1.4 Million Out Of Work American Workers Are A Political Football?
 

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...#ixzz2qR1bNTQR

Nice.

I think of all the workin' class folks who vote for these dicks that think they don't need it anyways........until they need it and then it had better damn well be there, because they've earned it.:rolleyes:

Dave

So, exactly how long should an individual receive unemployment benefits? Unemployment benefits are managed by the Feds and the States in a similar manner to disability coverage. Benefits paid are valued up to a pre-determined amount based on an individuals income, and extend for (until recently) a pre-determined duration.

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the longer an individual remains unemployed in any capacity, the more harmful it is to the individual. Not only does their productivity / effectiveness decrease, but their bargaining power in the marketplace also decreases. Not to mention the long term damage to self - esteem that comes with being out of work.

So, how long should unemployment benefits reasonably continue? Should there be a point that benefits cease, for the long term good of the individual?

Oh maybe until there are jobs available? It is simply an HR myth that people who are unemployed for long periods lose their skills. Having been retired for nearly ten years I an tell you that I have not lost a damn thing. Companies have been using the benefits of easy money (Interest rate at 0% according to Bernanke) along with increased productivity to build high profit margins but they only work existing satff harder rather than hire.

Duh.

Ya think?

If the Republicans would quit obstructing and start supporting a goddamn government jobs program which is what we need because the private sector sure as shit ain't gonna get it done, then maybe we wouldn't have so many unemployed.

I doubt that you have lost anything, but has the industry (or any occupation) changed?

For your consideration.http://www.econ.ucla.edu/tvwachter/p...ages_paper.pdf

Yeah, I know.

So, ya think maybe certain crybabies should suck in their lower lips, realize the world is changing whether they like it or not and just start creating some jobs?

I do.

Dave

Or, some folks who are sitting on the sidelines waiting for someone else to making things happen go out and make it happen for themselves?

That, of course, denies over 200 years of history. But hey, you're on a roll.

Or maybe a little of both?

Because no one goes out looking for a job just because they have an irrepressible urge to make someone else rich. A fact some people in our generation seem to have lost sight of.

Dave

John I was an educator of software engineers and at times a technical writer, as well since the vast majority of industrial changes get ample press keeping up is really not difficult.

I really chuckle at the conceit of many people in industry about the vast changes they are making. All you need to do to prove that many of these 'improvements' are illusory is install the latest version of Window.:)

Of course being unemployed affects re-employmant wages. When you have three people applying for the same job the prospective employer is goind to offer a low salary because he/she knows the applicants are hungry. But that is solely due to greed and not any loss of ability on the part of the applicants.

One thing that I never understood about employers here is the reluctance to offer training. You have aan employee who is a known quantity, give them training and they become more valuable. Bell gave me all the training I coukl absorb and in the process identified my talents as an instructor. As a result when I rose to second level management I developed many good employees for them, so there was payback.

Right, so when do you think all those CEOs are going to get the finger out?:p

I can't argue with that!:)

You're the one that is denying history.

The last 40 years of right wing trickle down economics policies have been one of the biggest failures in the history of mankind.

There are a handful of them, which the paid right wing shills aggressively ferret out and repeat those examples over and over and over in the media in order to try to create the illusion that "They are all like that".

I've had employers tell me they don't want to spend money on formal traing because, "We pay for someones education, then they leave to go work for someone else. We're not paying to educate our competitors employees."

Which, if you think that through, it boils down to greed too. The reason the educated employee leaves, is because the employer offers little or no financial reward at the finish of training........but the competitor does. Funny, how such free market principles are so precious to them.....so long as it works in their favor. If it doesn't, they'd rather have ignorant employees than pay out the money. Which, of course, costs them more in the long run.:rolleyes:

And, I fail to see how that's the employees fault. Or anybodys fault but management, for that matter.

Dave

Whell, we should just have the Feds hire anyone out of work. Presto, full employment!

Pete

Like including military/government retirees, the elderly on SS and Medicare and the legitimately disabled in the 47% as if they are all "Cadillac Driving Welfare Queens"?:rolleyes:

Dave

A by gone era when a Bell tech travelled first class and eat at the finest restaurant. :D

HEAR! HEAR!

(And the most adamantly and feverishly denied failures.)

Dave

here's an interesting article:

I don't know ANYTHING about the author or veracity of data.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...y-edition.html

Pete

So when did 99 weeks become indefinite unemployment insurance payouts?

You start from a false premise so all the rest is drivel from a HR dude's fevered dream lowered employment costs for a big attaboy from your masters of the universe. You'll have to try a lot harder than the previous bs to convince me that you've got the best interests of workers at heart.

As Rob noted, there are an average three applicants for every job opening. Excuse me if I call bullshit on your diehard assholishness when it comes to being an advocate for the working class. On more than one occasion you've voiced your disdain for organized labor, so you might as well get used to the fact that your opinions are rejected out of hand, Mr. HR dude.

Back on topic, I ask you when did the Republicans start thinking that it's OK to shit on workers actively seeking work? Here's my opinion, it's when they enticed the Ayn Rand worshipping libertarian fools to be their guiding lights. Isn't little Lyin' Ryan & the ferret faced phuck from Virginia their standard bearer these days?

...to answer your last question Mike, it should continue until the unemployment rate drops substantially. Either though much needed government work programs or your masters of the universe get off their lazy asses and start wanting to make money again instead of hoarding it.

That was Bell Canada and believe me there was nothing too classy about that Chevy van. That said they are an honest company who's word you can take to the bank.:)

......

This elderly person on SS does not feel the least embarassed as I was given no choice. They said you must pay FICA and if you manage to stay employed for more than 40 weeks we will grant you a stipend. In any case I bring more money into this country than I take out of it.:p

The nearest equivalent I can come up with France pre revolution. We all know how that worked out for that condescending bitch Marie Antoinette and her ilk. :rolleyes:

https://encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com/i...0sGNFEgK2hI_qw

You forgot the smiley, your pastiness.;)

First I look at the purse.:rolleyes:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megan_McArdle

Well, one could, if they were so inclined, :), google 'income per capita US adjusted for inflation', or check the sources of her graphs, which I see are from the Census.

Pete

...and that would be your job since you floated a Daily Beast piece written by an arch libertarian. ;)

But using Census data ;)

But fair enough. Here's one:

http://gailtheactuary.files.wordpres...dollars-v2.png

"Figure 3. US per capita non-governmental wages, in 2012 dollars. Non-governmental wages and population from Bureau of Economic Analysis; Adjusted to 2012 cost level using CPI-Urban from Bureau of Labor Statistics."

http://ourfiniteworld.com/2013/02/14...its-to-growth/

Pete

Seein' as how this thread is about unemployment insurance benefits becoming a football for the POSGOP party...

Mebbe someone can start up a thread about denying income inequality? Like yourself.:rolleyes:

I know you are being sarcastic but that is exactly what needs to be done.

I'm one of those.

A veritable leech on society.

Somehow, I don't believe you're a leech.

In fact, if you ask around in some cases, it's the so-called "Lefties" on this board that are the "better off", with pensions, strong paying occupations and money in savings.:rolleyes:

Dave

At the rate folks are leaving the workforce, we might get there soon anyway.

I never stated or implied that it did. I simply asked a question, and provided evidence that suggested that extensions may actually be counter-productive.

You, then, apparently didn't bother yourself to look at the evidence, but built yourself a nice little straw man out of all manner of interesting assumptions, and then tried to knock him down.

Have fun with that.