no jobs!
O-PGManager
Are we running out of work?
The amount of laborers it takes to make the products so we can feed,
clothe, shelter, educate, and entertain ourselves has been on a steep
decline for a long time. Machines and computers replace jobs at a way
faster rate than they create new ones.
On top of that - many hundreds of millions of newly skilled and educated
workers in Asia are competing for the few jobs that remain.
In theory, this should be a good thing. On the aggregate there is more
time for culture, entertainment, family, spreading goodwill around the
world. 20 hour work weeks? 6 month work years?
But in practice it seems to be a very bad thing - the economic prosperity
brought about by the efficiency gains (and cheap exported labor) are going
into fewer hands - an increasingly gigantic underclass of unemployed is
emerging - either scraping by on government benefits, or not scraping by
at all. The people fortunate enough to have the few jobs there are are
being squeezed tighter than ever - their negotiating position is destroyed
by the legions of qualified unemployed who would jump to take their place.
First of all, does anyone disagree with this trend? Second of all, what
do we do?
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
--------
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com
johnny_t
> Second of all, what do we do?
Prostitution. There is not too much of it.
--
If she circumcised her first child and he died
and a second one also died
she must not circumcise her third child
Babylonian Talmud
Rabbi Judah haNasi, redactor of the Mishneh
RGP Loner
We have lost millions of jobs, and they aren't coming back. So in effect
we as a population will have to share jobs or settle for part time or
seasonal employment. This will create the 20 hr . work week, and or the
six months employment you refer to.
So I do agree with the trend.
As to what we do,,, We pass(ed) health care reform so people don't lose it
when mom or dad gets sick.
We extend unemployment to levels 4 times what was once considered normal.
These 99 weekers will learn how to do without without the social upheaval
getting out of hand.
The US citizen WILL learn to do with less and must adapt to the new
economic reality.
The World economy as we knew it is Broken and beyond repair. Therefore
we will adopt a new currency, the Amero, and we will forge a new economic
and political order. The North American Alliance. Canada , Mexico and
the US. It will come to pass sooner than you know .
"The world can therefore seize the opportunity [Persian Gulf crisis] to
fulfill the long-held promise of a New World Order where diverse nations
are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of
mankind."
George Herbert Walker Bush
"In the next century, nations as we know it will be obsolete; all states
will recognize a single, global authority. National sovereignty wasn't
such a great idea after all."
Strobe Talbot, President Clintons Deputy Secretary of State
"We shall have world government whether or not you like it, by conquest or
consent."
Statement by Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member James Warburg to
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 17th, l950
"The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined
by those who are not behind the scenes."
Benjamin Disraeli, first Prime Minister of England
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAaQNACwaLw&feature=channel
Watch first 2 Min.
*************************************************
-----
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
John the Savage
> Totally non-political, big picture civilization question:
>
> Are we running out of work?
>
> The amount of laborers it takes to make the products so we can feed,
> clothe, shelter, educate, and entertain ourselves has been on a steep
> decline for a long time. Machines and computers replace jobs at a way
> faster rate than they create new ones.
>
We are a "service economy" now. The more people there are, the more
servicing there is to do. I don't think lack of work is a significant
part of the problem our civilization faces in the "big picture".
As long as there is cheap energy, and a resource base (land, food, raw
materials for iPods) on which the economy can grow, we are golden.
Luckily for us all of those things are available in unlimited quantities.
number6
> Totally non-political, big picture civilization question:
>
> Are we running out of work?
>
> The amount of laborers it takes to make the products so we can feed,
> clothe, shelter, educate, and entertain ourselves has been on a steep
> decline for a long time. Machines and computers replace jobs at a way
> faster rate than they create new ones.
>
I don't believe that is the problem ... The problem is that we don't
produce anything anymore ... Auto plants ... steel plants ... smelters
to make metals ... shoes ... it goes on and on ... take you pick
mostly or all gone ... Even when a printer circuit board boom made
many jobs here ... one by one they closed and moved to cheaper
production areas as sales and price competition grew too heavy ...
We've moved too far into a service sector/public worker sector
economy ... the problem with that is that produces no tangible goods
for sale ...
Like someone digging a hole for another to fill ... at least we could
be selling dirt ...
MrBookworm
> do we do?
We make sure that the unemployed and the underemployed are not incented to
stay that way. We also incent them to innovate and create things and
businesses that can employ them and others.
In the long term, this should be a good thing.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_destruction
"Creative destruction can cause temporary economic distress. Layoffs of
workers with obsolete working skills can be one price of new innovations
valued by consumers. Though a continually innovating economy generates new
opportunities for workers to participate in more creative and productive
enterprises (provided they can acquire the necessary skills), creative
destruction can cause severe hardship in the short term, and in the long
term for those who cannot acquire the skills and work experience.
However, some believe that in the long-term society as a whole (including
the descendants of those that experienced short-term hardship) enjoys a
rise in overall quality of life due to the accumulation of innovation -
for example, 90% of Americans were farmers in 1790, while 2.6% of
Americans were farmers in 1990[9]. Over those 200 years farm jobs were
destroyed by exponential productivity gains in agricultural technology and
replaced by jobs in new industries. Present day farmers and non-farmers
alike enjoy much more prosperous lifestyles than their counterparts in
1790."
