• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. Adds 195,000 Jobs; Unemployment Remains 7.6%

Conservative said:
How many long term unemployed have you hired? Get some help reading my response since obviously comprehension isn't a strong suit. This isn't a union shop where you hire the one out of work the longest, you hire the most qualified and one with the best work ethic depending on the job. Since you don't hire people your comments are opinion only and don't touch reality.
Click to expand...
Those who have been in long term unemployment are not in that condition due to "ethics", this is again the conservative Ayn Rand morality play. It is an continuing avoidance of why the unemployment numbers are the way they are.

This is not about morality.
 
Conservative said:
Two years unemployed? Why? Why would you hire someone who was unemployed for two years collecting an unemployment check? Are you going to get the right employee representing you to the public with that track record? For someone that never hires anyone I suggest you stop telling those of us who do that we are wrong since you have nothing to compare our choices to.
Click to expand...
You said two years, I did not. You continue to make this about morality, ignoring that there 3 unemployed for every job. You don't want them to get UI, you don't want govt assistance for retraining, you think that deregulation will cure this.......sometime.
 
Conservative said:
So you oppose keeping more of your own money and believe the govt. needs it more? Working people today are still benefiting from the Bush tax cuts whereas people working today aren't benefiting from the Obama tax cuts. I find it interesting that you cannot see the difference. Could it be political ideology blinding you?
Click to expand...
Many of the people not working today are not working because of the of the Bush tax cuts, especially those in the public sector. The tax rates established by President Clinton were working just fine.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
Those who have been in long term unemployment are not in that condition due to "ethics", this is again the conservative Ayn Rand morality play. It is an continuing avoidance of why the unemployment numbers are the way they are.

This is not about morality.
Click to expand...

Your opinion noted and since you claim to speak for all the long term unemployed please cite your experience and expertise in knowing what motivates the long term unemployed to stay unemployed for two years? Wonder if it has anything to do with unemployment benefits? Think they will manage your money any better?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You said two years, I did not. You continue to make this about morality, ignoring that there 3 unemployed for every job. You don't want them to get UI, you don't want govt assistance for retraining, you think that deregulation will cure this.......sometime.
Click to expand...

I want the employee that is going to represent me the best to the public not the one who spent 2 years unemployed and collected a paycheck from the taxpayers. That may or may not be the long term unemployed but the choice is mine because it is my investment that I am protecting.
 
Conservative said:
What you show is your inability to understand what leadership is. President's do not control the economy but their leadership influences the economic policies that do. A good leader doesn't continue to blame someone else for their own failures. A good leader takes a bad situation and makes it better not a bad situation and keeps it the same.

I have shown that you are the one that doesn't know what the numbers mean and that like far too many wage slaves have no concept of what it costs to run a business and what an intrusive Federal Govt. does to those costs with programs like Obamacare, more regulations, and higher taxes.
Click to expand...

No, not that much. No. I'm not going to lose money just because the president is weak. it really doesn't work that way. Sorry.

And regulations? If we need them, we need them. If not, show which ones we don't and why. Before reform, we pay more than any country in the world. Seems to me if you were worried about cost, you'd want more reform and not less.
 
pbrauer said:
Many of the people not working today are not working because of the of the Bush tax cuts, especially those in the public sector. The tax rates established by President Clinton were working just fine.
Click to expand...

Then the govt needs to stop spending money and forcing unfunded mandates on the states. The tax rates established under Clinton were revised due to the Republican controlled Congress. Tell me what benefit raising taxes does for the unemployed? Does that create greater demand for jobs. Would that create an atmosphere for your employer to hire more people? There is no benefit to raising taxes in this economy and you know it because you are smarter than this.
 
Boo Radley said:
No, not that much. No. I'm not going to lose money just because the president is weak. it really doesn't work that way. Sorry.

And regulations? If we need them, we need them. If not, show which ones we don't and why. Before reform, we pay more than any country in the world. Seems to me if you were worried about cost, you'd want more reform and not less.
Click to expand...

So you are telling me that businesses are going to pay no attention to Obama economic policies? What you ignore as do most liberals is that private business has to meet a payroll and higher taxes, more regulations, and Obamacare raise operating expenses that require more revenue to pay. A business doesn't get the revenue the business doesn't hire. That is what is happening today thanks to Obama. You saying a President doesn't control the economy ignores the impact his policies do have on the economy.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You said two years, I did not. You continue to make this about morality, ignoring that there 3 unemployed for every job. You don't want them to get UI, you don't want govt assistance for retraining, you think that deregulation will cure this.......sometime.
Click to expand...

