• Swiss voters reject $25 minimum wage proposal
    39 replies, posted
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27459178[/url] [quote]Swiss voters have rejected a proposal to introduce what would be the highest minimum wage in the world in a referendum, latest results indicate. Under the plan, employers would have had to pay workers a minimum 22 Swiss francs (about $25; £15; 18 euros) an hour. Supporters said the move was necessary for people to live a decent life. But critics argued that it would raise production costs and increase unemployment. Almost 77% of voters opposed the minimum wage proposal, according to almost complete results. Supporters had argued it would "protect equitable pay" but the Swiss Business Federation said it would harm low-paid workers in particular. The issue was the most prominent of several referendums held on Sunday. They also included a controversial plan to buy 22 Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets for the Swiss Air Force. Incomplete results indicated that 54% of voters had rejected that proposal. Latest results also showed that two-thirds of voters backed a plan to impose a lifelong ban against convicted paedophiles working with children.[/quote]
Yeah that's pushing it.
I guess the basic income proposal that they're voting on later this year is probably going down too then
I'm not really sure what the costs of living are in Switzerland, but I do remember everything being pricey as hell when I went there on vacation. Maybe $25 an hour isn't so unreasonable?
[QUOTE=deltasquid;44840602]I'm not really sure what the costs of living are in Switzerland, but I do remember everything being pricey as hell when I went there on vacation. Maybe $25 an hour isn't so unreasonable?[/QUOTE] My experience with visiting places for vacation is, where there are tourists, there are higher prices but where there's only natives, there are lower prices. Plus, different industries have different success in income while a minimum wage that high will affect them each differently where some could take it while others will crumble into bankruptcy.
It isn't, but it would help no one in Switzerland since just about everyone there already makes shit tons of money.
[QUOTE=deltasquid;44840602]I'm not really sure what the costs of living are in Switzerland, but I do remember everything being pricey as hell when I went there on vacation. Maybe $25 an hour isn't so unreasonable?[/QUOTE] Yeah it's really not that huge. Currently only 9% of the population earns less than 22 chf/hour.
[QUOTE=smurfy;44840432]I guess the basic income proposal that they're voting on later this year is probably going down too then[/QUOTE] i think the main reason this didn't go through is because they expect the basic income thing to go through instead, which would arguably be better for everyone
[QUOTE]Latest results also showed that two-thirds of voters backed a plan to impose a lifelong ban against convicted paedophiles working with children.[/QUOTE] I'm more surprised that this was accepted. To those rating dumb, this is a radical and redundant law. We already have measures against this.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;44840724]I'm more surprised that this was accepted.[/QUOTE] What? Why? This is a ban to make sure a pedophile never works with any children after he's been convicted once. I don't think that's overboard.
[QUOTE=Eltro102;44840715]i think the main reason this didn't go through is because they expect the basic income thing to go through instead, which would arguably be better for everyone[/QUOTE] Main reason is because they set the minimum wage really high. I bet if they'd set it to a more reasonable level it would have been accepted.
[QUOTE=Feuver;44840785]What? Why? This is a ban to make sure a pedophile never works with any children after he's been convicted once. I don't think that's overboard.[/QUOTE] Because it's just a feel-good measure that doesn't really do anything useful. Courts can already ban paedophiles from being in contact with children if needed. But now there will be this vague constitutional article which forbids "anyone who has violated the sexual integrity of a child or non-autonomous person" to work with children or non-autonomous persons.
[QUOTE=Doom64hunter;44840724]I'm more surprised that this was accepted.[/QUOTE] I am more surprised there are places that permit pedophiles to work with children
[QUOTE=Kljunas;44842046]Because it's just a feel-good measure that doesn't really do anything useful. Courts can already ban paedophiles from being in contact with children if needed. But now there will be this vague constitutional article which forbids "anyone who has violated the sexual integrity of a child or non-autonomous person" to work with children or non-autonomous persons.[/QUOTE] And thus reducing the chances that these criminals might commit the same crime again? We're talking about weaker people who aren't in the full possibility to defend themselves in case he might attack. I mean, obviously pedophiles can be rehabilitated, but just giving them a job in a children-filled environment is a complete no-go.
[QUOTE=Zambies!;44840407]Yeah that's pushing it.[/QUOTE] Do you realize Switzerland is one of the most expensive places to live at in the world?
