Why We Need a Universal Jobs Guarantee

phattonez · Mar 31, 2019

1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

Exquisitor · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

Some jackasses just can't work, and I'd rather give them welfare than pay them to stand around and be unproductive.

phattonez · Mar 31, 2019

Exquisitor said:
Some jackasses just can't work, and I'd rather give them welfare than pay them to stand around and be unproductive.

I'd rather give those jackasses nothing.

jdog21 · Mar 31, 2019

Exquisitor said:
Some jackasses just can't work, and I'd rather give them welfare than pay them to stand around and be unproductive.

While I don't agree with OP, your take on the matter is something I definitely don't agree with.

trouble13 · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

We also have more women working in the workplace. You think maybe men are not working by choice?

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

What do you plan to do with the drunk, lazy, and others that don't fit into your plan?

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

Don't we already do that?

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

How does creating a labor surplus put upward pressure on wages? If anything it will have the opposite effect.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

It really won't but it will increase the amount of part time Jobs being offered and decrease the amount of full time and overtime being offered by employers.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

This almost sounds like a threat. Have fun threatening people with failed ideas

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I467 using Tapatalk

phattonez · Mar 31, 2019

trouble13 said:
We also have more women working in the workplace. You think maybe men are not working by choice?

Not unless you think men are choosing to be poor.

What do you plan to do with the drunk, lazy, and others that don't fit into your plan?

The man who will not work, neither shall he eat.

Don't we already do that?

Given how many men aren't working, we're not doing it nearly enough.

How does creating a labor surplus put upward pressure on wages? If anything it will have the opposite effect.

What happens to companies paying $10 an hour when the job guarantee program pays $15 per hour?

It really won't but it will increase the amount of part time Jobs being offered and decrease the amount of full time and overtime being offered by employers.

Why would I take a lower paying job instead of a guaranteed job with better benefits? And you seem to forget that this would replace welfare and food stamps.

This almost sounds like a threat. Have fun threatening people with failed ideas

You're far too cavalier about the possibility of a socialist revolution. This has happened innumerous times throughout history. What makes you think we're immune?

soylentgreen · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
I'd rather give those jackasses nothing.

Then you have nothing to offer but a contradiction.

You say;

1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

You really cannot hold both positions and be seen as credible.

soylentgreen · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
You're far too cavalier about the possibility of a socialist revolution. This has happened innumerous times throughout history. What makes you think we're immune?

No, do not try and blame this on socialism. You come up with a silly idea and think it should be accepted merely because it fits what you think is an ideology. That is even more of a dumb reason than the poor excuse for a solution you are offering.

Ido not know if you realise your's is not a novel approach. It has been tried in america before and resulted in government spending that has put america in debt to this very day.

Why we might not have built the Hoover Dam today

Grokmaster · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

Let's see the BLS UNEDITED, UNALTERED stats , showing this "record number of men not working".

Men of VIABLE WORKING AGE, not RETIRED BABY BOOMERS.

Exquisitor · Mar 31, 2019

jdog21 said:
While I don't agree with OP, your take on the matter is something I definitely don't agree with.

I take my impression from France a few years ago on the news, the unproductivity and sense of entitlement seemed somewhat undesirable.

Exquisitor · Mar 31, 2019

phattonez said:
I'd rather give those jackasses nothing.

No, we do, you can't get welfare if you're a male, you have to live off your wife's check and then they give you food stamps.

The best jobs guarantee is low interest rates like we had under Obama and taxation that can pay wages and debt which will lower interest rates.

School and early development and investment in infrastructure will put people people to work and money into the economy.

phattonez · Apr 9, 2019

Exquisitor said:
No, we do, you can't get welfare if you're a male, you have to live off your wife's check and then they give you food stamps.

The best jobs guarantee is low interest rates like we had under Obama and taxation that can pay wages and debt which will lower interest rates.

School and early development and investment in infrastructure will put people people to work and money into the economy.

Lol. Some jobs guarantee. We had years of persistently high unemployment. Low interest rates only helped the rich.

Exquisitor · Apr 13, 2019

phattonez said:
Lol. Some jobs guarantee. We had years of persistently high unemployment. Low interest rates only helped the rich.

A logical plausistic, but incorrect.

How would low interest rates help the rich, when it is they, you are borrowing from?

High unemployment occurred because of the economic crisis left by Bush.

Everyone was lending money for big bucks.

The employment and economy slowly grew to the hand-off to Trump who pumped it full of sugar and now the rich lend at higher rates till it breaks down and they choke up.

No, all you tRump Reprobates have your head up your ***hole.

We have a choice this election between people who have their head up their ***hole and the Democrats so vote equally for both parties.

SoCal · Apr 13, 2019

trouble13 said:
...What do you plan to do with the drunk, lazy, and others that don't fit into your plan?..

We should let them die in the street like dogs. It's the, 'I've got mine, ____ you' conservative plan...

nekrodev · Apr 13, 2019

I don't know that this is necessarily how we best fix all the issues you listed, but it's certainly one that I'd support until I found a better alternative.

There's so much work to be done in our country, just speaking in terms of infrastructure, to basically provide a job to every able-bodied person 18 and older.

