5/2/2014 6:50 PM
How do you suppose welfare inflates wages?  Do you honestly believe the truck driving company cited is going to increase wages to attract welfare recipients?  I can, with little doubt, say that they won't.  Besides which, we never established how much that trucking company was paying.  All we established was that you didn't want to take all of that on when you could get free money from the government.

As stated earlier, the minimum wage provides an absolute floor for wages.  So that is taken care of.  As far as whether or not a job is worth taking, it depends on how badly you need the money that job offers.  If said trucking company is offering a decent wage for a pain in the *** job, and you have people choosing to take money from the system rather than take that job (and pay money back into the system), then your system is broken.  It's not as difficult as you make it out to be.  Though I suspect you know this, you just can't admit defeat.

Put a meaningful time limit on welfare, and make the time limit on unemployment meaningful.  Require real verification that people receiving aid are taking meaningful steps to look for work and/or get an education.  I personally know of someone who just finished drawing a year's worth of unemployment, and that person didn't want a job.  They wanted to retire, they just wanted a year's worth of unemployment first.  If you care anything about the burden on taxpayers, as you said you do, fix that garbage first.  Force more people into the job market, where they pay into the system and help the greater good, rather than draining from it.  I counted 8 Help Wanted signs on the way into work this morning.  If there is a job available in a given region where there is someone on assistance, that job should be filled immediately.  Not passed over because "I don't want to take all of that on."

The beautiful part of that plan is that it gives you what you always want - more money for the government (more wage earners paying taxes, less people taking money from the coffers), and more government jobs (increased staff for increased scrutiny).  The problem, of course, is that liberals don't REALLY want that plan, because they can't sell it their constituents who receive assistance.  So they hide behind the "We won't take money from the poor, because we're not heartless" argument.  Which is complete crap, obviously.
5/2/2014 7:09 PM
"How do you suppose welfare inflates wages?  Do you honestly believe the truck driving company cited is going to increase wages to attract welfare recipients?"

Let's go back to your example.

Person has bad job + assistance.
Available trucking job - assistance only pays a little more with more physical, training, and time demands.
Person stays at bad job.
Trucking company still has position to fill, considers raising starting wages to attract people to the position.






5/2/2014 7:39 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/2/2014 5:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by raucous on 5/2/2014 5:30:00 PM (view original):
If you want people to get back to work, stop rewarding people who don't work.  Cut "social" policies.  No 2 years unemployment. No forced healthcare.  Be much more strict about disability (thow Binder and Binder in jail??  jk).  Cut back some of the military when it is safe to do so.  Unfortunately we can't do that at this time, thanks to Live Shot Kerry and his continued bumbling and Obama taking the usual road of not working with his adversaries to solve problems, but that is another subject.
...and that is just to start.

...and the Republicans like Boner have just as much of a hand in this crapfest as Obama does.

My credo is



...or actually everyone in DC.

When you look at the economy and the recession we were (are?) in, do you see:

a) a shortage of people willing to work

or

b) a shortage of jobs 
It started with b and then it went to a.

The recession we got out of after Dumbass I was the willingness for people to take the crappy jobs because their unemployment ran out.

After Dumbass II, people could stay unemployed for 2 years so even though landscapers and construction were ready to hire people 2 years ago and even when they would get 100s of applications no one would take the jobs that they offered. The unemployed people were telling them, "I still have a year of unemployment yet and you are paying just a few bucks more a week than I am getting for sitting on my ***. So forget it."  It really delayed the recovery.

We are finally in a recovery in the 1st quarter of 2014. Hopefully Obamacare won't ruin it.

If we didn't give people 2 years, we would probably be doing much better right now than we are.
5/2/2014 7:50 PM
Posted by raucous on 5/2/2014 7:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/2/2014 5:32:00 PM (view original):
Posted by raucous on 5/2/2014 5:30:00 PM (view original):
If you want people to get back to work, stop rewarding people who don't work.  Cut "social" policies.  No 2 years unemployment. No forced healthcare.  Be much more strict about disability (thow Binder and Binder in jail??  jk).  Cut back some of the military when it is safe to do so.  Unfortunately we can't do that at this time, thanks to Live Shot Kerry and his continued bumbling and Obama taking the usual road of not working with his adversaries to solve problems, but that is another subject.
...and that is just to start.

