...
I am a tolerant and patient person with the optimistic hope that everyone has a positive side despite their history. I may get disappointed sometimes but I don't think I will change and will still give everyone a chance.
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - Avenger - 07-16-2012
The title of my posts are my own. I have never claimed that you can find an article with that exact heading. The fact that you are holding me to show-me-the-3-hour-lunch article shows you are not debating in good faith. I am sure if I point you to a piece that debates 2:59 hour lunch breaks you'd be back here asking for clarification. The European welfare state is well known and people often take pride in it. Part of that is the generous work hours and vacations that in retrospect could not be sustained. No need to get tangled up in a 3 hour vs. 2.5 hour lunch break argument.
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - voodoopenguin - 07-16-2012
Avenger wrote:
The title of my posts are my own. I have never claimed that you can find an article with that exact heading. The fact that you are holding me to show-me-the-3-hour-lunch article shows you are not debating in good faith. I am sure if I point you to a piece that debates 2:59 hour lunch breaks you'd be back here asking for clarification. The European welfare state is well known and people often take pride in it. Part of that is the generous work hours and vacations that in retrospect could not be sustained. No need to get tangled up in a 3 hour vs. 2.5 hour lunch break argument.
Understood, you made it up.
Glad we sorted that one out.
Paul
Re: 6 weeks paid summer vacations and 3 hour lunch breaks - hal - 07-16-2012
voodoopenguin wrote: I am a tolerant and patient person with the optimistic hope that everyone has a positive side despite their history. I may get disappointed sometimes but I don't think I will change and will still give everyone a chance.
...and that's why you're so darned lovable - please - don't change :-)