Jacob~AnimeLover~Long

I have to disagree with some things xueli. First " Employers slashing hours isn't exactly something that falls under the scope of the government. That's up to the companies to decide. The government can't dictate to companies that they cannot cut their workers' hours because then some people will claim they're overstepping their bounds. It's a no win situation." With respect I take issue with this and perhapsI mmisunderstand something, if so please say so. Slashing hours is up to the companies to decide but in this case it is only occurring because government intervention raised the cost of having full time employees and lowered the standard of what defines a full time employee. Slashing hours was a predictable consequence of these actions and thus shouldn't have been in the healthcare bill. You can hardly blame a company for trying to maintain the normal profit margins it is use to and even if you do you should at least know this was likely to happen. Second "I've been looking at the reports from the Bureau of Labor and it seems more like the opposite in that it's showing jobs gain instead of losses with employers giving the same amount of hours as a year ago. Also it seems like the number of people who work part time that would rather work full time is also lower than a year ago as well." I take issue with this because the issue I am talking about just happened and shouldn't have any numbers to attribute to it yet. Also those numbers are easily manipulated. A scandal came out that shows the employment numbers were manipulated and incorrect leading up to the last election. Also a mmuch bigger reason that I say this is that those numbers are based on what you define as unemployed, underemployed, ect...... So you literally can not trust those numbers. You must know exactly how they define those categories. Third Kohls was just an example, I am sure there will be plenty more popping up soon. It has yet to be actually put in place. I respect that you did research and had an informed opinion. Honestly it is only because my own personal unique experiences that I know about the manipulation of employment numbers, though many had suspected it for years.

How much do you believe money change the outcome of a race? I actually have personal experience with this issue. No doubt money can be thrown at a race and no matter what that will benefit someone. The degree that it will benefit someone depends on how the money is spent. I ran a race for Dubuque city council last year in a town of over 50,000 people. I was outspent by a large margin. Here is a link to the campaign disclosure report. Clicking a name will download their report. My name is Jacob Long Opponets name is Joyce Connors https://webapp.iecdb.iowa.gov/PublicView/?d=county%2fDubuque%2fCity_Candidate Click on the latest reports I managed to receive 40% of the vote while being out raised over 20 to 1 and out spent about 30 to 1 Feel free to ask questions. Basically money isn't everything at a local level race in a medium size town. What are your general thoughts on money in politics?