lowing
Banned
+1,662|6952|USA

Scorpion0x17 wrote:

CaptainSpaulding71 wrote:

i mentioned earlier that for those people who are uneployable, there's nothing to say they can't pick up a shovel and join a road crew somewhere.  how about helping with park maintenance?  working at a recycling center?  repairing levees in NO?
And for the disabled? fit them with 'drill-arm' attachments and send them down the mines?

'Unemployable' means just that - un-employable - some people are just too ill, feeble, mad or stupid to have the ability to be of use to society without expensive care and support - and by this I don't just mean the paralysed or severely physically or mentally disabled - I mean the severely depressed, the dyslexic that was overlooked at school and came out with no qualifications, the insomniac that barely functions, and the countless others in our society that really are un-employable.
Bullshit!!

Unemployment means you currently do not have a job, it does not mean you are incabable of getting one. Or even striving for that or an education that would lead to one.
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london
dont you have to have steady employment for at least 6 months before you could claim unemployment insurance?
lowing
Banned
+1,662|6952|USA

God Save the Queen wrote:

dont you have to have steady employment for at least 6 months before you could claim unemployment insurance?
Now, that I am not sure of. It would make sense though, since sadly, the first thing a liberal would do is work for a day, get his ass fired, then run to the unemployment office. That is what I would do if my ideolgy lead me to believe that I was entitled to shit by the rich more than I needed to earn shit, on my own..
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6901|132 and Bush

For (statistic) clarification:

Some people think that to get these figures on unemployment the Government uses the number of persons filing claims for unemployment insurance (UI) benefits under State or Federal Government programs. But some people are still jobless when their benefits run out, and many more are not eligible at all or delay or never apply for benefits. So, quite clearly, UI information cannot be used as a source for complete information on the number of unemployed.
More--
Go forth and learn my friends.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london

lowing wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

dont you have to have steady employment for at least 6 months before you could claim unemployment insurance?
Now, that I am not sure of. It would make sense though, since sadly, the first thing a liberal would do is work for a day, get his ass fired, then run to the unemployment office. That is what I would do if my ideolgy lead me to believe that I was entitled to shit by the rich more than I needed to earn shit, on my own..
thats how it is in california.  a person is able to collect 12 months of unemployment if they worked for 6 months non stop.  now you could only collect for 6 months.


I was collecting it when I got out of active duty.  Funny thing is, I made more money collecting unemployment than I did in Iraq.

Last edited by God Save the Queen (2008-06-10 19:13:20)

lowing
Banned
+1,662|6952|USA

God Save the Queen wrote:

lowing wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

dont you have to have steady employment for at least 6 months before you could claim unemployment insurance?
Now, that I am not sure of. It would make sense though, since sadly, the first thing a liberal would do is work for a day, get his ass fired, then run to the unemployment office. That is what I would do if my ideolgy lead me to believe that I was entitled to shit by the rich more than I needed to earn shit, on my own..
thats how it is in california.  a person is able to collect 12 months of unemployment if they worked for 6 months non stop.  now you could only collect for 6 months.


I was collecting it when I got out of active duty.  Funny thing is, I made more money collecting unemployment than I did in Iraq.
So honestly, where is the incentive to get out and get a job and support yourself? Other than work ethic................ut ohhhhhhhhhhh now I get it


What did you do in the Army? In Iraq?
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london
the cost of living for a prior service e-4 native to california was more than the wage I was recieving as an enlisted man in iraq.  california unemployment compensates for that.  if I had collected from the state that I deployed from (texas) I would have recieved only a fraction of what I did by living in california.
paul386
Member
+22|6546

ZombieVampire! wrote:

In theory free market is great.  In theory Communism is great.

In practice Communism gets corrupted, and free market needs limitations.
Communism does not work in theory and this is the stupidest common "arguement" I have heard in regards to the subject. If you truly think that communism makes sense in theory and work work in theory then you must live in a cave. People inherently do what is best for them. That is a natural instinct of all living things.

Capitalism does work in theory and has NEVER been tried in reality. Government has always knocked any attempt at pure capitalism off of its  self-maintained balance.

Varegg wrote:

Sooo lowing ... you think it is allright then for the less fortunate that haven't had the same oppurunities as you to work for minimum wage and miss out on the american dream ? ... there can be loads of reasons for just that to happend, a disability, a work accident that lost them their well paid job and later forced them to take another or is everyone without a uni degree freeloaders ?

Don't you need bolt installers and clerks in the US ? ... why not pay them a little more so they can afford their mortage, a reasonable mortage that is ...

A little more emphasis would do you good ... you can't really compare everybody else up against yourself ...
The problem with minimum wage is the following:

1. When you impose a minimum wage on a company this will increase their costs. This will be especially profound on business that operate on low skill labor, like you grocery stores, factories, and convenience stores. Thus as a result all of these companies must increase their price to cope with the increased cost. Now the low end labor is getting paid more, but they also paying more for all their basic costs.

Net effect for the people being paid minimum wage.... NOTHING!

Now the middle class is unaffected by the wage increase, because they were already being paid more than minimum wage. But they ARE affected by the increase in cost and this erodes their status as middle class. They become closer and closer to the low class as their salaries stay stagnate but the prices increase all around.

Net effect on the middle class.... IT DISAPPEARS!