...and the Republicans like Boner have just as much of a hand in this crapfest as Obama does.

My credo is



...or actually everyone in DC.

When you look at the economy and the recession we were (are?) in, do you see:

a) a shortage of people willing to work

or

b) a shortage of jobs 
It started with b and then it went to a.

The recession we got out of after Dumbass I was the willingness for people to take the crappy jobs because their unemployment ran out.

After Dumbass II, people could stay unemployed for 2 years so even though landscapers and construction were ready to hire people 2 years ago and even when they would get 100s of applications no one would take the jobs that they offered. The unemployed people were telling them, "I still have a year of unemployment yet and you are paying just a few bucks more a week than I am getting for sitting on my ***. So forget it."  It really delayed the recovery.

We are finally in a recovery in the 1st quarter of 2014. Hopefully Obamacare won't ruin it.

If we didn't give people 2 years, we would probably be doing much better right now than we are.
Sorry, you're retarded. There is no shortage of people willing to work.
5/3/2014 5:21 AM
Did you fall off the turnip truck yesterday? 


money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/smallbusiness/1203/gallery.employees/3.html


...and moron trucking jobs pay more than the median pay.  You probably think they should be millionaires.

caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/25/with-8-2-unemployment-why-does-nobody-want-200000-trucking-jobs/

5/4/2014 1:04 PM
How many of the people that have posted here are making minimum wage?

I wager none of you are making minimum wage.  

I suspect people that get minimum wage to start get a raise within 3 to 6 months.

If I apply for a fast food job tomorrow, I bet I'm hired on at more than minimum wage unless it's a mom and pop.

So the question is:  What percentage of the work force is paid minimum wage?

10%?  5%?  2%?  1%?  Less than 1%?

I suspect it's less than 1%.  Perhaps half of that.  And you're not there for long. 

Most of those workers should be teenagers and it should be their first job.

If injured on the job their medical bills are paid for and they are compensated at 60%.

In other  words…..this is not a crisis. 
5/5/2014 11:43 AM
"Sorry, you're retarded. There is no shortage of people willing to work. "

I had to laugh out loud - literally, when I read that.  Besides the easy-to-find articles raucous posted, I meet with some friends of mine every Friday, three of whom are contractors in various fields.  Every one of them talks about how hard it is to find people willing to work.  Typical examples (paraphrased):

1.  "I've been working with my son's friend, who came on as a helper.  I'm paying him $12/hr to start and I wanted to teach him the business.  I told him I'd raise him to $15/hour just to start training in doing the work - then $18/hour after the first year.  He said don't bother.  "I would rather not have any responsibility"."

2.  "The last three guys I hired all left either after the first week, the first day, or didn't even show up - even after passing the mandatory drug test".

3.  "The last guy I hired quit before his first work day - as soon as he found out that the unemployment benefits had been extended".

I hear this all the time.

The truth?  It's about risk and incentive.  Whether it's wages, taxes, or unemployment benefits, you increase the number of something by adding incentives...

5/5/2014 12:05 PM
Posted by raucous on 5/3/2014 5:21:00 AM (view original):
Did you fall off the turnip truck yesterday? 


money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/smallbusiness/1203/gallery.employees/3.html


...and moron trucking jobs pay more than the median pay.  You probably think they should be millionaires.

caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/25/with-8-2-unemployment-why-does-nobody-want-200000-trucking-jobs/

Putting aside for a moment that it is somewhat self serving for a business owner to complain that no workers want the amazing jobs being offered, those examples are anecdotal. The reality is that, as of January of this year, there were three unemployed people for every one job opening. A true shortage of workers would drive wages up, and that isn't happening. Wages are rising at a rate less than 2%, which is under inflation.
5/5/2014 12:09 PM
Posted by DougOut on 5/4/2014 1:04:00 PM (view original):
How many of the people that have posted here are making minimum wage?

I wager none of you are making minimum wage.  

I suspect people that get minimum wage to start get a raise within 3 to 6 months.

If I apply for a fast food job tomorrow, I bet I'm hired on at more than minimum wage unless it's a mom and pop.

