“Hmmm....feeling a little threatened? A little insecure about your own sexuality? For your information, the vast majority of gay people want to do what you suggest -- live their own lives without folks like you stigmatizing them and denying them the same basic rights as any heterosexual person.”
“Really? and how would you know what a company in a country that has maternity leave would do? How much experience do you have with that?
Let me tell you my experience -- two kids, two mat leaves with different companies. One small family run business (less than 50 employees) and one large corporation (more than 5,000 employees). BOTH companies backfilled my position while I was gone. I was guarantee a job back when I returned.
Hiring to backfill positions where the worker is gone for six or twelve months is EXACTLY what companies do.”
“My apologies if I misunderstood. But I'd disagree on your point about those days never coming back. Everything is cyclical and there's been a shift since this last election cycle. The people need to find creative ways to have their voices heard.
BTW, Canada didn't start off at one year maternity leave. My friend's moms had six weeks - by the time I had kids it was six months - by the time my sister in law had kids it had moved to one year. You've gotta start somewhere - even if you start with the six weeks - paid AND with a job return guarantee!”
Malcontent21 on Feb 4, 2013 at 20:33:09
“Believe me those days are over the middle class is in decline, the entire global economy has reached debt saturation. The days of working at the same company for 30 plus years with pensions and enough to retire on are gone.”
“It's actually worse on co-workers if there is no paid maternity/parental leave. A company will make co-workers take extra hours, take on more work and work harder if they only have to cover off a few weeks until the mother comes back. If they are off for a more reasonable extended timeframe, they will hire replacement workers to replace that person.”
Growup2290 on Feb 4, 2013 at 19:40:08
“BS!! NO ONE hires temps at all NO ONE. Those days are gone.”
“"Malcontent" is an apropos pen-name. This is why America is suffering on so many different fronts - the steadfast refusal to admit that another country might just have a better idea, a newer concept, a better way of doing things.
Supporting maternal/parental leave works because it stabilizes the workforce. The parent doesn't have to worry about losing a job and getting another one simply to raise a family (which produces the next generation of the workforce). The company hires someone to fill in so there is little loss of productivity. The replacement worker gets work,pay,experience they may not have been able to get before.
If it didn't benefit the economy and society in so many different ways, don't you think the rest of the world would have ditched the idea by now. Oops, I forgot, we're all so much stupider than the US - we obviously don't get it *sarcasm* (in case you missed it)”
Malcontent21 on Feb 4, 2013 at 19:46:24
“You misunderstand me I agree with you we should have paid maternity leave but that's not the reality of America. Corporations don't want to accommodate the labor force anymore those days are over and they're never coming back.”
“How old is that chart? It shows Canada at 119 days of paid maternity leave, but with a mix of maternity leave and paid parental leave, you can be off work for almost a year. But then perhaps the parental leave is part of extended benefits. It's been a while since I had mat leave I can't remember the details. Can anyone else from Canada comment?
Sorry US friends, but the rest of the world has never understood how the country that touts its "family values" the most, and says its the bedrock and framework of American society is also the one country that consistently fails to support the family at the most basic levels.”
Scooterish on Feb 5, 2013 at 15:29:29
“I'm in Canada. I had a full year off work, but I also took the father's leave, too. 1 year is divided between parent, if I remember correctly. Easy enough to look up, I guess.”
User011 on Feb 5, 2013 at 11:16:03
“Same with Germany. You get 98 days at 100% (like is mentioned in the chart), but after the 98 days is up, you get the next 12 months paid at 66% (and 2 months for the father too), and your job is kept for you for up to 3 years.”
annyp on Feb 5, 2013 at 02:07:16
“You get a year off and you apply for Unemployment Insurance.”
RespectKids EnjoyFuture on Feb 4, 2013 at 19:44:48
“Thanks. Most of us who get it know that we could be a much better country than we are, in countless ways, are sorry as well. I really wish we would follow better examples like your country, Canada is great, I envy you guys often.”
Daly on Feb 4, 2013 at 18:38:20
“can you recommend any universities in Canada for international (USA) students”
belladio on Feb 4, 2013 at 18:36:53
“Those of us who live here don't understand it either. Only thing I can conclude by it is that we're a nation of absurdly irrational hypocrites.”
lissy0625 on Feb 4, 2013 at 18:27:53
“I believe Austria gives 2 years of paid maternity leave and will have a job for the mother when she returns to work. Sad that we are so far behind here.”
“I think the point of the comment was that the primary process is not the ONLY democratic process you could use to pick a nominee.
In the parliamentary system, the leader of the party with the most elected members becomes Prime Minister. If you want a say in who that leader is, you need to be more involved politically as the party delegates choose the leader.
No system is perfect. But the extended length of the primary season alone is enough for me to vote to get rid of it. It takes almost two years to go through the entire system of primaries and then the final election - ridiculous!”
Jan 31, 2013 at 15:09:52
Canada British Columbia
“You know, if I wasn't so opposed to censorship, I'd be tempted to flag your insulting/offensive comments.
But since I won't do that, just continue to be under the mistaken impression that you'll never be on the receiving end of such hatred. That is, assuming your ethnicity is as pure as the driven snow, which I doubt...”
Jan 31, 2013 at 15:06:21
Canada British Columbia
“There are no "severe medical issues" solely attributable to being a mult-racial or multi-ethnic child. My two Asian/Caucasian kids have the immune systems of tanks - thank you very much.
This article just highlights the very real problem of realizing that there is a new(er) segment of the population that could be disadvantaged with respect to their treatment unless other multi-racial people realize their donations are needed.”