Dean
--
"I am a troll." - Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
______________________________________________________________________
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com
O-PGManager
> We are a "service economy" now. The more people there are, the more
> servicing there is to do.
Yes, but even these jobs are increasingly replaced by technology.
The technology trajectory seems to be one that reduces the need for jobs.
As an example, the travel agent industry - gone, replaced by software. At
the same time, the labor force is growing faster than ever.
It seems to me lack of work could be a real issue. This SHOULD be a good
thing.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
____________________________________________________________________
O-PGManager
> > First of all, does anyone disagree with this trend? Second of all, what
> > do we do?
>
> We make sure that the unemployed and the underemployed are not incented to
> stay that way. We also incent them to innovate and create things and
> businesses that can employ them and others.
A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
benefits people would find jobs.
>
> In the long term, this should be a good thing.
I know the theory. I'm concerned its not working out that way.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
----
BillB
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:fis7l7x...@recgroups.com...
> A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
> benefits people would find jobs.
Many would, albeit at a much lower rate of pay. There's no shortage of work
to be done out there...what is in short supply is people willing to do it
for the price someone would be willing to pay. There's no question that
unemployment benefits create a disincentive to work, just as there's no
question that more money for any given job increases the incentive to do
that job.
Dave the Clueless
The manufacturing jobs to which you refer all got driven out of the US by
environmental and other regulations which made it unprofitable if not
impossible to make those items here.
---
MrBookworm
> benefits people would find jobs.
Some would find jobs, probably for less than what they wanted to earn.
More importantly, others would create jobs.
>
> I know the theory. I'm concerned its not working out that way.
That has always been the concern. However, over the long term we get more
and more productive and improve our standard of living even with short
periods of distress. Think back 100 years, then 200 years, then 300 years,
etc. In 100 years the standard of living will be substantially better than
today.
Dean
--
"I am a troll." - Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
---
johnny_t
>> A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
>> benefits people would find jobs.
>
> Some would find jobs, probably for less than what they wanted to earn.
> More importantly, others would create jobs.
>
>>
>> I know the theory. I'm concerned its not working out that way.
>
> That has always been the concern. However, over the long term we get more
> and more productive and improve our standard of living even with short
> periods of distress. Think back 100 years, then 200 years, then 300 years,
> etc. In 100 years the standard of living will be substantially better than
> today.
>
> Dean
Is America better suited with me wasting away my days sitting here on
the Internet?
Because my spouse is a high earner. Between Medicare, SSN, declining
tax benefits due to wealth and being in the top income tax bracket, I
have to pay >50% on the first dollar that I make as income. If I have a
job where I have to leave my home, I have to make $24 bucks an hour just
to break even on job generated costs and child care. This is before I
earn 1 dollar for me and family. Just 1 EXTRA Dollar.
This really can't be right can it?
BillB
"johnny_t" <nobo...@home.com> wrote in message
news:4c814b0a$0$1468$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
> Is America better suited with me wasting away my days sitting here on the
> Internet?
>
> Because my spouse is a high earner. Between Medicare, SSN, declining tax
> benefits due to wealth and being in the top income tax bracket, I have to
> pay >50% on the first dollar that I make as income. If I have a job where
> I have to leave my home, I have to make $24 bucks an hour just to break
> even on job generated costs and child care. This is before I earn 1
> dollar for me and family. Just 1 EXTRA Dollar.
>
> This really can't be right can it?
No, it can't. Get some advice from an accountant.
ChrisRobin
> The manufacturing jobs to which you refer all got driven out of the US by
> environmental and other regulations which made it unprofitable if not
> impossible to make those items here.
Damn environmental standards. If only we could be more like, say... China!
(Of course your statement is largely a misrepresentation of reality. Labor
costs are a much bigger factor than environmental regulations).
________________________________________________________________________
O-PGManager
> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:fis7l7x...@recgroups.com...
>
> > A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
> > benefits people would find jobs.
>
> Many would, albeit at a much lower rate of pay. There's no shortage of work
> to be done out there...
That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
--------
BillB
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
What's simply wrong? Everything I said is econ 101.
Not sure what you mean by there's a shortage at all levels.
susan
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> On Sep 3 2010 2:39 PM, BillB wrote:
>
>> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:fis7l7x...@recgroups.com...
>>
>> > A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
>> > benefits people would find jobs.
>>
>> Many would, albeit at a much lower rate of pay. There's no shortage of
>> work
>> to be done out there...
>
> That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
>
> Opie-GManager
> Rec.Gambling.Poker
> Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
>
there is not a MickeyDs or numerous other places around here that do not
have a hiring sign in the window.
johnny_t
> No, it can't. Get some advice from an accountant.
How can it not be right?
MrBookworm
> the Internet?
>
> Because my spouse is a high earner. Between Medicare, SSN, declining
> tax benefits due to wealth and being in the top income tax bracket, I
> have to pay >50% on the first dollar that I make as income. If I have a
> job where I have to leave my home, I have to make $24 bucks an hour just
> to break even on job generated costs and child care. This is before I
> earn 1 dollar for me and family. Just 1 EXTRA Dollar.