[quote]My experience with visiting places for vacation is, where there are tourists, there are higher prices but where there's only natives, there are lower prices. [/quote] It really depends where you go in switzerland, since we don't really have designated tourist regions beside the snowsport villages in the winter you usually pay the same as locals if are in a town. Switzerland is one of the most expensive countries and the wages aren't exactly low either if you compare to bordering nations. Where I live you can earn 5400 - 5700 dollars in an IT Job after you completed a 4 year apprenticeship. A friend of mine even scored his first job at 6700 dollar. [QUOTE=Feuver;44840785]What? Why? This is a ban to make sure a pedophile never works with any children after he's been convicted once. I don't think that's overboard.[/QUOTE] Even the National Council advised against it because it violates the constitutionaly granted proportionality of sentences. Basicly there are measures in place that grant the possibility to ban peoples from this jobs. But because the judge can see the case and prevent a 19 year old who has relationship with a 15 3/4 year old (16 y/o is legal if it is consentual) never beeing able to work with kids again. While I agree that actual pedophiles should not work with children I think this is on the same bullshit level of zero tolerance rules that get students thrown out of schools for little missteps in the US. edit: the new law even triggers with a kiss
Would work better as a citizen's income (Universal Basic Income) but that idea isn't about to catch on either unfortunately.
[QUOTE=Emperor Scorpious II;44840618]My experience with visiting places for vacation is, where there are tourists, there are higher prices but where there's only natives, there are lower prices. Plus, different industries have different success in income while a minimum wage that high will affect them each differently where some could take it while others will crumble into bankruptcy.[/QUOTE] Go to Cancun or Cabo in Mexico and anything you buy will be outrageously expensive. Go anywhere else in Mexico and you could live like a king for a couple thousand dollars.
[QUOTE]They also included a controversial plan to buy 22 Swedish-made Gripen fighter jets for the Swiss Air Force. Incomplete results indicated that 54% of voters had rejected that proposal.[/QUOTE] And as usual we westerners were here to make the right choice and save the day. [t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/LJ3K/Capture.png[/t] I don't know what you guys would do without us.
[QUOTE]Switzerland is one of the most expensive countries and the wages aren't exactly low either if you compare to bordering nations. Where I live you can earn 5400 - 5700 dollars in an IT Job after you completed a 4 year apprenticeship. A friend of mine even scored his first job at 6700 dollar. [/QUOTE] What?! First job 6k greens? Damn it people, why the fuck aren't you buying properties in Argentina?
$25 in Switzerland has the same purchasing power as $14 in the United States. Just food for thought.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;44844283]And as usual we westerners were here to make the right choice and save the day. [t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/LJ3K/Capture.png[/t] I don't know what you guys would do without us.[/QUOTE] I was going to agree, then I saw that they are replacing a fleet of F-5's. That is...not... a good aircraft today. The US bought them, FROM SWITZERLAND, because they have a decent number of air frames with really low hours and now the US uses them as pretend enemies in dog fights during training because F-5E's and F-5F's suck in similar ways to the shit 3rd world nations field in combat. The US keeps a wing roughly the size of the entire F-5 fleet of Switzerland, solely for the purposes of having them pretend to be the enemy. To make matters more insulting, the US fake aggressor F-5N's have better avionics. I'm all for a small military, but jesus, buy F-15's or [I]something[/I]. You can have nearly two for the price of one Gripen, produce them domestically, and they STILL haven't lost a dog fight.
I really like the Swiss direct democracy model.
