A Radical Way to Reduce Unemployment (employees, 401k, profit, jobs)

[JS1]

This really makes no sense trying to guilt people into resigning.

[ColoWeb]

What about getting the best individual to do the job?
You apply and the other individual applies and the employer gets to choose who they think is the best candidate?

If we go down the path of the OP then, since we are on a salary freeze where I work, would it be fair for my employer to reduce my pay because a co-worker has more kids and they need more money? Or should someone's pay raise be revoked because someone else needs the money more?

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by JS1

This really makes no sense trying to guilt people into resigning.

No instead having people work more jobs than they need while millions of others potentially starve to death who could do some of the work is better.

I guess the solution to that problem is the "cull the herd", right? Or a live version of "Logan's Run" (for those who don't know what that is, look it up.....basically a sci-fi book/movie where to solve a situation like today on a far more severe level the government orders all people to die at 30).

[GypsySoul22]

7 Wishes, don't forget Soylent Green. Then everyone would have enough food.

Scary, really.

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by GypsySoul22

7 Wishes, don't forget Soylent Green. Then everyone would have enough food.

Scary, really.

Interestingly, both came out during our then seemingly hopeless mid-70s "stagflation" troubles......

[Leisesturm]

Originally Posted by macroy

uh..ok...

why not take it a step further: smart / efficient people are not allowed to work to their full capacity; this way there will be more work to go around....

Actually... ... I am of the opinion that there will not likely be significantly more work in the coming years for everyone that is being born, immigrating or graduating from baccalaurate and masters programs. Do you want to see an official unemployment rate of 40%? I happen to know a couple of people who are in job sharing programs. One is voluntarily doing so with another new mother. The other is being forced to by her employer who is using the savings to hire more workers. Both examples shortchange the workers. What if, however, with no loss of hourly wage you could work half the hours and therefore have more time for other important details of life? Do you think Ford would have to go under if each and every line worker received the same wage for half the work allowing twice as many people to work the lines? Yes it would find it difficult to pull off without cutting out the bonus payouts and absurd salaries that the Executive Branch receive but of course my idea depends on those issues being fixed. And they need to be. The present path is unsustainable.

H

[JS1]

The post above makes absolutely no sense.

[Leisesturm]

Originally Posted by ColoWeb

What about getting the best individual to do the job?
You apply and the other individual applies and the employer gets to choose who they think is the best candidate?

If we go down the path of the OP then, since we are on a salary freeze where I work, would it be fair for my employer to reduce my pay because a co-worker has more kids and they need more money? Or should someone's pay raise be revoked because someone else needs the money more?

My GF is blind and I am African American. She has a Bachelor's and two Masters, one in Computer Science. I have three advanced IT certifications. We are both certified geniuses. We are routinely courted by the recruiters in our respective fields. Our resume's are sent to HR depts on a regular basis. The first thing HR does is ask about ethnicity and disability if they aren't given. It's not illegal apparently. It should be. I've had three interviews in a year and when the recruiters ask me how the interview went I say "I think it went ok" and they say, "you're not going to get the job. If they had been at all interested in hiring you, you would have come out sweating and shaking like a leaf". The way I see it, jobs should be like car insurance. There should be an assigned risk pool. Employers should be forced to interview candidates behind a screen the way symphony auditions are done. They should hire based on the stated qualifications only. This crap about 'fit' is entirely about patronage. And I'm not totatlly clueless to be fair the employer needs an out as well, but they have one, its called 'Probation'. No one is forced to hire a bad employee and keep them. They should have that 90 days to make a permanent decision. There is simply too much choice out there for someone like myself or my SO to have a chance in the job market the way it stands. It doesn't stop us from trying but it does p*** me off when people who haven't a clue about what it's like to be a marginalized demographic venture opinions on how things are fine the way they are. They are most certainly not.

H

[Leisesturm]

Originally Posted by JS1

The post above makes absolutely no sense.

No less sense than paying one individual $38 million/yr. Only someone who can raise the dead should receive that kind of compensation.

H

[7 Wishes]

Originally Posted by JS1

The post above makes absolutely no sense.

Actually the first half of it did to me. He's saying that like it or not, we are entering a world where there may permanently be far more people than there is work, so we are going to have to eventually find a way to share a little more to survive, or at least to not become a society of constant civil unrest and "survival of the fittest" to the extreme. Again, the wage/hour/overtime laws of today weren't created because FDR thought people were overworked and exploited, but to create jobs while still keeping healthy competition and not having 100% "socialism" because society back then feared a world of permanent unemployment for too many.

And/or that how we pay for this "shortage" is to stop paying executives 8 figure salaries. I certainly think the CEO should be the highest paid employee of the company, but honestly, the ratio of CEO pay to average worker pay is far higher than it's every been.