>
> This really can't be right can it?
Not really sure WTF this has to do with our discussion. You have other
choices besides wasting your life on the internet or working.
Dean
--
"I am a troll." - Paul Popinjay 3/16/2009
______________________________________________________________________
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com
BillB
> How can it not be right?
I am not qualified, licensed, or insured to give you personal tax advice.
However, the advice I did offer was good. Talk to an accountant. I am
certain she will offer you some helpful tax strategies, should you ever be
so silly to abandon your house-husband lifestyle.
Steam
> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:4m28l7x...@recgroups.com...
> > On Sep 3 2010 2:39 PM, BillB wrote:
> >
> >> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> >> news:fis7l7x...@recgroups.com...
> >>
> >> > A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
> >> > benefits people would find jobs.
> >>
> >> Many would, albeit at a much lower rate of pay. There's no shortage of
> >> work
> >> to be done out there...
> >
> > That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
> >
> > Opie-GManager
> > Rec.Gambling.Poker
> > Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
> >
>
> there is not a MickeyDs or numerous other places around here that do not
> have a hiring sign in the window.
Then "around here" must not be California.
______________________________________________________________________
Howard Beale
advance of technology w/ comments like 'It's not that computers will
eventually be smarter than us, it's that they will be trillions of times
smarter' and 'Hopefully the computers will want to keep us as pets' and
'Technology has become an evolutionary leap forward', etc.
Someday fairly soon the machines will be able to replace us all and we
will certainly interface w/ them. Combined w/ advances in robotics I
can't think of a single thing they can't do. Literature? Scan the
greatest works for the themes and reproduce them in the style of the
greatest authors ever. Music? Same thing. Medicine? A robot replaced
Luke Skywalker's hand. We won't even need cab drivers.
Personally I have a very dim view and expect a bloodbath this century that
I am glad I won't live to see.
Howard Beale
-----
susan
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:3358l7x...@recgroups.com...
> On Sep 3 2010 1:17 PM, susan wrote:
>
>> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>> news:4m28l7x...@recgroups.com...
>> > On Sep 3 2010 2:39 PM, BillB wrote:
>> >
>> >> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>> >> news:fis7l7x...@recgroups.com...
>> >>
>> >> > A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed
>> >> > UE
>> >> > benefits people would find jobs.
>> >>
>> >> Many would, albeit at a much lower rate of pay. There's no shortage of
>> >> work
>> >> to be done out there...
>> >
>> > That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
>> >
>> > Opie-GManager
>> > Rec.Gambling.Poker
>> > Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
>> >
>>
>> there is not a MickeyDs or numerous other places around here that do not
>> have a hiring sign in the window.
>
> Then "around here" must not be California.
>
>
Tennesee - however my particular town is at 18% unemployment. We have had
an opening for over a month in our pizzeria, have hired and fired at least 3
people in that time frame - no call, no shows etc etc
susan
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
Just went to my email and found this
10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem
Imagine a no-holds-barred "summit" that comes up with ideas to solve both
our job and environmental problems. What might it come up with?
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/03-4
johnny_t
> Just went to my email and found this
>
> 10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem
>
> Imagine a no-holds-barred "summit" that comes up with ideas to solve both
> our job and environmental problems. What might it come up with?
>
> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/03-4
Government sponsored weatherization programs.
O-PGManager
> Just went to my email and found this
>
> 10 Ways to Solve the Jobs Problem
>
> Imagine a no-holds-barred "summit" that comes up with ideas to solve both
> our job and environmental problems. What might it come up with?
>
> http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/09/03-4
Careful Susan, you're starting posting links and talking like a big
government liberal!
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
______________________________________________________________________
O-PGManager
There is a shortage of jobs.
Yes, many of the unemployed could take Susan's advice and go find work at
McDonalds - at which point there would become a shortage of McDonalds jobs.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
____________________________________________________________________
Steam
I believe you. I also know that the local Mcdonalds has hired new people
and lost or fired some other people also, I can't argue that nobody is
hiring anybody, but the lack of help wanted signs is very conspicuous in
this recession arund here for a very long time now. You used to just see
a whole lot of them just driving down teh street, but not for a very long
time now.
-----
susan
"Steam" <a74...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
having lived for a long time in CA I have a lot of the newspapers
bookmarked I just checked the OCRegister, and the NorthCountyTimes and no
longer can you just view the classifeds online = you have to register and go
through Monster or something. sux
BillB
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> On Sep 3 2010 4:12 PM, BillB wrote:
> There is a shortage of jobs.
You mean there is a shortage of jobs at the current price of labor. Labor is
a resource. As the price decreases, demand increases. Would you hire someone
to detail your car for you (i.e. create a job) if he was competent and would
work for $1 an hour? Sure you would. $40 an hour? Not so much.
> Yes, many of the unemployed could take Susan's advice and go find work at
> McDonalds - at which point there would become a shortage of McDonalds
> jobs.
