The Republicans are the Problem

[Quiddity]

Maybe you should offer better jobs then? Also, if you're poaching employees from rival companies, what makes you think they'll show any more loyalty to you? It's like marrying the guy who left his wife for you.

Don't blame the unemployed for your high turnover.

The truth of the matter is that companies know they have the upper hand. They can demand what they want, even if you don't like it. And if you don't, well somebody else will and trust me there is no competing between companies in that regard. More then enough people apply to make all companies happy. High turnover has nothing to do with it.

 

[Storm]

The truth of the matter is that companies know they have the upper hand. They can demand what they want, even if you don't like it. And if you don't, well somebody else will and trust me there is no competing between companies in that regard. More then enough people apply to make all companies happy. High turnover has nothing to do with it.

Fine. What's that got to do with discrimination against the unemployed?

 

[Quiddity]

Fine. What's that got to do with discrimination against the unemployed?

Good luck trying to make that case (you'd lose that case in court for sure). I never said I liked it, but you can't force companies to not protect themselves from what they see as potential employees that have their foot out the door already. It's not that they won't hire them, it's that they are percieved to be a diservice because of it.

 

[esmith]

Let say there are X number of companies that require the technical skills of one type of worker. Each company has to compete for that employee and ensure that they stay. I know for a fact that there are companies that are very strict in the work and play ethics of their employees. One company I know of will only hire young highly motivated engineers. The company requires that the company comes first, the family second. They have no problem hiring or retaining their personnel. If you applied to that company for a position and you had been out of work for a period of time there is no chance that you would be hired.

 

[Storm]

Good luck trying to make that case (you'd lose that case in court for sure).

What case? Is it your estimation that discrimination is necessarily illegal?

I never said I liked it, but you can't force companies to not protect themselves from what they see as potential employees that have their foot out the door already. It's not that they won't hire them, it's that they are percieved to be a diservice because of it.

I never mentioned forcing companies to do anything. I said the reason you gave for this pattern was stupid, and it is.

 

[Quiddity]

What case? Is it your estimation that discrimination is necessarily illegal?

No, it's my estimation that your interpretation of what discrimination is holds little weight and is more complex then you are willing to accept.

I never mentioned forcing companies to do anything. I said the reason you gave for this pattern was stupid, and it is.

Legally calling what they do discrimination amounts to force. You said without saying.

 

[Storm]

No, it's my estimation that your interpretation of what discrimination is holds little weight and is more complex then you are willing to accept.



Legally calling what they do discrimination amounts to force. You said without saying.

Look, I'm not responsible for anything you take upon yourself to add to my posts.

If I say I won't date people under 5'10", that's discrimination. Says nothing about legality.

 

[Quiddity]

Look, I'm not responsible for anything you take upon yourself to add to my posts.

If I say I won't date people under 5'10", that's discrimination. Says nothing about legality.

You could just correct me and say..."that's not what I meant.....I meant...." and I'll believe you.

Company discrimination is not a legal issue? :areyoucra

 

[Storm]

You could just correct me and say..."that's not what I meant.....I meant...." and I'll believe you.

Apparently, you won't since you took "not all discrimination is illegal," and got:

Company discrimination is not a legal issue? :areyoucra

I'm in no mood for games today.

 

[no-body]

Don't worry about the legality of it, just think about thousands of unemployable people who are getting more and more desperate. Then as a slap in the face cut welfare and benefits programs to boot and lets see what ends up happening.

 

[idav]

Don't worry about the legality of it, just think about thousands of unemployable people who are getting more and more desperate. Then as a slap in the face cut welfare and benefits programs to boot and lets see what ends up happening.

Awesome, can we test that in some sort of SIM environment or something first?:cover:

 

[esmith]

Awesome, can we test that in some sort of SIM environment or something first?:cover:

Do believe they are testing that theory in Spain and Greece now.

 

[Quiddity]

Apparently, you won't since you took "not all discrimination is illegal," and got:

I'm in no mood for games today.

When you make this statement:
What's that got to do with discrimination against the unemployed?

It believe it holds legal ramifications, if you don't, that's fine but it seemed obvious to me that it would. If you meant to just utter it without even considering that it would, then I'm sorry you felt it was a game for me to ask you the question. Perhaps another day.

 

[1robin]

Don't worry about the legality of it, just think about thousands of unemployable people who are getting more and more desperate. Then as a slap in the face cut welfare and benefits programs to boot and lets see what ends up happening.

Let's just expand that out a little further. It eventually winds up with 90% of the country living off 10%. We aren't to far from that as it is.It doesn't take an economist to see that the parsitic styles adopted by Greece and Spain do not work. They simply kill the host. In fact they are completely broke but marching in the streets to resist cuts of any kind.

 

[no-body]

Let's just expand that out a little further. It eventually winds up with 90% of the country living off 10%. We aren't to far from that as it is.It doesn't take an economist to see that the parsitic styles adopted by Greece and Spain do not work. They simply kill the host. In fact they are completely broke but marching in the streets to resist cuts of any kind.