So the question is:  What percentage of the work force is paid minimum wage?

10%?  5%?  2%?  1%?  Less than 1%?

I suspect it's less than 1%.  Perhaps half of that.  And you're not there for long. 

Most of those workers should be teenagers and it should be their first job.

If injured on the job their medical bills are paid for and they are compensated at 60%.

In other  words…..this is not a crisis. 
It's 5%. And it really isn't a crisis, either way. I think it would be good policy to raise minimum wage, though.
5/5/2014 12:19 PM
That 5% (5.2% as of 2011 BLS statistics) includes those who are paid less per hour but earn tips and commissions.  Strictly minimum wage earners comprise about half of that (or 2.3%).

Overall this percentage is less than half of the total making minimum wage in 1979, meaning those who do earn minimum wage make up a significantly smaller percentage of the workforce than they did 30+ years ago.

Of course, if minimum wage immediately rises, so will the percentage of those making it....
5/5/2014 12:24 PM
Posted by bad_luck on 5/5/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by raucous on 5/3/2014 5:21:00 AM (view original):
Did you fall off the turnip truck yesterday? 


money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/smallbusiness/1203/gallery.employees/3.html


...and moron trucking jobs pay more than the median pay.  You probably think they should be millionaires.

caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/25/with-8-2-unemployment-why-does-nobody-want-200000-trucking-jobs/

Putting aside for a moment that it is somewhat self serving for a business owner to complain that no workers want the amazing jobs being offered, those examples are anecdotal. The reality is that, as of January of this year, there were three unemployed people for every one job opening. A true shortage of workers would drive wages up, and that isn't happening. Wages are rising at a rate less than 2%, which is under inflation.
It won't necessarily do that unless the people actually take the jobs, or they get filled by quality applicants.  The wages don't exist if the jobs aren't filled.  If I can't find a qualified applicant to do the job I'm hiring for, I usually assign it to the skilled people I have and we keep looking.

You should read your link thoroughly.  It points out that the 3:1 ratio you are referring to comes with caveats.  I'll let you find them.

5/5/2014 12:27 PM
According to my math, from this link from BLS, only 2.8% of the entire U.S. workforce (as of 2012) are making minimum wage or less.
5/5/2014 12:31 PM
Posted by silentpadna on 5/5/2014 12:24:00 PM (view original):
Posted by bad_luck on 5/5/2014 12:05:00 PM (view original):
Posted by raucous on 5/3/2014 5:21:00 AM (view original):
Did you fall off the turnip truck yesterday? 


money.cnn.com/galleries/2012/smallbusiness/1203/gallery.employees/3.html


...and moron trucking jobs pay more than the median pay.  You probably think they should be millionaires.

caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/07/25/with-8-2-unemployment-why-does-nobody-want-200000-trucking-jobs/

Putting aside for a moment that it is somewhat self serving for a business owner to complain that no workers want the amazing jobs being offered, those examples are anecdotal. The reality is that, as of January of this year, there were three unemployed people for every one job opening. A true shortage of workers would drive wages up, and that isn't happening. Wages are rising at a rate less than 2%, which is under inflation.
It won't necessarily do that unless the people actually take the jobs, or they get filled by quality applicants.  The wages don't exist if the jobs aren't filled.  If I can't find a qualified applicant to do the job I'm hiring for, I usually assign it to the skilled people I have and we keep looking.

You should read your link thoroughly.  It points out that the 3:1 ratio you are referring to comes with caveats.  I'll let you find them.

Oh, I read it. Thanks for your permission, though. The caveats go both ways, meaning you could make an argument that the job market is actually tighter than 3:1.

If I list an item for sale on craigslist and someone offers to buy it at half its value and I refuse, am I a bad person? Should I be forced to accept half price or should I be allowed to wait and see if I can get more for it?
5/5/2014 12:35 PM
You should do what you think the market will do.  That's how markets work.  If the government told you you had to sell it for $100 and it's only worth $20, would you be able to sell it?
5/5/2014 12:36 PM
If the government told me I had to buy something at a predetermined price regardless of market value, should I be forced to buy it from the "marketplace"?
of 122

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.