There's lots of work to be done. Go to your local lumber yard and tell them
you'll work your ass off cleaning up the yard for $3/hr. They'll create a
job for you. Do really believe if everyone was cut off unemployment they'd
just roll over and starve? Nope, ain't gonna happen in a wealthy,
diversified, modern economy. Like any good businessperson, they would simply
have a major sale on their product (their labor).
By the way, once all those McDonald's (and lumber yard) jobs fill up, new
jobs will be created by the demand created from the new incomes. That's how
it's supposed to work anyway.
When the US embraced the global economy it was basically saying "our workers
can compete with your workers." Welcome to the brave new world of global
competition. You are now competing with people who are willing to pull 12
hour shifts to bring home 10 bucks. Great for consumers (people with money).
Not so great for paycheck to paycheck workers, which unfortunately describes
a large portion of the so-called "middle class" in the US. Look how wages
have remained stagnant as productivity has continued to increase. The
departure started in the mid-70's and the gap has been widening ever since.
During the same period, the capitalist class has enjoyed incredible gains in
wealth. I don't see that trend changing anytime soon.
bub
wrote:
>Tennesee - however my particular town is at 18% unemployment. We have had
>an opening for over a month in our pizzeria, have hired and fired at least 3
>people in that time frame - no call, no shows etc etc
i have talked to a few contractors around here and they have plenty of
people willing to work but for cash only so they can still get the
unemployment. i suppose unemployment and tax free cash isn't too bad
for some people
O-PGManager
> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> news:dk88l7x...@recgroups.com...
> > On Sep 3 2010 4:12 PM, BillB wrote:
>
> > There is a shortage of jobs.
>
> You mean there is a shortage of jobs at the current price of labor.
Yes, that's what I meant. If I could hire personal servants for 1$ a
month I would create lots of jobs. More so - the price of labor has been
dropping, and there's still a shortage. A big one.
> Do really believe if everyone was cut off unemployment they'd
> just roll over and starve?
No, they'd do their best not to starve. Things would get very ugly.
People nudged out of their minimum wage jobs by the competition from all
the new laborers might lead to some people starving. You're about 300th
on my list of RGPers who I'd guess would advocate such a thing.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
____________________________________________________________________
Jerry Sturdivant
Drop the workweek to 34 hours. Cut all two-worker household benefits.
Required vacations (like France). No multiple time for voluntary overtime.
Four day workweeks.
As the economy and pay improved, we went from single worker households with
single living rooms, single phone, single car, single garage, single phone,
single TV, to; double or triple everything. (How many cars, garages, living
rooms do you have?) Government backed benefits for two-worker households
removed. Childcare benefits removed. (Stay home and raise your own kids).
Stop supporting single-person transportation improvements. *
* The easier and quicker it is for you to travel long distances, the further
you'll live from the city. Downtowns deteriorate. You burn more gas.
Non-productive time driving. Bigger cities (more costs).
Extreme finance reform. Something like: Politicians may not accept money,
benefits or future jobs (including 'being on the board of directors) from
any corporation for 4-years after they're in office. All income and
financial records open to the public. Any war you start, you must be on the
front lines for 90-days. If it's worth starting a war, it's worth dying for.
Make me Head Dictator in Charge (with 007 status).
Jerry (I can fix anything) 'n Vegas
BillB
"O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>You're about 300th
> on my list of RGPers who I'd guess would advocate such a thing.
I'm not really advocating anything except workers coming to grips with the
new realities, for their own good! I'm not happy with the state of affairs,
but sticking your head in the sand isn't going to help in the long run.
Labor has gone down in value, at least temporarily. Telling people, "don't
worry about it, we'll just print money and send it to you" is obviously not
a economically sound long-term solution. In fact, it's an economic disaster
waiting to happen. The longer people stay unemployed, the more devalued the
price of their already devalued labor becomes. The more money you give
people on unemployment, and the longer you let them collect it, the longer
the average duration of unemployment will become. It really isn't helping.
So, I do feel for people who lost their $25/hr jobs. I even feel for the
auto workers who have lost their $50/hr jobs. At the same time, I also feel
it's time for a reality check. If you embrace a free market economy, you
have to accept that the price of labor will fluctuate like any commodity.
Nobody is going to starve, or have to do manual labor for $3 (at least not
in the very near future), but concessions will have to be made if you want
to get back to near full employment in the next five years. Extending
unemployment benefits in perpetuity only delays the inevitable, at a higher
end cost than would have otherwise accrued.
O-PGManager
> Telling people, "don't
> worry about it, we'll just print money and send it to you" is obviously not
> a economically sound long-term solution. In fact, it's an economic disaster
> waiting to happen.
Really? What disaster would that be?
Everyone being plunged back into labor market to work for crumbs?
Funny how your disaster is the same as your solution.
I can't believe you are peddling this "the solution to unemployment is
cutting of UE benefits" right wing bullshit.
I mean, sure, it's technically correct, but the point of employment isn't
for employments sake, its for higher qualities of life. Your solution
would bring about a lot of suffering, a lot of life quality dropping, but
sure, it'd help the UE rate.