So do you have any solutions? I mean other than freeing up the market with no restrictions so we can have oligarchies and slave labor.

 

[Falvlun]

Let's just expand that out a little further. It eventually winds up with 90% of the country living off 10%. We aren't to far from that as it is.It doesn't take an economist to see that the parsitic styles adopted by Greece and Spain do not work. They simply kill the host. In fact they are completely broke but marching in the streets to resist cuts of any kind.

Actually, it's more like the 10% living off of the 90%. How long do you think it will take for the millions to stop accumulating in the fat cats' banks if the people who actually do the work stopped working?

 

[esmith]

Lets look at the facts.
4.1% of the American Population is on Welfare
48.5% live in households that are dependent on welfare in the first quarter of 2010
14.5% share a home with a person on Medicare
16% live in a home with someone receiving Social Security retirement
32.4% receive food stamps
Application for State benefits have increased by 50% in the past decade
46.4% will not pay Federal Income Tax

Let's look at the alarming figure of 46.4% will not pay Federal Income Tax. That means that 53.6% of the population is supporting all entitlements not counting Social Security or Medicare. They, the 46.4% are not supporting mandated expenses like National Defense, Federal Employee Retirement payments, and other costs. Basically 46.4% are relying on 53.6% of us to pay their "fair share" of government expenditures. I kind of like the Idaho State Income Tax. Once you have computed your tax owed or tax refund you have to add or subtract $10.00 as an additional tax. This way everyone in the State has "skin in the game".

 

[Falvlun]

Lets look at the facts.
4.1% of the American Population is on Welfare
48.5% live in households that are dependent on welfare in the first quarter of 2010

These two numbers in conjunction are confusing. Are you saying 48.5% of the 4.1% were dependent on welfare? If so, that's not a lot of people.
Also, just because you may recieve government aid-- welfare-- doesn't mean that your entire substinence is coming from the government.

14.5% share a home with a person on Medicare

Oh, so all those 14.5% of people never payed taxes themselves?

16% live in a home with someone receiving Social Security retirement

Social security is what we pay into the system. We earn that money. That money gets taken out of MY paycheck every single month.

32.4% receive food stamps
Application for State benefits have increased by 50% in the past decade.

Again, prove that none of those people pay taxes.

46.4% will not pay Federal Income Tax

There are other forms of taxes besides income tax.

Let's look at the alarming figure of 46.4% will not pay Federal Income Tax. That means that 53.6% of the population is supporting all entitlements not counting Social Security or Medicare. They, the 46.4% are not supporting mandated expenses like National Defense, Federal Employee Retirement payments, and other costs. Basically 46.4% are relying on 53.6% of us to pay their "fair share" of government expenditures.

Not only is that false, but 53.6% is a far cry more than the top 10%.

And none of this addresses how the rich people got their money, enabling them to pay taxes, in the first place. Hint: They didn't do it all by themselves.

 

[esmith]

These two numbers in conjunction are confusing. Are you saying 48.5% of the 4.1% were dependent on welfare? If so, that's not a lot of people.
Also, just because you may recieve government aid-- welfare-- doesn't mean that your entire substinence is coming from the government.

No, there are 4.1% of the US population receiving welfare, 48.5% of the population live in a household receiving government assistance of some kind.

Oh, so all those 14.5% of people never payed taxes themselves?

No, it says that 14.5% of the US population live in a household that someone is receiving Medicare. Nothing about who is or is not paying taxes.

Social security is what we pay into the system. We earn that money. That money gets taken out of MY paycheck every single month.

I agree, that has nothing to do with anything that was in my post.

Again, prove that none of those people pay taxes.

Those figures does not say if the do or do not pay income tax. It is just that 32.4% of the population receive food stamps.

There are other forms of taxes besides income tax.

Correct, I stated that 46.4% pay no FEDERAL INCOME TAX. There is a difference between Income Tax and Social Security/Medicare tax.

Not only is that false, but 53.6% is a far cry more than the top 10%.

Are you saying that the figure of 46.4% is incorrect? I suggest you look at the following: Misconceptions and Realities About Who Pays Taxes — Center on Budget and Policy Priorities

And none of this addresses how the rich people got their money, enabling them to pay taxes, in the first place. Hint: They didn't do it all by themselves.

What the blank has this to do with my post. How do you think Steve Jobs, Scott McNealy, Mark Zuckerberg, Bill Gates, Howard Hughes, Henry Ford, George Vanderbilt and others made their fortunes? I would suspect if was by hard work and dedication to a goal.

 

[1robin]

So do you have any solutions? I mean other than freeing up the market with no restrictions so we can have oligarchies and slave labor.

Whatever Reagan did when he created 12 million jobs would be a good core to start from. Lower - not eliminate regulations, lower corporate taxes (we are currently the worst in world history), bust unions that are sucking companies dry making $40 an hour to change light bulbs. Bring in the pipe line from Canada, open up off shore drilling again, access known oil reserves in the Dakotas and quit funding middle easter religious tyrants. That is a start. Oh and undue everything Obama has done. Or at least most we can keep Bin Laden dead.