Can someone answer these questions about Obama's speech?

Question

In last night's speech, Obama said the following:

(APPLAUSE)

Now is the time to help families with paid sick days and better family leave, because nobody in America should have to choose between keeping their job and caring for a sick child or an ailing parent.

Now is the time to change our bankruptcy laws, so that your pensions are protected ahead of CEO bonuses, and the time to protect Social Security for future generations.

And now is the time to keep the promise of equal pay for an equal day’s work, because I want my daughters to have the exact same opportunities as your sons.

(APPLAUSE)

1) Didn't Bill Clinton past the Family Leave Act that gave you sick days and guaranteed your job should you have to leave for an extended illness?

2) Didn't Obama's running mate Joe Biden support the current Bankruptcy act that Bush signed? So he and Joe are at odd over this? For the record, Biden's home state famously holds the incorporation papers of large credit card and financial services companies. He obviously knows how his bread is buttered in Delaware, which means a "profile in courage" by 'ol Joe on the bankruptcy bill was out of the question.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jackson-williams/joe-biden-true-friend-of_b_120776.html

3) How is Obama going to "protect Social Security for future generations"? Again, just words in a speech and again no details. To me this means that the FICA tax is going up again. Will the promises to raise taxes ever stop? Also what is wrong with privitizing Social Security? The Public Employee Retirement Service is a private organization and they can pass want they put into it along to their children. If it is good enough for Obama and crew, why can't you and I do this?

4) The equal pay issue. How is he going to do this? Most women that I have worked with make less money not because they don't do equal work, its because she and the husband decided to have children. So she ends up off for a year or two or five before they come back to work. Thus the man who has been working gets raises, while she is taking care of the kids. Anyone care to talk about this?

Answer 1

The facts are that although the law was passed to guarantee family leave time, it is not universally enforced and a lawsuit must be filed by the employee to gain anything from it.  The bankruptcy laws still protect corporations over pension plans and guarantee the "golden parachutes" of failing C.E.O.'s over the severance packages of the actual workers.  The taking time off to have a baby argument has been tossed about for decades, but the facts are that women are still paid less for the same work at the same rank, time off or not.  I must agree that we the people should have the same choice that our politicians have to opt out of the social security system if we want to.  Social Security however was designed to be a trust fund for retiring Americans and as such it should keep that trust with those invested in it and not be looted to make up budget shortfalls.

Answer 2

The bankruptcy part has to do with companies who file bankruptcy and  get out of paying pensions to retired employees, but seem to find the money to pay out their CEO's.

Social Security would be protected by making everyone pay.  That means people making over 100k a year would have to pay.  As it is structured now, you only have to pay Social Security on the first $97k of your income.

I am not even going to address number four with you.  It's obvious you are clueless about what equal pay for equal work means.  Because a woman decides to get married and have children should have no bearing on her pay.  Men get married and have children also, so what is the difference.  Your view is chauvinistic.

*edit*  I never said you were a pig, however you were the one differentiating the difference between the sexes.  I simply pointed out there is no difference really from a man getting married and having a family and a woman.  You chose to make the distinction.  I know of no company that would let someone take "year or two off" and then just come back to work.  Even under FMLA you only have 12 weeks then the employer does not have to hold your job.  So your example is poor.

Answer 3

The Family Medical Leave Act does not provide for paid sick days, only a specific time period where, under certain conditions, one can take leave and not lose their job.  There are many companies and many employees who are exempt and don't have that protection.

Bankruptcy laws recently changed for consumers, not corporations.

Answer 4

Yeah, I found most of his comments naive and condescending to the point of humor. I'm self employed. If I don't work, I don't get paid. For the last five years I've taken, at most, a week's vacation. One year I had none. That's because I have a business to run. And I have a family. We have problems, we deal with them. I'm not living in some magic bubble where nothing bad or unexpected happens. I prepare for and deal with it. I don't ask for or expect the government to do sh*t for me. I moved out of my mommy and daddy's house years ago. Government programs didn't make this country great!  When are the American people going to slip on the big boy pants and return to the self sufficiency, personal responsibility and self reliance that really made this country great?