Far better to let them keep their standard of living higher by socializing
the fruits of the more productive labor of those still employed and hope
some industries can come along that put people back to work.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
________________________________________________________________________
Pepe Papon
<frac...@comcast.net> wrote:
>On Sep 3 2010 1:58 PM, number6 wrote:
>
>> On Sep 3, 12:49 pm, "O-PGManager" <ad63...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>> > Totally non-political, big picture civilization question:
>> >
>> > Are we running out of work?
>> >
>> > The amount of laborers it takes to make the products so we can feed,
>> > clothe, shelter, educate, and entertain ourselves has been on a steep
>> > decline for a long time. Machines and computers replace jobs at a way
>> > faster rate than they create new ones.
>> >
>>
>> I don't believe that is the problem ... The problem is that we don't
>> produce anything anymore ... Auto plants ... steel plants ... smelters
>> to make metals ... shoes ... it goes on and on ... take you pick
>> mostly or all gone ... Even when a printer circuit board boom made
>> many jobs here ... one by one they closed and moved to cheaper
>> production areas as sales and price competition grew too heavy ...
>> We've moved too far into a service sector/public worker sector
>> economy ... the problem with that is that produces no tangible goods
>> for sale ...
>> Like someone digging a hole for another to fill ... at least we could
>> be selling dirt ...
>
>The manufacturing jobs to which you refer all got driven out of the US by
>environmental and other regulations which made it unprofitable if not
>impossible to make those items here.
No, they got driven out of the US by the free trade agreements that
allow employers to circumbent our worker safety, minimum wage, and
environmental regulations.
Pepe Papon
<ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
>On Sep 3 2010 1:20 PM, MrBookworm wrote:
>
>> > First of all, does anyone disagree with this trend? Second of all, what
>> > do we do?
>>
>> We make sure that the unemployed and the underemployed are not incented to
>> stay that way. We also incent them to innovate and create things and
>> businesses that can employ them and others.
>
>A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
>benefits people would find jobs.
Not only that, they'd magically become creative and innovative.
Travel A
On 9/3/10 9:49 AM, O-PGManager wrote:
"Second of all, what do we do?"
I wrote:
Vote Democrats out of filibuster-proof power in November for one thing.
When businesses and consumers feel safe from any more Obama, radical
government takeovers, regulations, taxes and bogus "stimulus"plans that
are just left wing financing for socialist apparatus, the "jobs"
situation will greatly improve
There's $1.8 trillion being hoarded from the economy by buinesses and
consumers' spending because they're afraid of what Obama and the
socialist, Democrat congress will go next.
da pickle
>>A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed UE
>>benefits people would find jobs.
>
> Not only that, they'd magically become creative and innovative.
This discussion has taken a strange direction and strange bedfellows have
started bunking together.
Opie starts an interesting thread, but eventually seems to believe that
preventing any suffering and keeping people in the life styles that they
have run up is more important than getting back to work and perhaps reaping
the sorry that over-spending inevitably results.
Opie is calling BillB a purveyor of "right wing bullshit," even if it is
"technically correct."
And you, Seth, are in agreement with BillB and agree that more extensions of
unemployment benefits might not be such a great idea. (No one is saying we
should "axe" all UE benefits, that is just silly.)
This has been a strange thread so far ... but very interesting. Capitalism
rules!
Beldin the Sorcerer
"Pepe Papon" <hitme...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:111486t7vd3o7kqnn...@4ax.com...
Well, here's the problem (and it's a big one)
We don't want highly educated people digging ditches or spreading asphalt.
So we don't impliment mandatory employment in public works.
We also realize that changing this makes it much harder for these people to
go on job interviews once the economy improves.
OTOH, loads of people don't like paying people to sit home and watch porn on
the internet.
I offered a solution once. I don't think people would go for it yet, but it
IS a much cheaper solution
Beldin the Sorcerer
That's false.
Let's leave aside bipartisan support for Nafta, the claim is false.
Manufacturing is in decline, for the most part, because people don't want to
work in factories.
Most of the ones still IN the US have the poorest educated, often barely
capable of english. There are exceptions (Auto industry) but most people
don't WANT that kind of job.
We DON'T need 90 people to feed 100 any mor, we need less than one (3 per
1000) . We don't need 60 people to provide the other goods for us. This
largely leaves services and entertainment. (and new goods, but they tend to
eliminate old goods)
Jerry Sturdivant
"Beldin the Sorcerer" <Beld...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:i5ti12$7ul$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
I can get paid for that? I'm qualified and experienced. Where do I apply?
Jerry (with a left-hand mouse) 'n Vegas
x
news:agl8l7x...@recgroups.com:
> Far better to let them keep their standard of living higher by
> socializing the fruits of the more productive labor of those still
> employed and hope some industries can come along that put people back
> to work.
If we must take from the employed to give to the long-term unemployed, we
should do it with education. Instead of just paying cash benefits, the
benefits should be mostly for continuing education, and should be
conditional on effort being put in towards success in that education.
Education is what they need, to be able to get a new job in a new industry,
to replace the old job in the obsolete industry that left them unemployed.
Education for the average person should be vocational, in the sense that
it's mostly job training for jobs in new industries or industries that are
hiring and can't find enough skilled workers.
risky biz
The one jewel in this thread is your second paragraph which contains one
horribly bad sentence. Troll English.
