1
   

Oh This Is Rich

 
 
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 01:23 pm
http://www.drudgereport.com/flash3cc.htm

squinney and I have already quoted the upcoming response to this thread here.....I'll let you know if we were right.....
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 544 • Replies: 7
No top replies

 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 01:46 pm
I don't know what he's driving at, but I have to confess that I do think there ought to be some consideration for, how should I say, a gender-based, non-income producing occupation. In other words, I think that women (or men, for that matter) who choose not to work outside the home in order to raise children should be entitled to more than just half (or whatever it is) of the husband's payout. I think it should be equal.

But I'd love to hear his expanded remarks because he just sounds silly there.
0 Replies
 
blueveinedthrobber
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 01:49 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
I don't know what he's driving at, but I have to confess that I do think there ought to be some consideration for, how should I say, a gender-based, non-income producing occupation. In other words, I think that women (or men, for that matter) who choose not to work outside the home in order to raise children should be entitled to more than just half (or whatever it is) of the husband's payout. I think it should be equal.

But I'd love to hear his expanded remarks because he just sounds silly there.[/[/b]quote]

There's a reason for that....
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 02:12 pm
He certainly is an awful communicator but I don't think he's trying to lower benefits for Jews...if you know what I mean?
Certainly, women have gotten screwed the last 50 years because of what Duck said and because of the glass ceiling.
0 Replies
 
Dartagnan
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 02:28 pm
Sounds like a lot of nudge, nudge, wink, wink to me. But his real message is what? I have no idea...
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 02:37 pm
So, what's the verdict? Women live longer, so men should get a higher return to compensate for less years of benefit?
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 02:56 pm
This has got to be one of the stupidest ideas there are out there. The should be no consideration based on anything onther then you paid into the system or you didn't. If you paid in longer, then you should get more but that is about it.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Mon 24 Jan, 2005 04:41 pm
I guess we finally all agree on something?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Oh This Is Rich
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 10/01/2020 at 07:48:34