Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It's obvious to me that the ridiculous list of job qualifications for a $20 an hour temp job was designed by an HR employee to comply with some sort of regulation or policy saying they had to advertise for the job when they had already filled it through a back channel (referral or internal promotion).
1)Toxic living is good for you?! So apparently, these are a waste of time in the land of the extremists:
CAA (Clean Air Act)
FDA (Food and Drug Administration)
MSHA (Mine Safety and Health Act)
TSCA (Toxic Substances and Control Act)
WPCA (Water Pollution Control Act)
Nice to know. I'll just go off and enjoy my clean air and drinking water, non-toxic food, and so on. Ah, but that's right... in corporate-shill land, big business will do all this on their own, despite the fact it costs them money and that if they were interested in taking care of these issues, the laws and regulations wouldn't have been needed.
2) It's okay to have 2nd class citizens?! Also, if any minorities or veterans think the extremist, far-right party is right for them, remember that these are also apparently a waste of time and money:
CRA (Civil Rights Act of 1964)
VEVRRA (Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act)
3) A few cases of abuse = shut it all down!? So, because some lawsuits are bad, we should get rid of them all, get rid of regulations, etc. Based on that "logic," if one corporation screws up, they should all be shut down, banned, and put in prison or some nonsense. Get a grip - abuses of the system does mean the whole system is totally flawed. How about some constructive suggestions vs. the usual "get rid of all government and let everyone do whatever they want because anarchy has worked so well in the past."
Whoosh! The point is not that all regulations are bad, but rather that there are unintended consequences, such as with the ADA where reasonable accommodations must be made for the disabled yada yada. The result is that rather than hire disabled people and risk lawsuits or fines, employers avoid hiring them. Of course, most companies deny that this is the policy, and mostly they do try to hire disabled, but the disincentive is built into the laws now, unfortunately, and it almost definitely affects hiring.
Similarly, the clumsy attempts to control illegal immigration by fining employers has resulted in a reluctance to hire anyone with a Spanish accent--smaller companies simply can't afford the extensive background checks they have to make to verify the documentation, which even if they do, and the person is still illegal, the company can get fined.
Of course we need pollution controls, but we need to also recognize the price we pay every time we enact a strict law like that.
2) It's okay to have 2nd class citizens?! Also, if any minorities or veterans think the extremist, far-right party is right for them, remember that these are also apparently a waste of time and money:
CRA (Civil Rights Act of 1964)
VEVRRA (Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act)
What are you talking about? The republicans paved the way for the civil rights movement, and pushed through the civil rights act. Martin Luther King was a proud republican. And which "far right party" are you talking about anyways? They are both basically the same thing, and the results are the same no matter who you vote for. America circles the toilet bowl.
What are you talking about? The republicans paved the way for the civil rights movement, and pushed through the civil rights act. Martin Luther King was a proud republican. And which "far right party" are you talking about anyways? They are both basically the same thing, and the results are the same no matter who you vote for. America circles the toilet bowl.
And yet a modern supporter of the far-right considers the Civil Rights Act a waste of effort.
I'm fully aware of history.
I'm also fully aware that today's Republican party bears no resemblance to the one that passed the Civil Rights Act... no such bill would be supported today by the current crew in that manifestation of the party.
I'm also fully aware that today's Republican party bears no resemblance to the one that passed the Civil Rights Act... no such bill would be supported today by the current crew in that manifestation of the party.
100% true. I hate it when people try to draw that comparison between what was and what is today. They are two completely different brands.
Whoosh! The point is not that all regulations are bad, but rather that there are unintended consequences, such as with the ADA where reasonable accommodations must be made for the disabled yada yada. The result is that rather than hire disabled people and risk lawsuits or fines, employers avoid hiring them. Of course, most companies deny that this is the policy, and mostly they do try to hire disabled, but the disincentive is built into the laws now, unfortunately, and it almost definitely affects hiring.
Similarly, the clumsy attempts to control illegal immigration by fining employers has resulted in a reluctance to hire anyone with a Spanish accent--smaller companies simply can't afford the extensive background checks they have to make to verify the documentation, which even if they do, and the person is still illegal, the company can get fined.
Of course we need pollution controls, but we need to also recognize the price we pay every time we enact a strict law like that.
Sorry if this violates some gospel-like beliefs.
Maybe if businesses actually followed the law, they wouldn't have to pay such fines and such. For example, how about checking to see if you're hiring an illegal vs. just hiring the cheapest people around. They seem to have no problems doing insanely complete background investigations on US citizens... but looking the other way when it comes to cheap labor saves them money, so they hire the illegals and then play dumb and whine about the fines.
Nobody is denying that there's a cost associated with regulation, but nobody who likes to live in an advanced society can seriously look at the costs and ask, "Gee, maybe it's okay to NOT have clean air since that'll lower the cost."
With regard to "fat-cats lording over the people," care to explain how "Government is evil and out of control" and thus must be stopped, but when big business does the EXACT SAME THING and in fact typically buys up the government and rewrites the laws in their favor (vs. in favor of the citizens), it's suddenly okay and we should all spend more time worrying about the terrible "cost" associated with clean air vs. demanding the same level of accountability from them that we'd demand from anybody in power? Why does big business, which is at least as powerful as government, get a free pass?