Now the upper class is not affected by the minimum wage increase because they were being paid well above that rate. The increase in costs insignificantly affects them because the % increase is very small.

Net effect on the upper class... Insignificant!

A forth effect of minimum wage increase is the elimination of labor for the unemployed, resulting in higher unemployment rates.

Thus minimum wage only decreases the number of available jobs and merges the middle and lower class. Congratulations.

Varegg wrote:

You people claimed unemployment was a problem in the US, not me ...

And lowing - i don't insist, i merely explain how it works over here and it do work very well with the European socialistic model - we take care of everybody - you seem to care less about anyone but yourself, the misfortunate can blame themselves for their situation entirely, that's egocentric imo ...
Something I see frequently in Europeans is that they think they are somehow more evolved and more sophisticated because of their larger and more socialistic government. I got news for you buddy. Socialistic governments have been around for ages, since the beginning of time. Libertarian ideals are the more sophisticated and modern concepts, and they are quite a bit harder to grasp. Most people simply don't fully comprehend libertarian ideals or the consequences of socialistic ideals.

The concepts that we are arguing is not that you shouldn't care for those in need. Is it that government does not have the right, capability or effectiveness to do this.
imortal
Member
+240|6966|Austin, TX

God Save the Queen wrote:

the cost of living for a prior service e-4 native to california was more than the wage I was recieving as an enlisted man in iraq.  california unemployment compensates for that.  if I had collected from the state that I deployed from (texas) I would have recieved only a fraction of what I did by living in california.
Yes, but the cost of living here in Texas is much more reasonable.  Well, it was until everyone fleeing California decided to start moving here.
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6625|New Haven, CT
Something interesting to look at would be comparing the states with the highest values on these two charts.
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6843|Texas - Bigger than France

nukchebi0 wrote:

Something interesting to look at would be comparing the states with the highest values on these two charts.
pretty colors.

what r u looking at?  / wat's interesting?
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london

imortal wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

the cost of living for a prior service e-4 native to california was more than the wage I was recieving as an enlisted man in iraq.  california unemployment compensates for that.  if I had collected from the state that I deployed from (texas) I would have recieved only a fraction of what I did by living in california.
Yes, but the cost of living here in Texas is much more reasonable.  Well, it was until everyone fleeing California decided to start moving here.
but you have to deal with texans
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6625|New Haven, CT

Pug wrote:

nukchebi0 wrote:

Something interesting to look at would be comparing the states with the highest values on these two charts.
pretty colors.

what r u looking at?  / wat's interesting?
See if there is a correlation between high unemployment and high minimum wage.
SenorToenails
Veritas et Scientia
+444|6431|North Tonawanda, NY

nukchebi0 wrote:

Something interesting to look at would be comparing the states with the highest values on these two charts.
There is no obvious conclusion to draw from those. 

CA, OH, MI all have higher unemployment rates, but have laws for higher than federal minimum wage.  All of New England does not have particularly high unemployment, but they also have laws for higher than federal minimum wage.
nukchebi0
Пушкин, наше всё
+387|6625|New Haven, CT
So would that suggest you can't blame a high minimum wage on unemployment?
Pug
UR father's brother's nephew's former roommate
+652|6843|Texas - Bigger than France

God Save the Queen wrote:

but you have to deal with texans
then stay in CA pedro.
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london
Im just staying away from texas, billy ray.
imortal
Member
+240|6966|Austin, TX

God Save the Queen wrote:

imortal wrote:

God Save the Queen wrote:

the cost of living for a prior service e-4 native to california was more than the wage I was recieving as an enlisted man in iraq.  california unemployment compensates for that.  if I had collected from the state that I deployed from (texas) I would have recieved only a fraction of what I did by living in california.
Yes, but the cost of living here in Texas is much more reasonable.  Well, it was until everyone fleeing California decided to start moving here.
but you have to deal with texans
Well, yes.  There is that.  But they are easier to deal with than Californians.  Except that they are coming here too.  And snowbirds that are fleeing to the south for our warm winter weather.  And the illegals who are fleeing north for the jobs.  And the liberals that come to UT (Honestly, is it a requirement to be an unthinking ultra-lib Democrat to wear burnt orange out here?).

There are worse things in life, I suppose.
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london

imortal wrote:

There are worse things in life, I suppose.
like texans
imortal
Member
+240|6966|Austin, TX

God Save the Queen wrote:

imortal wrote:

There are worse things in life, I suppose.
like texans
Aren't you a native Texan?
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london
bite your tongue
imortal
Member
+240|6966|Austin, TX

God Save the Queen wrote:

bite your tongue
That wasn't an answer... you mentioned earlier you enlisted in Texas... Won't bother me either way: Born in Florida, raised in North Carolina.
God Save the Queen
Banned
+628|6644|tropical regions of london
I was born in florida and raised in California.  never said I enlisted in texas, I deployed from texas.  I was stationed there for 5 years at hood.  garryowen.
Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|6901|132 and Bush

Both you guys left the best state after you were borne. Now get on topic.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
imortal
Member
+240|6966|Austin, TX

God Save the Queen wrote:

I was born in florida and raised in California.  never said I enlisted in texas, I deployed from texas.  I was stationed there for 5 years at hood.  garryowen.
That is true, I remember you.  1/7, huh?  "RIver never crossed, horse never ridden" and all of that.  I hated Fort Hoodland for the 4 years I spent there.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard