Employers should be mandated to hire X percentage of work force by age groups (wages, middle east)
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.
Ok, we could break this down by age groups, let's say 16 to 25, 26 to 35, 36 to 45, 46 to 55, 56 to 65, and 66 to 75. That is six groups and therefore 16% of each group should be hired. This would make things fair and ensure a chance for all in the workplace. Additionally, diversity is touted as this wonderful thing so what better way to bring together the young and the old to both learn and pass down skills?
Who agrees with me? If I were running things, it's how things would be done. No more age discrimination allowed and quotas to be filled.
Thoughts?
The last thing this country needs is more involvement in business by a government that can't even run itself.
Life isn't fair. Life is about being the best person for the job. All this screaming about "fairness" is a bunch of folks that are too unqualified and lazy to do a good job, and think this will even the playing field.
If you want to start a business and hire that way, go right ahead.
Just what I want - a hospital hiring the same number of unqualified and inexperienced 16-24, and 66-75 year olds to tend to me.
It doesn't have to be this way. Why should you get rich off of someone else breaking their back?
You just don't understand business, do you? You think, like most liberals, that being successful is nothing but good luck.
People that are successful in business are hard working, make smart decisions, take the time to learn their business, and invest their own money in that business. Then you liberals think that it was all done by magic, and expect them to hand over the fruits of their labor to someone that just works for them?
Ok, well, I am sure you could afford to share some of the wealth, no? After all, you're not out there busting your butt I am quite sure. And does it stroke your ego to "be the boss?"
As I'm sure you can afford to share your's. Didn't you say you owned your home free and clear? Well, I'm looking to buy one. Will you pay half my mortgage? It would only be fair. After all, you have equity in your home and don't. Or does it stroke YOUR ego to "own your home free and clear"?
How do you know he's not out there busting their butt? How dare you.
The basic problem with the economy these days is not enough jobs, pretty much in all age groups. But I could just see the Chicago Bears having to have 65 year old kickers beating the Packers' 65 yr old defensive tackles.
The basic problem with the economy these days is not enough jobs, pretty much in all age groups. But I could just see the Chicago Bears having to have 65 year old kickers beating the Packers' 65 yr old defensive tackles.
There's plenty of jobs. That's not the issue. I don't understand why people go around saying that there aren'y enough jobs.
The issue is that there are no longer jobs where there used to be and also because there's a disconnect between desired and aquired skills. While factory jobs in the midwest are down, risk management jobs in NYC are significantly up and there's not enough people to fill them.
On of the obvious issues with the OPs suggestion (among others) is that there's not an equal distribution of all age groups. There are far more baby boomers than younger and older people. It doesn't make sense for them to have equal distribution in the work place.
Honestly, whenever I go to business venture meetings, most of the people there are in their 50s and 60s. Many retired from their fulltime jobs but now managing businesses. I believe this is the course of progression as you age. Just like you would expect to see more 25 year olds working behind a bar, you're can expect to see the 50+ age group outside the workplace doing business deals. Next time you go to a country club or golf range, take a look to see who's around discussing business.
Ok, we could break this down by age groups, let's say 16 to 25, 26 to 35, 36 to 45, 46 to 55, 56 to 65, and 66 to 75. That is six groups and therefore 16% of each group should be hired. This would make things fair and ensure a chance for all in the workplace. Additionally, diversity is touted as this wonderful thing so what better way to bring together the young and the old to both learn and pass down skills?
Who agrees with me? If I were running things, it's how things would be done. No more age discrimination allowed and quotas to be filled.
Thoughts?
I am against quotas but can see an issue with age discrimination since they keep raising the retirement age on SS. More and more people will be required to work longer but where they will be able to find work might become an issue. Discrimination due to age is difficult to prove even though it is currently against the rules.
Casper
Driller and other business owners should not have to "share the wealth". That concept is just ridiculous. I'm sure they worked hard to get to where they are and now the OP wants gov't to step in and tell them who they need to hire and such?
This is one of the stupidest threads with a delusional message.
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.