Last edited by Rambler123; 12-04-2013 at 08:37 PM..
In all due respect yes those are regulations but does anyone honestly think that they'll find less regulations in the market today?
Europe easily has more regulations than the USA
China is easily increasing regulations as we speak. There's already talk about medical care and old age pensions (medicare and social security). We can argue about who copied who but this is the direction they are taking.
Ok so where to now? Brazil? You mean the place with no political parties so no one is predictible while in office?
Russia? You mean a place with no war water ports for trade outside of Sochi?
India? again the regulations have increased significantly and will continue to do so
Like it or not but development often times comes in tangent with some forms of regulations.
Let's not forget also that many regulations are actually protections like patents, trademarks, servicemarks and copyrights. Go ahead and abolish those in the name of regulation and see how long various industries last. Of course there is also what is called civil lawsuits in which that companies sue each other ALL the time. If you remove the government from this how exactly would organization rectify things peacefull if that? Yeah people can blog and complain but social media can sometimes be ignored.
Some ramble about government not be responsible with it's money but that's a bit of a red herring. Most of corporate america is not open with its records so it cannot assure anyone that they were not cooking the books until Sarbanes Oxley in 2002. Furthermore who bailed who out again? Banks cannot complain about regulations because they were bailed out. If someone doesn't know where to put their money they put it in a bank. Now if a bank doesn't know where to put its money.... same with GM given the bailouts and cash for clunkers.
As for the political party discussion civil rights and Vietnam caused shifts in the political spectrum. At one point we had conservative democrats and liberal republicans then it flipped. There might be some old dixiecrats left but not that many. Parties change. Sometimes to win over a base, sometimes to win an election and sometimes to keep up with the times.
Whoosh! The point is not that all regulations are bad, but rather that there are unintended consequences, such as with the ADA where reasonable accommodations must be made for the disabled yada yada. The result is that rather than hire disabled people and risk lawsuits or fines, employers avoid hiring them. Of course, most companies deny that this is the policy, and mostly they do try to hire disabled, but the disincentive is built into the laws now, unfortunately, and it almost definitely affects hiring.
Similarly, the clumsy attempts to control illegal immigration by fining employers has resulted in a reluctance to hire anyone with a Spanish accent--smaller companies simply can't afford the extensive background checks they have to make to verify the documentation, which even if they do, and the person is still illegal, the company can get fined.
Of course we need pollution controls, but we need to also recognize the price we pay every time we enact a strict law like that.
Sorry if this violates some gospel-like beliefs.
Would you rather have people with disabilities working or living off your tax dollars though? I have aspergers and I've been on SSI. I choose NOT to be on it because I want to work. I'm not perfect, far from it, never considered myself to be. Even if the laws weren't there you would still have the same issue. When I worked retail I was on foot for at least 7 hours a day and I toughed it out. I don't really expect accomodations, but I do expect to be treated with respect if I'm respectful. I'm human just like you, I'm not an object like the staffing companies think you (and I) are.
You do realize, that there is a tax credit in place for hiring the disabled right? Especially if a person was on food stamps or SSI. So there IS an incentive to hire but apparently not many are aware.
Of course we need pollution controls, but we need to also recognize the price we pay every time we enact a strict law like that.
Sorry if this violates some gospel-like beliefs.
How about the price we pay if we DON'T?
You know...between 1992 (beginning with Danielle) and 2013 (ending with Andrea) - a span of 21 years, there were 15 hurricanes/tropical storms/tropical depressions which affected my current home state of Pennsylvania (and they seem to be an annual event here now, Irene, Sandy, Andrea in consecutive years, 2011-2013...also had Lee in 2011, same year as Irene, I might add.)
Prior to Danielle, the last hurricane/tropical storm/tropical depression to affect Pennsylvania was
Tropical Depression Nine, in 1987...and prior to that, Tropical Storm David in 1979.
To go back in history from 1987 - to find 15 storms that have affected Pennsylvania...you have to go back to October 24, 1923.
The upshot of this is...from 1923-1987 a span of 64 years we had as many hurricanes as we have had now in the last 21.
This means Pennsylvania is being affected by hurricanes/tropical storms/tropical depressions at a rate THREE TIMES HIGHER THAN HISTORICAL AVERAGES IN THE LAST TWENTY-ONE YEARS.
I do not believe this is an accident. I DO believe that man-made global climate change is responsible. How much more evidence do we need, before we start doing something?
Or is corporate profit more important to you than having a habitable planet to leave to your children?
Would you like to propose some other reason WHY Pennsylvania is experiencing hurricanes/tropical storms/tropical depressions at a rate three times it's historical average over the most recent two decades?
With regard to "fat-cats lording over the people," care to explain how "Government is evil and out of control" and thus must be stopped, but when big business does the EXACT SAME THING and in fact typically buys up the government and rewrites the laws in their favor (vs. in favor of the citizens), it's suddenly okay and we should all spend more time worrying about the terrible "cost" associated with clean air vs. demanding the same level of accountability from them that we'd demand from anybody in power? Why does big business, which is at least as powerful as government, get a free pass?
Indeed. I, too, would like an answer to that bolded question.
And note that it is BIG business that gets all the breaks. Little businesses like mine...we're on our own.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