Your quote of mine says two years. Stop posting that which you don't want repeated
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You are avoiding the point made, those who will not hire the long term unemployed would not hire you as anything.
Click to expand...

one bad practice doesn't a bad employer make. i don't agree with not considering the long term unemployed. however, it's still possible that the employer treats its existing employees well. if one practice like that automatically makes an employer "bad," then there are probably no "good" employers.
 
Conservative said:
Your opinion noted and since you claim to speak for all the long term unemployed please cite your experience and expertise in knowing what motivates the long term unemployed to stay unemployed for two years? Wonder if it has anything to do with unemployment benefits? Think they will manage your money any better?
Click to expand...
Not only are you playing the dishonest "absolute" argument, you still continue to make this a morality based argument, that the"motivation" is freeloading. You just can't bring yourself to acknowledge the reality of the job market which is compounded by your espoused views on NOT hiring the long term unemployed.

Since it is a combination of negative morality viewpoints, it shows a hatred of the person....it is an irrational viewpoint.
 
Helix said:
one bad practice doesn't a bad employer make. i don't agree with not considering the long term unemployed. however, it's still possible that the employer treats its existing employees well. if one practice like that automatically makes an employer "bad," then there are probably no "good" employers.
Click to expand...
You are still avoiding the point, you would not be hired by him, you do not agree with his views on discrimination of the long term unemployed, therefore for you he could not be a "good" employer.
 
Conservative said:
No, civics says you are wrong, The house is where all Appropriation bills begin, not where all legislation start. Why don't you ask Harry Reid why he is sitting on House passed bills and refusing to allow the Senate to debate them? Donc gets it, why don't you? Your view of the do nothing House is distorted based upon the media reports that continue to ignore House passed legislation.
Click to expand...

Oh you mean the thirty three or so bills repealing the affordable care act, the bills that are banning abortion, letting unemployment benefits expire, and bills cutting food stamps.

How do any of those create jobs?
 
Conservative said:
So you are telling me that businesses are going to pay no attention to Obama economic policies? What you ignore as do most liberals is that private business has to meet a payroll and higher taxes, more regulations, and Obamacare raise operating expenses that require more revenue to pay. A business doesn't get the revenue the business doesn't hire. That is what is happening today thanks to Obama. You saying a President doesn't control the economy ignores the impact his policies do have on the economy.
Click to expand...

I didn't say no attention, but they won't throw away opportunity to make money because of them. They will adjust. They always have. You guys tend to use what was happening before reform as being his fault. That's often just silly.
 
Helix said:
one bad practice doesn't a bad employer make. i don't agree with not considering the long term unemployed. however, it's still possible that the employer treats its existing employees well. if one practice like that automatically makes an employer "bad," then there are probably no "good" employers.
Click to expand...
You continue to avoid the point, you would not be hired by him, you could not therefore claim from a personal viewpoint that he is a good employer, only those who work for him can make that personal judgement.
 
ocean515 said:
For the average business, how much gross revenue is required to cover the cost of an employee being paid $50k/yr, plus average benefits?
Click to expand...
How much is tea in China?
 
Gimmesometruth said:
You continue to avoid the point, you would not be hired by him, you could not therefore claim from a personal viewpoint that he is a good employer, only those who work for him can make that personal judgement.
Click to expand...

But you've never worked for "him", yet your able to make a claim "he" is a bad employer?

Remarkable...
 
Conservative said:
Your opinion noted and since you claim to speak for all the long term unemployed please cite your experience and expertise in knowing what motivates the long term unemployed to stay unemployed for two years? Wonder if it has anything to do with unemployment benefits? Think they will manage your money any better?
Click to expand...

It's simple, productivity has greatly outpaced wages. Things are made so that they can be sold. The only people who can buy things are people who make money. Employment drops when productivity outpaces wages.

Wages - savings + borrowing = consumption
Consumption / productivity = # of jobs.
 
Gimmesometruth said:
The average newly hired long term unemployed is not getting a $50K salary.

Clueless, indeed.
Click to expand...

I made no mention of newly hired, or long term unemployed. I was curious to see what number you would estimate, based on your business experience.

I think your reply answers many questions.
 
ocean515 said:
But you've never worked for "him", yet your able to make a claim "he" is a bad employer?

Remarkable...
Click to expand...
I did not make such a judgement, I said anyone who whines about the long term unemployed, constantly using them as a club in their arguments....when they previous and continuously repeat they would not hire the long term unemployed.......are making hypocritical statements.

It is remarkable that you have yet to comprehend that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom