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.
Yes, temporary income to sustain the temporary lives of some people. If they "stay" on these jobs? Who wants to stay? They are forced to do so, by the economy and the American social system. We eliminated millions of jobs and now asking the bottom feeders: what? why aren't you moving forward? Unbelievable!
But the real problem is not with "principles" but numbers: the bottom feeders are already in huge numbers and if we continue conducting our business as usual, the'll become the majority, which means becoming third world country.
What you are seeing is free-market religious fundamentalism in action. Destroy peoples livelihoods, push them to poverty pay jobs, and then blame them 100% for their "fall from grace."
Any sort of attempt to alleviate their suffering is an affront to the "holy job creators," you know the ones that offshored most of the well-paying jobs to India and China.
He thinks unemployment is some sort of gravy train that workers just can't wait to exploit by purposefully laying themselves off so they experience the joys of barely paying the bills on $1300 a month.
No what I understand and neither of you seem to, is that semi skilled and skilled workers are not going to work for the same money or basically the same money as unskilled workers. Otherwise what is the purpose of learning those skills? They would rather sit on unemployment getting that $1300 a month and government assistance then working for the $1800 a month with no government assistance.
No what I understand and neither of you seem to, is that semi skilled and skilled workers are not going to work for the same money or basically the same money as unskilled workers. Otherwise what is the purpose of learning those skills? They would rather sit on unemployment getting that $1300 a month and government assistance then working for the $1800 a month with no government assistance.
You make a lot of assumptions about the unemployed. Many of them would gladly take the $1800 a month position in a related field if employers for example didn't blacklist them for being out of work for three months, or discriminated them due to their age.
What they won't do is take a crappy paying McJob if their time is better utilized networking in their field, sending out resumes, coaching, and interviewing for a new (hopefully similar paying) position. That was the purpose of unemployment, a stopgap measure to prevent people from being forced to take any job or starve rather than focus on finding a suitable replacement job.
What you are seeing is free-market religious fundamentalism in action. Destroy peoples livelihoods, push them to poverty pay jobs, and then blame them 100% for their "fall from grace."
Any sort of attempt to alleviate their suffering is an affront to the "holy job creators," you know the ones that offshored most of the well-paying jobs to India and China.
My point of view is practical (and simple): what country will the US become if we continue doing the same? Conservatives have a point: they understand that with millions unemployed and/or working for min wage (supply and demand theory) the US will become a third world country. They also understand that continuing on the same route will increase poverty and that's the reason they object to social programs: they will cost more and more.
My point of view is practical (and simple): what country will US become if we continue doing the same? Conservatives have a point: they understand that with millions unemployed and/or working for min wage (supply and demand theory) the US will become a third world country. They also understand that continuing the same route will create increased poverty.
I'm pretty sure you meant liberals because conservatives want nothing to do with any sort of government interference that alleviates the plight of the poor, working poor, or unemployed.
They think the solution to a weak economy, where we have a large glut of businesses trying to market to a large chunk of the population who have little to nothing in terms of purchasing power or disposable income, is to keep minimum wage at joke levels and yank the remaining safety nets that are keeping the poor from falling into utter destitution and our economy from slipping even further.
Last edited by go-getta-J; 12-03-2013 at 04:40 PM..
Except for those at the top, wages can't continue to increase because they have not been increasing for many years now. Just possibly this is because the minimum wage hasn't been increased at anything like the rate of inflation.
This is like blaming doctors for the high cost of medical care in the United States when doctors have very little to do with the cost but hey, it sure feels good to blame someone else for your own miserable failures.
This is like blaming doctors for the high cost of medical care in the United States when doctors have very little to do with the cost but hey, it sure feels good to blame someone else for your own miserable failures.
Terrible analogy and nonsensical reply aside, it's a good thing we have the Affordable Care Act to finally address out-of-control healthcare costs.
It's great to see more of a push for a higher minimum wage. I'll add that the government should also provide a WPA like jobs program to get people productive and repairing our badly aged infrastructure.
Since we can no longer rely on employers to provide stable well-paying jobs, i think its also time look into proposals which willl de-link income security from job security. As automation, robotics, and offshoring accelerates in the future and further destroy more jobs, the government should look into instituting an unconditional basic income like they are proposing in Switzerland.
This will tilt bargaining power back towards employees, who would be more free to refuse poverty level wages and abusive employers as well as create an automatic stabilizer should someone lose their income from paid work. No more falling into abject poverty because your boss decided to fire you on a whim one day in an at-will state and other employers now see you as "damaged"
Terrible analogy and nonsensical reply aside, it's a good thing we have the Affordable Care Act to finally address out-of-control healthcare costs.
Yup... Requiring everyone to purchase a product, and fining them for non compliance is really sticking it to those health insurance companies
But why don't you educate us... How did this terrible abomination of a bill address the out of control costs of healthcare in America? Affordable care act... Could they have selected an any less fitting name?
These jobs are typically very low skilled and were meant for people seeking temporary income. The problem is more and more people are turning to this on a permanent basis, sometimes to support families over the long term. If they stay on these jobs for a long time, there will be less opportunity for others who really need them to enter the workforce or support temporary but urgent needs.
True, but that was for a manufacturing economy prior to automation where an initial set of skills would lead to further on the job skills.
We are in a service economy with a computerized self-service. You either have high level skills or no appreciable skills.
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.