---
Dave the Clueless
You said it much better than I did. I by no means am in favor of
pollution, and I like our environmental regs. I just wish we would make
anyone who wants to export to us adhere to the same standards.
------
da pickle
>> This has been a strange thread so far ... but very interesting.
>> Capitalism
>> rules!
>
> The one jewel in this thread is your second paragraph which contains one
> horribly bad sentence. Troll English.
Sorry, risky, I will be more careful next time.
johnny_t
> I wrote:
> Vote Democrats out of filibuster-proof power in November for one thing.
That won't happen.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"susan" <hotd...@charter.net> wrote in message
news:eJcgo.11923$IH1...@newsfe18.iad...
>
> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>> On Sep 3 2010 2:39 PM, BillB wrote:
>>
>>> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
>>>
>>> > A few specifics please? You seem to be hinting that if we just axed
>>> > UE
>>> > benefits people would find jobs.
>>>
>>> work
>>> to be done out there...
>>
>> That's simply wrong. There is a shortage, at all levels.
>>
>> Rec.Gambling.Poker
>> Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
>>
>
> have a hiring sign in the window.
Question :
If you're mortgage payment is $1100 a month, can you work for $6.50 an hour?
Especially if you have two kids?
~M~
> Question :
> If you're mortgage payment is $1100 a month, can you work for $6.50 an
> hour? Especially if you have two kids?
Answer: If you are not qualified to earn more than $6.50 an hour, you should
not have two kids, or a mortgage.
--
"An idealist is one who, on noticing that a rose smells better than a
cabbage, concludes that it will also make better soup."
- H.L. Mencken
Beldin the Sorcerer
"~M~" <~M~@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:mN6dnaqBiOa2lR7R...@giganews.com...
> "Beldin the Sorcerer" <Beld...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:i5uvqh$ds2$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Question :
>> If you're mortgage payment is $1100 a month, can you work for $6.50 an
>> hour? Especially if you have two kids?
>
> Answer: If you are not qualified to earn more than $6.50 an hour, you
> should not have two kids, or a mortgage.
>
Now actually think a minute
This thread is about "job openings" at McDonalds and at a pizza place and
similar types, while the unemployment rate is very high.
Some people have wondered why that is.
There are loads of people collecting unemployment benefits based on earnings
of $3500 a month (to pick a number out of the air) that have expenses that
could not conceivable be met by taking a job in fast food.
They are fully qualified for the job they formerly held, they have just been
laid off and are currently collecting unemployment, perhaps with
supplimental support because they have children.
It's not a matter of their qualifications, it's a matter of the job openings
being extremely out of sync with the income requirements and qualifications
of the collecting people.
Now, I would have thought this was extremely obvious from my post and the
thread, which is why normally I'd call you an imbecile or something. Maybe
I've just been incorrectly assuming people actually read the posts they're
replying to
Steam
Yes, that is the real issue going on here, maybe a lot of 7 dollar an hour
jobs, but people very qualified for jobs paying many times that amount
with enormous expenses, those types of jobs have become incredibly scarce.
Of course it would be naive to think the governament will guarantee that
you can earn whatever income you have become used to or need for your
expenses, but it is a very real problem which is not solved by delivering
pizza or working at mcdonalds.
____________________________________________________________________
popinjay999
>
> No, they got driven out of the US by the free trade agreements that
> allow employers to circumbent our worker safety, minimum wage, and
> environmental regulations.
BUT CLINTON! BUT CLINTON!
popinjay999
> On Sep 4 2010 8:20 PM, Beldin the Sorcerer wrote:
>
>
> > They are fully qualified for the job they formerly held,
>
> but it is a very real problem which is not solved by delivering
> pizza or working at mcdonalds.
>
Or stocking shelves at Best Buy.
Beldin the Sorcerer
"popinjay999" <paulpo...@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:68d606be-93bd-4735...@v35g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
***
Is that what you do now?
~M~
> Stop.
> Now actually think a minute
>
> This thread is about "job openings" at McDonalds and at a pizza place and
> similar types, while the unemployment rate is very high.
No it isn't. The original post lamented the amount of jobs available and
needed to support the American economy. Not that OP is reasonable by any
stretch, but no one expects the employment burden to be carried by McDonalds
and pizza places. Neither technology nor oursourcing are replacing jobs at
McDonalds or pizza places.
> Some people have wondered why that is.
>
> There are loads of people collecting unemployment benefits based on
> earnings of $3500 a month (to pick a number out of the air) that have
> expenses that could not conceivable be met by taking a job in fast food.
This may come as a shock to you, but fast food workers generally do not have
mortgages. Jobs in fast food are normally held by people who depend on
others for their needs, like you. This thread, nor the unemployment crisis,
is not about people like you that have no marketable skills.
> Now, I would have thought this was extremely obvious from my post and the
> thread, which is why normally I'd call you an imbecile or something. Maybe
> I've just been incorrectly assuming people actually read the posts they're
> replying to
I read the post I replied to. It was written by an idiot.
--
"I am firmly of the opinion that if I make it to 50 in good health, I'll
make it to 100. And if I make it to 100, technology will get me to 200."
