The Restoring Full Time Work for Atlasia Act (Passed)

[Associate Justice PiT]

Take a bigger swing, Yankee, and let's go back up to the full 40. The right has an overwhelming majority, let's do something about it.

     I propose an amendment:

2. The normal hours of work within a week of full-time employment, before accruing overtime pay, shall be 40 hours.

[Associate Justice PiT]

Take a bigger swing, Yankee, and let's go back up to the full 40. The right has an overwhelming majority, let's do something about it.

     I propose an amendment:

2. The normal hours of work within a week of full-time employment, before accruing overtime pay, shall be 40 hours.

Is that an amendment to what?

     It inserts a new clause into the bill, my apologies. The current clause 2 becomes clause 3.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

I have to object. While I agree the extent to which the old and great Senator of the Midwest TNF pushed the boundaries as far as he could, I have to push for Midwest workers. I will not support a massive wage decrease in respect to work hours, which this bill would do in its current form.

I have seen this so many times with Libertarians before, it shouldn't come as a surprise anymore.

You ran on and are currently running on freeing the economy of the shackles of Atlasian legalism, now is your chance radicals! Looks like the radicals are wussing out, or worse, never had any intentions of keeping their promises to conservatives in the economic arena.

Precisely what the hell do you think a legislative reboot is going to do, Maxy baby?

     The radicals have to square their economic leftism with the fact that the status quo is economic leftism. I guess in Atlasia, just leaving things the same is a pretty radical idea.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Well, bold moves don't always work. That's why we call them bold.

[Associate Justice PiT]

But rolling back 32 to 40 after this bill was already enacted will make things a lot worse off.

     Eh, that is supposition. Given the fact that unemployment has remained largely unchanged, there is little concrete reason to believe that the law being repealed had any actual impact on employment numbers.

[Associate Justice PiT]

But rolling back 32 to 40 after this bill was already enacted will make things a lot worse off.

     Eh, that is supposition. Given the fact that unemployment has remained largely unchanged, there is little concrete reason to believe that the law being repealed had any actual impact on employment numbers.

There are many other reasons our unemployment has largely unchanged, due to a lack of stability in our regional governments, excessive deficit hounding, and not enough support for our armed services. I think that attempting to make a stark reverse course not only limits the number of people potentially able to work, but significantly affects stability, seeing as this is a major workplace policy.

     Are you the GM? Or do you just enjoy speaking as if you have the facts?

[Associate Justice PiT]

But rolling back 32 to 40 after this bill was already enacted will make things a lot worse off.

     Eh, that is supposition. Given the fact that unemployment has remained largely unchanged, there is little concrete reason to believe that the law being repealed had any actual impact on employment numbers.

There are many other reasons our unemployment has largely unchanged, due to a lack of stability in our regional governments, excessive deficit hounding, and not enough support for our armed services. I think that attempting to make a stark reverse course not only limits the number of people potentially able to work, but significantly affects stability, seeing as this is a major workplace policy.

     Are you the GM? Or do you just enjoy speaking as if you have the facts?

Isn't this supposed to be a debate? You are arguing that removing this bill has no effect. I'm trying to argue of other potential factors for our stable level of terrible employment numbers. If this turns to a whole LOL THERE'S NO GM YOU CAN'T DEBATE then what's the point of the amendment, the senate, or even the whole game? Why are we even putting up bills? because we think they'll have an effect.

     The potential factors you talk about don't even make sense. The Senate deficit hounding? Seriously? I'm not even sure we're talking about the same country at this point.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Generally speaking, I agree that surpluses are unnecessary; we should aim to run close to even since a surplus equates to wasteful taxation. It's just odd to blame deficit hawks for this given the historical political leanings of Atlasia.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

That logic didn't do much to reduce unemployment when your distinguished traitor of a predecessor rolled it back to 32 hours late last year.

     Yeah, there is little empirical evidence for lowering the full-time bar increasing employment. It is far clearer that it would hurt those Atlasians who already work by forcing them to work fewer hours under higher stress.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Aye

This should be 2016 instead of 2015.

     I was thinking that too. Can we ask for a re-redraft?

[Associate Justice PiT]

     Let's just finish with this and push through a new bill amending it to be 2016 as quickly as we can.