AISD Money Issues (Austin, Burnet, Llano: day care, school districts, college)

[sinking]

Originally Posted by jobert

You wanna see those jobs taken? Then cut unemployment benefits. Pretty freaking simple. 2 years unemployed and people pleading for another two years of benefits? That's not "helping someone get back on their feet", that's a structural problem that benefits can't fix.

If unemployed people weren't allowed to vote, benefits would be cut tomorrow.

I hate how the rep system requires me to spread reps around. Just go ahead and add one mentally.

[jobert]

Originally Posted by sinking

I hate how the rep system requires me to spread reps around. Just go ahead and add one mentally.

Imagine you are the private sector boss (90%+ of whom are Republicans) who signs the checks. You have to choose between two accountants to hire; both unemployed for 3 years as accountants, except one of the applicants worked an $8/hour job to makes ends meet while looking for a 50K accountant position - the other applicant didn't, and instead accepted 3 years of tax-payer funded benefits.

Rhetorical question: Who do you think the boss is going to hire? How do these two behaviors reflect on the individual?

The people who take unemployment for 3-4 years are going to have to explain that on their resume. There is talk of "unemployable" people and structural unemployment as a new reality.. the long-term unemployed have the perception that their skills are "rusty" but I think the truth is that hardship brings out people's true character, and the long-term unemployed people's willingness to take 3 years worth of government handouts is what speaks the loudest.

[sinking]

Originally Posted by jobert

Imagine you are the private sector boss (90%+ of whom are Republicans) who signs the checks. You have to choose between two accountants to hire; both unemployed for 3 years as accountants, except one of the applicants worked an $8/hour job to makes ends meet while looking for a 50K accountant position - the other applicant didn't, and instead accepted 3 years of tax-payer funded benefits.

Rhetorical question: Who do you think the boss is going to hire? How do these two behaviors reflect on the individual?

The people who take unemployment for 3-4 years are going to have to explain that on their resume. There is talk of "unemployable" people and structural unemployment as a new reality.. the long-term unemployed have the perception that their skills are "rusty" but I think the truth is that hardship brings out people's true character, and the long-term unemployed people's willingness to take 3 years worth of government handouts is what speaks the loudest.

I'm not sure if you were trying to convince me but I was saying I agree with you. If you were just expanding on what you said then I agree with what you just said, too.

[hoffdano]

If no one will do farm work for $8 per hour, then wages should rise enough to get people to work. Of course unemployment should not be so lucrative to keep people "on the sofa" so to speak.

If wages rise, then the farmer's expenses rise - which makes food more expensive.

THAT IS OK WITH ME if the workers are legal workers. I think our cost of goods should reflect our desired state.

[jobert]

Originally Posted by sinking

I'm not sure if you were trying to convince me but I was saying I agree with you. If you were just expanding on what you said then I agree with what you just said, too.

I almost always start my posts with a quote, then I veer off topic and into irrelevancy. In the end it wasn't aimed at anyone in particular, I was just blowing off steam.

[jobert]

Originally Posted by hoffdano

If no one will do farm work for $8 per hour, then wages should rise enough to get people to work. Of course unemployment should not be so lucrative to keep people "on the sofa" so to speak.

If wages rise, then the farmer's expenses rise - which makes food more expensive.

THAT IS OK WITH ME if the workers are legal workers. I think our cost of goods should reflect our desired state.

Staying off-topic here.. I agree. I don't think we really need $1 pints of strawberries. I think we should all pay more for things like groceries and durable goods, while we pay less for our houses. We have literally "passed the buck" in that sense. Because we have gotten away with cheap "everything" we have ended up flushing the extra money into overpriced housing. This gross misallocation of our funds was made possible by our exploitation of migrant labor. Some will say, "but migrants built our houses".. guess what? WE did not get the benefit of that trade-off, the builder did. Companies like DR Horton pay migrant labor 40K in wages and 40K in material to build a house that they turn around a sell to the homebuyer for 250K. We still believe they are worth 250K because we've pass the buck around through RE transactions. When we find ourselves spending $5/gallon for gas, and 6$ for a gallon of storebrand milk, then we have had the "passed the buck" back to ourselves, and only then we will have found out how much we overpaying for our houses because we could - because everything else was cheap from foreign labor.

[deanne76]

Has everyone forgotten about the "robin hood" law? All of our property taxes do not go to our local schools. Millions and millions of dollars leave many Austin area school and go to other district in the state of texas.

[Nomadic9460678748]

Four more schools added to the wood pile. *sigh*

4 more Austin schools added to list for possible closure

[HappyTexan]

Originally Posted by deanne76

Has everyone forgotten about the "robin hood" law? All of our property taxes do not go to our local schools. Millions and millions of dollars leave many Austin area school and go to other district in the state of texas.

And because of that poor rural schools are able to get computers and other advanced technology to help their students get just as good as education as the richer school districts.

That is one thing I applaud regarding Texas; it gives the poor districts a chance to have current equipment.

No, they don't have the teen student day cares and they don't have parent assistants and they don't have football fields to rival UT but they have computers and AV equipment and access to software programs and can hire staff for after school tutoring and homework help.

[Tim_Barton]

Originally Posted by jobert

You wanna see those jobs taken? Then cut unemployment benefits. Pretty freaking simple. 2 years unemployed and people pleading for another two years of benefits? That's not "helping someone get back on their feet", that's a structural problem that benefits can't fix.

If unemployed people weren't allowed to vote, benefits would be cut tomorrow.

This is why these type of people lost their jobs. They were fired for a reason and then giving them the opportunity to draw unemployment. To me, that is a win, win for them that do loose their jobs. : smack:

I knew a guy whom worked @ motorola, got great money, economy took a dump. He lost his job, then he took the unemployment beni's and took his time. Instead of getting something to accept to get back in his field of work. He said he refuse to accept a job that did not pay him what he was getting from Motorola. 3-yrs later, still jobless and is a work of art.