-Beldin the Sorcerer, 10/28/2007
Beldin the Sorcerer
> "Beldin the Sorcerer" <Beld...@verizon.net> wrote in message
> news:i5v299$dbd$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Stop.
>> Now actually think a minute
>>
>> This thread is about "job openings" at McDonalds and at a pizza place and
>> similar types, while the unemployment rate is very high.
>
> No it isn't.
Yes it is.
That's what Susan was writing about .
The original post lamented the amount of jobs available and
> needed to support the American economy. Not that OP is reasonable by any
> stretch, but no one expects the employment burden to be carried by
> McDonalds and pizza places. Neither technology nor oursourcing are
> replacing jobs at McDonalds or pizza places.
See "thread drift"
Your comment about debt load was a reference to my post about not being able
to take the jobs available
>
>
>> Some people have wondered why that is.
>>
>> There are loads of people collecting unemployment benefits based on
>> earnings of $3500 a month (to pick a number out of the air) that have
>> expenses that could not conceivable be met by taking a job in fast food.
>
> This may come as a shock to you, but fast food workers generally do not
> have mortgages. Jobs in fast food are normally held by people who depend
> on others for their needs, like you. This thread, nor the unemployment
> crisis, is not about people like you that have no marketable skills.
Wow, sir.
In addition to being unable to read, or think, your memory is failing.
I made 60k last year.
I have marketable skills.
And I'm not unemployed
AND, amazingly, if I got laid off, I'd be better off taking the unemployment
than working at Mickey-D's too.
Did you consider actually thinking before posting, or is that contrary to
the Randroid mantra?
>
>> Now, I would have thought this was extremely obvious from my post and the
>> thread, which is why normally I'd call you an imbecile or something.
>> Maybe I've just been incorrectly assuming people actually read the posts
>> they're replying to
>
> I read the post I replied to. It was written by an idiot.
A) You obviously didn't.
B) Your skill at determining whom is an idiot is, apparently, set in reverse
Travel A
I wrote:
Vote Democrats out of filibuster-proof power in November for one thing.
Johnny t blithered:
That won't happen.
I wrote:
You mean that it won't happen in your mind. That's a big difference from
reality.
Pepe Papon
<frac...@comcast.net> wrote:
Exactly. Fair trade as opposed to free trade.
Pepe Papon
Yep. That was one of the two disastrous moves by Clinton. The other
was the Telecommunications Act of 1996.
Oh, wait. Glass-Steagall was repealed under Clinton, wasn't it? That
makes three.
Of course, the Repulbican Congress shares the blame for all of those,
but Bill championed NAFTA and signed the other two bills into law.
Pepe Papon
>"Beldin the Sorcerer" <Beld...@verizon.net> wrote in message
>news:i5uvqh$ds2$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
>> Question :
>> If you're mortgage payment is $1100 a month, can you work for $6.50 an
>> hour? Especially if you have two kids?
>
>Answer: If you are not qualified to earn more than $6.50 an hour, you should
>not have two kids, or a mortgage.
Bad answer. Suppose you're highly qualified, but your job was just
shipped overseas or your employer went out of business. Then what?
Pepe Papon
Refresh my memory. Someone here once proposed that everyone,
regardless of income, be guaranteed enough money to pay for basic
needs, and that anything above that must be earned. Was that you/
I remember thinking that it was quite an elegant solution to a
complicated problem, but that, politically, the odds of it ever being
adopted are about 1 to infinity.
Beldin the Sorcerer
No
I don't set salaries.
I proposed ending unemployment, but providing free food and shelter for the
unemployed, as well as training in other areas.
I don't want to give people money, I want to give them access to the
services and goods themselves. It's got less waste, and there's just a hint
of social stigma to motivate people to get off the dole.
That's the real problem a lot of people upset at those collecting have.
Susan is too proud to collect. Now I think that's a poor attitude; it's
insurance, and you collect on the policy when you need to, but to get people
off of it, there needs to be a little social encouragement. It's harder
today, because the government makes it harder to see who's on them.
The same is true of foodstamps. I don't want anyone going hungry. Absolutely
we should help those who need it. But those with temporary needs ought to
feel a little social push to get off them. Renaming them SNAP benefits,
using an EBT card, making it much less obvious that you're on assistance,
lessens the social stigma.
Keep people from slipping through the cracks, while encouraging them to get
off the dole. It's a hard thing to do, and often one of those two goals gets
stressed, and the other doesn't
>
> I remember thinking that it was quite an elegant solution to a
> complicated problem, but that, politically, the odds of it ever being
> adopted are about 1 to infinity.
Anything involving giving things away is pretty much nil
Unless lobbyists are involved, of course
Beldin the Sorcerer
You obviously are qualified. You used to earn $3500 a month, which
conveniently got snipped.
The point is obvious : while there ARE jobs available, they are not the
RIGHT jobs, and while the guy could obviously do the work anyway, they can't
pay their bills.
A method around this (also politically unrealistic) is to cap unemployment
payouts, not weeks. Anyone taking a job paying less than unemployment
benefits would be gets to collect benefits for the difference PLUS (say)
10%, and can collect until their 'account' empties (Hey Alim, I'm not
talking about an actual account, that's a metaphor, ok?)