[QUOTE=GunFox;44847380]I was going to agree, then I saw that they are replacing a fleet of F-5's. That is...not... a good aircraft today. The US bought them, FROM SWITZERLAND, because they have a decent number of air frames with really low hours and now the US uses them as pretend enemies in dog fights during training because F-5E's and F-5F's suck in similar ways to the shit 3rd world nations field in combat. The US keeps a wing roughly the size of the entire F-5 fleet of Switzerland, solely for the purposes of having them pretend to be the enemy. To make matters more insulting, the US fake aggressor F-5N's have better avionics. I'm all for a small military, but jesus, buy F-15's or [I]something[/I]. You can have nearly two for the price of one Gripen, produce them domestically, and they STILL haven't lost a dog fight.[/QUOTE] Yeah but what for? We're a landlocked neutral country and our only neighbours are the EU and Liechtenstein. Who are we going to dogfight with? France, Italy, Germany? Good luck with that. [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethiopian_Airlines_Flight_702"]Not to mention that our air force is a joke and doesn't intervene outside office hours.[/URL]
Gunfox: The area of switzerland is about 41,285 km², the states 9,629,091 km². You even have direct access to two oceans and a fleet of aircraft carriers. The US also had the tendencie to "visit" some exotic places. Switzerland is such a tiny country that an enemy jet could pass through it before our jets even started. We are surrounded by allied countries. Heck we have such a small fleet our first responder pilotes only work during business hours. If you put aside the first and second WW where we just guarded the borders the last armed conflict was 1847 and that was a civil war, catholics vs protestants. If you look at this you probably see that the best time to invade switzerland would be saturday after 6 pm. You would probably be done by sunday for lunch to enjoy some fondue. We could either spend 10 billion on those jets or invest it into something else. [quote]I really like the Swiss direct democracy model. [/quote] IMHO it is the best form of democracy because even if we elect our politicians they can't just do what they want the people can still interfere. But it also has some small downsides. If there is some event that scares people or even someone with a lot of money who puts a lot of ads everywhere to scare people they can still bring the voters to vote on something stupid. But still better than just beeing able to bribe some politicians and fuck over the citizens.
I am glad it got rejected. It would be hard to find a job when only people with a lot of expirience in their job would get a job.
[QUOTE=G3rman;44847424]I really like the Swiss direct democracy model.[/QUOTE] Nah, having everyone vote on all bills requires everyone to be politically sound, is a massive logistics problem, and would be too vulnerable to swings from sudden occurrences (unless a vote by the people could be blocked by an upper house in the legislature, but what would be the point of having direct democracy then). Take a look at share markets - the only people who play it right are experienced investors who know what they are doing. Everyone else, mummy and daddy investors, go in for short term gain, but lack composure and subsequently panic when things start to look bad.
[QUOTE=ctlilc;44847933]Gunfox: The area of switzerland is about 41,285 km², the states 9,629,091 km². You even have direct access to two oceans and a fleet of aircraft carriers. The US also had the tendencie to "visit" some exotic places. Switzerland is such a tiny country that an enemy jet could pass through it before our jets even started. We are surrounded by allied countries. Heck we have such a small fleet our first responder pilotes only work during business hours. If you put aside the first and second WW where we just guarded the borders the last armed conflict was 1847 and that was a civil war, catholics vs protestants. If you look at this you probably see that the best time to invade switzerland would be saturday after 6 pm. You would probably be done by sunday for lunch to enjoy some fondue. We could either spend 10 billion on those jets or invest it into something else. IMHO it is the best form of democracy because even if we elect our politicians they can't just do what they want the people can still interfere. But it also has some small downsides. If there is some event that scares people or even someone with a lot of money who puts a lot of ads everywhere to scare people they can still bring the voters to vote on something stupid. But still better than just beeing able to bribe some politicians and fuck over the citizens.[/QUOTE] You are spending the money to maintain the pilots and equipment for forty useless jets. Buy 10 or 15 useful ones and you'll save money in the long term. Again something you can buy the rights to and produce domestically so the money goes largely back into your economy. Maintaining jets isn't cheap. Why bother maintaining a fleet of jets that are worthless? That seems like a giant waste of money.
[QUOTE=Kljunas;44844283]And as usual we westerners were here to make the right choice and save the day. [t]http://jesusfuck.me/di/LJ3K/Capture.png[/t] I don't know what you guys would do without us.[/QUOTE] youre fuckin up our economy!!!
[QUOTE=Antdawg;44849481]Nah, having everyone vote on all bills requires everyone to be politically sound, is a massive logistics problem, and would be too vulnerable to swings from sudden occurrences (unless a vote by the people could be blocked by an upper house in the legislature, but what would be the point of having direct democracy then). Take a look at share markets - the only people who play it right are experienced investors who know what they are doing. Everyone else, mummy and daddy investors, go in for short term gain, but lack composure and subsequently panic when things start to look bad.[/QUOTE] A) it actually works pretty well and requiring everyone to have at least basic understanding of the political system is a big advantage. B) we don't vote on every single bill. If people are unhappy, they can launch a referendum, which requires them to collect a specific amount of signatures in a certain amount of time. Only if they manage this a public vote will be held.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.