[...]
...and easily fixed by paying wages that people can actually live off. Stop whining. There's always going to be a small number of folks who prefer scraping by on unemployment to work, but a society that can afford not appropriately taxing the Bezos', Musks, Gates' and other super-rich can easily afford that as well.
Paying people to not work, well, doesn't work.
I'm not whining; I'm personally happy and fully employed. None of my employees would do better on unemployment, by some big factor. But not all businesses can afford high wages and benefits, especially small biz with foreign competition.
When people work from home, they may as well be in India and make $2 an hour.
Taxing wealthy people, and giving money to non-productive people, doesn't work either. Most of the rich peoples' wealth is in stock shares. How is government going to turn that into cash? Seize their shares and sell them? That would be fun.
My son had been working for Microsoft as an idependent contractor for about 6 months. He had been working from home for a while after the virus. Almost a year ago he was hired over the telephone/internet. He has not been in personal contact with MS during that time and he said the work place office may not open before September. He might as well be in India, but being in the US he is making a very good wage and has good benefits. His job is sort of an upper level help desk for those that the lower levels can not help.
That is correct. But I ask you earnestly: What is a business suposed to do that cannot exist (for whatever reason) unless it pays sub-poverty wages?
Go bust, obviously.
So unemployment benefits doesn't encourage people not to work. It stops unsustainable businesses from existing. The reasons why those businesses are unsustainable are a different matter.
There are lots of interviews lately with people who prefer to collect unemployment and not work. And lots of businesses that can't find workers.
The well-being of a population increases with productivity. People who live off unemployment benefits and don't work are not productive.
On Monday, 10 May 2021 at 07:40:02 UTC-7, snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: ...
Ahh - you don't mind starving a few million people and making them homeless even if they couldn't work for a good reason as long as a few freeloaders don't get to abuse the system.
We get the picture.
kw
The big nutrition problem in the USA is obesity. I'm walking distance from multiple sources of free food. If you want to see the politics of starvation, go to Venezuela.
You don't get the picture. Disencentives to be productive discourages productivity, and productivity is good for everyone. A giant crash and stagflation won't make people better off.
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Horseshit Fox Non-News lies.
And employment compensation (what it is actually called, idiot) is a LIMITED thing without deductions so the benefactor has year end tax obligations which you are also 100% devoid of knowledge about.
John Larkin <jlarkin@highland_atwork_technology.com> wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
You sport a dismal grasp of reality. And you can't even spell the word disincentive. There isn't going to be "a giant crash", you pathetic republitard worm. You should be worm food.
On Monday, 10 May 2021 at 17:12:52 UTC-7, John Larkin wrote: ...
Aah - your plan was more subtle than I realized - when these millions are thrown out into the streets because they can't afford their mortgages they won't be able to afford food so that will automatically reduce obesity, brilliant. Of course many of those people weren't obese anyway and may have children or medical problems, but let's not worry about that.
Of course one of the reasons that obesity is such a problem in the west is that cheap food is full of fat and sugar while fresh fruit and vegetables are of limited availability and costly.
You are assuming that the unemployment payments are a significant disincentive to work, many studies have shown that they aren't.
It may be better to ensure that people get paid during times of unemployment avoid disrupting their lives excessively to help them quickly be productive members of the work force again. Forcing engineers or nurses to do unskilled labour because that is the only employment available is not the way to make the country productive again.
Sure there will always be some people that will take advantage of free money and would rather not work if possible but I think you are greatly underestimating the percentage of people who like to be productive. The freeloaders are just a cost that a modern civilization that takes care of its members has to bear.
kw
That's a bit silly. Unemployment benefits are limited. So it ultimately has no real impact on wages as it is not a viable alternative other than in crises like the current one, which seems to be coming to an end.
All the energy you are expending on snark has used up your ability to think or discuss.
That's common here.
On Monday, 10 May 2021 at 19:14:28 UTC-7, snipped-for-privacy@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote: ...
I had some discussion points in my post but you ignored them.
You're not exactly demonstrating much in the way of thought or effort in seeing other viewpoints yourself, just your usual stereotyping from a few cherry picked datapoints.
kw
Actually, it is malnutrition. Junk food is short of essential nutrients, so people have to eat a lot of calories (which they don't really need) to get the vitamins and minerals that they do need. The junk food manufacturers make more money by selling more junk food, so they are happy - in the short term. Killing you customers isn't a great business plan, but as long as new ones keep getting born, it doesn't make a noticeable difference to the bottom line.
It's the sort of public health problem that pure food and drug regulations ought to be able to fix, but it would take the kind of legislation that the junk food industry lobbyists would resist.
You don't need to. The US already delivers that on your door-step, but you haven't noticed.
The US is more interested in what's good for the top 1% of the income distribution - or more precisely - what the top 1% of the income distribution thinks is good for them. They'd get more from a smaller slice of a bigger cake, but only in the long term.
Which hasn't stopped you from being rude about Keynesian strategies that prevent them.
Not a problem John Larkin has - he can't think or discuss, so he goes directly to snark.
Your example has inspired a lot of other equally cognitively challenged posters - John Doe and Flyguy come to mind. You can still take part, even if you can't contribute.
Larkin often talks of his lemon tree, but seldom says anything about the cherry tree he picks so much fruit from.
He doesn't cherry-pick his own data - he's the kind of gullible twit who swallows alarmist reports which are based on cherry-picked data, and doesn't have enough sense to realise that the data has been cherry picked.
The report that prompted him to start this thread isn't actually an example of this. It complains that US jobs haven't recovered as rapidly as had been hoped, and he proceeded to attribute the shortfall to the defects of economic forecasting.
The problem actually seems to be that the pandemic didn't go away as fast as the medical forecaster had expected it would - Trump staged a bunch of election rallies that seemed to have kick started an unnecessary third wave of infections which eventually peaked in January 2021. That made the US economy a little less predictable than it might have been.
Injected? That has the problem of finding a vein, which is sometimes difficult.
Of course, we could order the fentanyl from China, delivered by US mail.
CO is far more dangerous. If you replace 20% nitrogen in air with 20% argon (equally inert gas) nothing happens. 20% percent CO is lethal by a wide margin.
In article <s78nhr$1hqd$ snipped-for-privacy@gioia.aioe.org>, snipped-for-privacy@decadence.org wrote: <SNIP>
You may be an advocate until you realize that you could be the victim of a legal mistake. Then you could be one of the innocent people put to death in the USA every year.
Groetjes Albert
ElectronDepot website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.