Individual · Apr 13, 2019

A more rational solution would be to eliminate the child tax deduction and raise taxes on large families.
The supply of people far exceeds the needs of employers.

Bullseye · Apr 13, 2019

phattonez said:
1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

We also have a record number of job openings. Creating make-work "job guarantees" is wasteful bribery.

In addition, many companies are raising wages voluntarily - as it should be. Number of people on food stamps is dropping as are the number of unemployment claims.

We had public works projects during the Grand Depression and it still top a world war to lower unemployment below 10%

ecofarm · Apr 13, 2019

Individual said:
A more rational solution would be to eliminate the child tax deduction and raise taxes on large families.
The supply of people far exceeds the needs of employers.

The demographic transition has never occurred under threat. Threat is the very reason people have many children, gotta play odds. It occurs in conjunction with two things foremost: education and healthcare, especially for women.

"If you don't have smaller families, we'll let you get poor" could only work if poor people had small families.

Individual · Apr 13, 2019

ecofarm said:
The demographic transition has never occurred under threat. Threat is the very reason people have many children, gotta play odds. It occurs in conjunction with two things foremost: education and healthcare, especially for women.

"If you don't have smaller families, we'll let you get poor" could only work if poor people had small families.

I'm unable to make any sense of your post, but we need for people to cease feeling that government exists to provide for their continued existence beyond their own abilities to provide.

ecofarm · Apr 13, 2019

Individual said:
I'm unable to make any sense of your post,

:lamo

Thingfish · Apr 13, 2019

As long as we’re pissn’ in one hand and ****ing in the other, I’d like to throw the “guaranteed for fair life” in the ring...long as we’re askin’

SoCal · Apr 13, 2019

Thingfish said:
As long as we’re pissn’ in one hand and ****ing in the other, I’d like to throw the “guaranteed for fair life” in the ring...long as we’re askin’

Can I play too? I'd like to ask for an honest president who's not a racist.

Your right of course, government can't guarantee a fair life. but liberals do what we can. Take the civil rights movement and the Brown vs BoE decision. Both made tremendous strides in making life much more fair for millions of Americans. Liberals fought long and hard for this progress and conservatives fought them every step of the way.

For most conservatives fairness is a dirty word. The roots of this attitude comes from conservatives not giving a flying ____ about the means, just the result. Fairness? That's for snowflakes. They've always been this way and always will be...

cpwill · Apr 13, 2019

SoCal said:
Can I play too? I'd like to ask for an honest president who's not a racist.

Your right of course, government can't guarantee a fair life. but liberals do what we can. Take the civil rights movement and the Brown vs BoE decision. Both made tremendous strides in making life much more fair for millions of Americans. Liberals fought long and hard for this progress and conservatives fought them every step of the way.

For most conservatives fairness is a dirty word.

This is incorrect. It is simply that, whereas conservatives tend to give more equal weight to multiple moral value systems, leftists tend to overemphasize Care. some fascinating research on this.

The roots of this attitude comes from conservatives not giving a flying ____ about the means, just the result.

It is actually flipped. Conservatives tend to emphasize process, Liberals results.

AmNat · Apr 14, 2019

phattonez said:
1. We still have a record high number of men not working. This is associated with high crime, decreased family formation, debt, and depression.

2. Without a job guarantee, the minimum wage is 0. The only way to have a real minimum wage is with a guaranteed job (and this applies only to those willing to work. Those who are lazy or show up drunk can and should be fired).

3. We can pay people to make real improvements to our communities and infrastructure instead of paying people money to do nothing (what we currently do).

4. It puts upward pressure on wages. Real median male income are still far lower than they were in the 70s.

5. It would end the practice of subsidizing the low wages of corporations through welfare. Currently companies pay people close to minimum wage because those employees can also collect food stamps. It's time to end this gross subsidy for rich corporations by ending food stamps and replacing it with a job guarantee at a living wage.

Each successive generation in this country is poorer and more indebted than the last. It's time to fix this, lower crime, beautify our communities, and stop subsidizing insolence. This is a far better option than UBI. Capitalists, if you want to avoid a revolution that leads to an end of property rights altogether, this is your only choice.

Amen.

cpwill said:
It is actually flipped. Conservatives tend to emphasize process, Liberals results.

This is true, but it's also why we consistently lose political battles.

cpwill · Apr 14, 2019

Individual said:
A more rational solution would be to eliminate the child tax deduction and raise taxes on large families.
The supply of people far exceeds the needs of employers.

Sure. And that works.

Up until the point where people age, and we discover that we live in a system where the young care for and pay for the old, and the old aren't very productive. Then it stops working so well.

Sent from my Moto G (5S) Plus using Tapatalk

Why We Need a Universal Jobs Guarantee

phattonez

Catholic

Exquisitor

Educator

phattonez

Catholic

jdog21

trouble13

phattonez

Catholic

soylentgreen

soylentgreen

Grokmaster

Exquisitor

Educator

Exquisitor

Educator

phattonez

Catholic

Exquisitor

Educator

SoCal

Woke Leftist

nekrodev

pleb

Individual

Bullseye

All Lives Matter or No Lives Matter

ecofarm

global liberation

Individual

ecofarm

global liberation

Thingfish

SoCal

Woke Leftist

cpwill

AmNat

cpwill