Someone who normally could collect benefits for 6 months gets a job at
Subway paying $300 a week, and collects half what the benefits would be, for
a maximum of a year. His employer's UI rates go up the same either way.
Congress wants to extend, they increase the 'account size'.
Yes, it's more paperwork
It does encourage people to work
susan
"Beldin the Sorcerer" <Beld...@verizon.net> wrote in message
news:i5uvqh$ds2$1...@news.eternal-september.org...
>
No - can you survive sitting on your ass and collecting unemployment?
Beldin the Sorcerer
Temporarily.
That IS what unemployment insurance is for
>
>
susan
no argument - TEMPORARILY is the key word. - like in your $6.50 and hour
question.
I do think your suggestion of a cap on $$ amounts as opposed to long term
dragemout benefits makes sense.
Beldin the Sorcerer
The point there is that they can't survive at all at that level.
They're better off collecting and trying to sell the house, say.
Yes, the system as set up is a bit nutty. It IS a government system
>
> I do think your suggestion of a cap on $$ amounts as opposed to long term
> dragemout benefits makes sense.
It would provide incentive to work, assuming there was even a slight benefit
to working over collecting,and it would provide a homeowner a longer period
to get out of the house and into something cheaper
Of course, since it makes sense and is reasonable, it'll neber happen
>
>
K9way
i grew up in a town with a Tappans , Westinghouse, Steel mill, GM plant,
tire plant
all gone
______________________________________________________________________
BillB
"K9way" <ad1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
news:4rjcl7x...@recgroups.com...
> we dont make anything any more
>
> i grew up in a town with a Tappans , Westinghouse, Steel mill, GM plant,
> tire plant
>
> all gone
Look on the bright side...there's a lot more Starbucks!
number6
There is huge difference between protecting the environment and EPA
environmental regulations ...
Here's a good one ... A plant in a local city has a limit of 0.45 ppm
Zinc in their effluent ... based on EPA regulations ... The water
supply must add 1.00 ppm Zinc to the water supplied to the people also
based on EPA regulations ... Both not only justifiable but actually
written into the law ...
Consumers dump millions of gallons a day down the sewer at 1 ppm
zinc ... The zinc the water authority was forced to add ... The plant
would dump 10,000 gallons at 0.75 ppm and get fined for destroying the
environment (quote from a local environmental activist)
Nowhere in the law establishing the EPA is the phrase "common sense
must be used" present ...
Howard Beale
Prob not in that town.
HB
________________________________________________________________________
* kill-files, watch-lists, favorites, and more.. www.recgroups.com
Dave the Clueless
Clinton and Bush both whored for NAFTA, so you know it was both stupid and
evil.
---
~M~
news:7in686pc0a0pv8pnn...@4ax.com...
> Bad answer. Suppose you're highly qualified, but your job was just
> shipped overseas or your employer went out of business. Then what?
Hope that the unions follow the jobs overseas, making it too expensive to
employ people there, forcing the jobs back to the US.
--
"Unionism seldom, if ever, uses such power as it has to insure better work;
almost always it devotes a large part of that power to safeguarding bad
work."
- H. L. Mencken
Pepe Papon
NAFTA started with Bush Sr. Clinton shocked liberals by taking that
ball and running with it.
da pickle
> NAFTA started with Bush Sr. Clinton shocked liberals by taking that
> ball and running with it.
Seth, your ability to keep the faith of the party line is admirable.
K9way
> On Sep 5 2010 7:22 AM, BillB wrote:
>
> > "K9way" <ad1...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in message
> > news:4rjcl7x...@recgroups.com...
> > > we dont make anything any more
> > >
> > > i grew up in a town with a Tappans , Westinghouse, Steel mill, GM plant,
> > > tire plant
> > >
> > > all gone
> >
> > Look on the bright side...there's a lot more Starbucks!
>
>
> Prob not in that town.
>
>
> HB
tru dat .. one coffee shop just off the square ..
do you have a telephone number or a social security number or an address
or a ....
Alim's answer: None of those track my every move
____________________________________________________________________
Beldin the Sorcerer
"da pickle" <jcpickels@(nospam)hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:yr-dnbMPGu6...@giganews.com...
>
>
O-PGManager
> "O-PGManager" <ad6...@webnntp.invalid> wrote in
> news:agl8l7x...@recgroups.com:
>
> > Far better to let them keep their standard of living higher by
> > socializing the fruits of the more productive labor of those still
> > employed and hope some industries can come along that put people back
> > to work.
>
> If we must take from the employed to give to the long-term unemployed, we
> should do it with education. Instead of just paying cash benefits, the
> benefits should be mostly for continuing education, and should be
> conditional on effort being put in towards success in that education.
> Education is what they need, to be able to get a new job in a new industry,
> to replace the old job in the obsolete industry that left them unemployed.
> Education for the average person should be vocational, in the sense that
> it's mostly job training for jobs in new industries or industries that are
> hiring and can't find enough skilled workers.
Good thought.
Opie-GManager
Rec.Gambling.Poker
Assistant Newsgroup Coordinator reporting to Mr. Popinjay
-----
Pepe Papon
WTF are you talking about?