“Lots of young kids her age have short lived relationships - really it's just dating, but I guess they consider it a "relationship". so she's not that different from most. But T Swifty's problem is that everything has to be SO public and SO "I'll love him forever" so quickly. And then writes songs about it so it never goes away.”
aschiavo611 on Jan 17, 2013 at 19:44:35
“She doesn't make it public, the media does. And no one is forced to listen to her songs, they elect to voluntarily. Also, it's not as if every other female singer doesn't recite similar subject matter.”
Dec 21, 2012 at 18:27:38
“I am SO looking forward to this movie - I hope I'm not setting myself up to be disappointed! My daughter says every time a Les Mis commercial comes on tv I'm acting like she does when One Direction is on. LOL”
“More guns just begets more gun violence. So let's say we arm the teachers, or provide armed guards. Who says one of them doesn't snap one day? Who decides that they are a "good guy" and deserving of a gun to tote around my kids?
I'm sorry but I'm not willing to let my kids go to a school where I'm asked to blindly believe that the person holding a gun that could decimate an entire classroom isn't going to lose his temper that day.”
“And where did most of those gang members get their guns? Most are stolen from law abiding citizens then resold on the black market. Less guns in the hands of everybody, means less guns in the hands of criminals.
Given the prevalence of guns in the US (300 million or so - G*d help us), even with new laws, it will take significant time to see a decrease in violence but if it doesn't start now, it will never happen.”
Adam Kazan on Dec 20, 2012 at 16:47:32
“that's it: 300 million guns in circulation now means there is no rational measure of a "significant timeframe" for eliminating them (not in this century or the next). This means that any gun control laws will not put a dent in gun violence. Unlike Japan and England and other former kingdoms where they never had many guns anyway. It is a sad but true reality, and restricting gun access by those Americans who respect the law favors those who ignore it.”
“You can argue crime statistics all day long, but Piers Morgan didn't say Britain had less violence. There is less 'gun' violence in England, and Canada, and Australia and all the other civilized nations that have gun control laws.
And btw, gun control doesn't mean "banning" guns. It simply means a set of laws that will insure guns are held by (hopefully) responsible owners and that they aren't as easily available to the mentally unstable.”
Adam Kazan on Dec 20, 2012 at 14:46:06
“But there is an important distinction to be made: Other countries never had gun rights (or Constitutions) early on. So now America has 300 million guns. I agree this is why there is nominally more gun violence in the USA. But with as many guns as there are people in a society, strict gun control affects lawful owners 100% (because by definition these folks do not break laws), but it affects criminals Zero.”
Adam Kazan on Dec 20, 2012 at 14:42:08
“That's right, gun control isn't about banning guns as much as having better controls so that lawful owners can be safer and less affected in their Constitutional rights than criminals (many of whom deal in a thriving underground). Piers' rant was probably understandable, given that his culture is distinct from that of Americans. Yet he could have found common ground with his guest be guiding the interview toward the question of a school Principle, not all teachers, trained and certified for handling firearms as airline pilots are. They may have agreed on this. Regardless, maybe Piers wouldn't have lost his cool and screamed insults at this fellow.”
“This stupid argument about the "good guys" having guns to protect themselves b/c the bad guys have them goes both ways. You don't think the bad guys carry guns b/c they don't know if their potential victims might be armed as well? Gun violence begets gun violence, I don't care who's carrying the weapon.
Many civilized countries have gun violence, but it's at a significantly lower rate than the US b/c of gun control (not "gun banning") laws. Most of the gun deaths in the US are not perpetrated by criminals on victims. The gun deaths result from accidents, sudden anger (and a gun is easily available as a weapon) and misunderstandings (homeowner thinking there is a burglar in the house when it is a family member).”
Adam Kazan on Dec 20, 2012 at 15:00:10
“In Los Angeles, with 120,000 gangmembers, we would disagree with your remark that "most of the gun deaths are not perpetrated by criminals on victims..." and that they "... result (mostly) from accidents, sudden anger and misunderstandings."”
“Totally disagree. People who commit mass random murder has totally de-personalized their victims. Guns play right into this and are the perfect weapon since the killer doesn't have to get close to their victims.
Any other kind of weapon necessitates close contact and the chance that the victims humanity may stop the killer from completing what he plans to do.
PS. That fast death you assume you get from a gunshot is only real on TV. Many times the wounds are horrificly painful and victims bleed to death slowly.”
“I'm curious to see what an inquiry into the hospital's practices will show. I find it hard to imagine that someone would commit suicide solely because of this prank. No matter how wrong headed or stupid it was it was fundamentally harmless. Perhaps there is a history of bullying or abuse of this nurse by her co-workers or perhaps she was on a performance plan at work and thought she might be disciplined. She may have felt that falling prey to this prank would have just increased what she was already dealing with and may have just been the one small thing to tip her over into making a horrific decision.”
trish224466 on Dec 14, 2012 at 17:49:41
“I've been wondering the same thing. I have a hard time believing that the administrators didn't come down on her like a ton of bricks. No doubt she already had problems and this pushed her over the edge.”
Carol Yothers on Dec 14, 2012 at 17:47:37
“That's some very good figuring - Just think how jealous her co-workers very well may have been - mix in the other factors - prank call was a perfect little push.”
abbadabba on Dec 14, 2012 at 16:36:34
“It was a violation of the Data Protection Act. It was criminal and not at all harmeless. Look at the consequences. The collateral damage is vast.”