Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 49

Thread: Jobs

  1. #27
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Quote Originally Posted by 2sac View Post
    Send 'em al to Canada
    How about starting out with no more carte blanch at the grocery store. EBT good for bread, bologna, pb&j, milk, juice, and water. Nobody will starve unless its by chioce. Ween them off the teat one nipple at a time. Time limit for welfare benefits. Free job training. Teach them the construction trades and have them build more prisons. That way the non compliers will be able to keep their free housing. Absolutely no free cell phones or cable tv. Need to use a computer, go to the library. Section 8 housing for a time limit with the person receiving the benefit responsible for 1/2 the rent. Don't have an answer about the cash for babies program. You don't comply you're homeless. Illegals get zero benefits and immediatly deported once they're found out.
    There is no easy answer but something needs to be done.
    I agree, people that live free of charge should not have a wide variety of choices, we should focus on getting them jobs.

  2. #28
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Helena, Montana
    Posts
    2,155
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    I agree, people that live free of charge should not have a wide variety of choices, we should focus on getting them jobs.
    You can lead a horse to water but.....until life is hard for the "takers" they will not choose to work.
    Don't worry zombies are looking for brains, you're safe...

  3. #29
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Atlanta area
    Posts
    2,552
    A new employee is an investment in an unknown. Before an employee can help to make a profit for the company, the company has to incur several costs upfront. A company should expect to break even on the new employee investment after six months.

    What are some of the costs of hiring a new employee?

    http://smallbusiness.foxbusiness.com...ring-employee/
    http://web.mit.edu/e-club/hadzima/ho...oyee-cost.html
    http://money.cnn.com/2010/03/26/smal...osts/index.htm

    "Not every new hire will demand the entire process, but even an $8/hour employee can end up costing a company around $3,500 in turnover costs, both direct and indirect."
    http://www.investopedia.com/financia...#axzz26ve0HP8p

    With so many unqualified workers looking for work and with the increasing costs of applicant screening, the easiest and most cost effective way to screen them is in the job listing. Why spend time and money on someone you have no intention of hiring?
    Vacuum Technology:
    CRUD = Contamination Resulting in Undesirable Deposits.
    CRAPP = Contamination Resulting in Additional Partial Pressure.

    Change your vacuum pump oil now.

    Test. Testing, 1,2,3.

  4. #30
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Paper Street Soap Company
    Posts
    2,304
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    I understand that employers are in business to make money, while only hiring the best will maximize profit gains in the short term, what happens when there are not enough people categorized as the best? The economy goes to crap because there aren't enough people working and your profit dwindles....the person you turned away, now has no money and can't buy your product.

    Am I backwards on this?
    It seems reaonable but thats not why our economy is in the crapper. So it's a rhetorical question you are asking.

    I dont tend to get into rhetorical or hypotheticals.

    Demand will increase employers profit. Not hiring for the sake of increasing the number of consumers.

    Right now there is a lack of confidence in the economy that is causing companies to withhold putting up that " Hiring" sign.

    The lack of confidence that comes with electing a guy who believes that redistrubtion is a legitmate economic concept.

    When that changes hiring will increase.

  5. #31
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,944
    Quote Originally Posted by 2sac View Post
    Send 'em al to Canada
    How about starting out with no more carte blanch at the grocery store. EBT good for bread, bologna, pb&j, milk, juice, and water. Nobody will starve unless its by chioce. Ween them off the teat one nipple at a time. Time limit for welfare benefits. Free job training. Teach them the construction trades and have them build more prisons. That way the non compliers will be able to keep their free housing. Absolutely no free cell phones or cable tv. Need to use a computer, go to the library. Section 8 housing for a time limit with the person receiving the benefit responsible for 1/2 the rent. Don't have an answer about the cash for babies program. You don't comply you're homeless. Illegals get zero benefits and immediatly deported once they're found out.
    There is no easy answer but something needs to be done.
    I find that 5-lb sacks of potatoes at Kroger's for $2.77 are always a good buy.

  6. #32
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ft. Worth, TX
    Posts
    1,944
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    I agree, people that live free of charge should not have a wide variety of choices, we should focus on getting them jobs.
    They won't let you stay on food stamps for more than 3 years. The problem is that this is the worst possible time to kick people off of government assistance because there are no jobs unskilled workers can do--the Mexicans already have the restaurant jobs and other entry level jobs. And so where is 250-lb mama gonna get a job who has been on public assistance her whole life? She won't get one unless it's a Barrack Obama government job. Who is going to watch the kids during the day? How can she afford it without government assistance to pay for it? Where is daddy? Long gone. Then add to this the democrats don't want change because they want the lock of the vote of the 47% that are now dependant on the U.S. government. Even if there were to be a financial collapse I wonder if it would be enough for change. The only way change happens is if those checks stop hitting her bank account every month. That is the only way. And the results would be very painful as somebody else already said.

  7. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Chicagoland Area
    Posts
    4,591
    My ex wife has been on public assistance since we divorced in 1996 because she is "bi polar" which in laymans terms "A depressed alcoholic" My son, who moved out of her home in'07, taxi's her around because her drivers license is revoked, won't enter the grocery store with her because he is embarassed she pays with ebt. Prior to us splitting up she held a decent job at a hospital doing administrative work and bookkeeping. She has never attempted to get a job after the divorce. She doesn't have to.
    At a certain point, I believe people who collect assistance become conditioned that they are helpless/hopeless. Once that happens, there is no way back.
    Officially, Down for the count

    YOU HAVE TO GET OFF YOUR ASS TO GET ON YOUR FEET

    I know enough to know, I don't know enough
    Liberalism-Ideas so good they mandate them

  8. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    2,650
    Will trade food stamps for crack.

  9. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    North Richland Hills, Texas
    Posts
    14,914
    Quote Originally Posted by freemind View Post
    A guy can't employ 50 people if he only needs 25. That seems to be the point your are missing. There just isnt't a demand for labor.
    There is that, but another part of the problem is that there are a lot of companies out there that would actually like to higher a couple more people, but it would push them over the number of employees where federal and stat laws make the offering of certain benefits manditory, thus driving their cost per employee up.
    Even in a reasonably good economy, but especially in an economy like we have now, growing companies have to maximize the productivity of their current workforce, because it is just to damn expensive to transition to the next level.
    If more government is the answer, then it's a really stupid question.

  10. #36
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    Thanks for your responses.

  11. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    N.E. Indiana
    Posts
    879
    Quote Originally Posted by AStudent View Post
    I'm not saying the employee owes anyone anything....my I have already stated that these are rights of employers.

    The question...when companies choose to work understaffed, does this raise or lower unemployment?

    Companies not hiring leads to fewer people being employed...plain and simple.
    When a company runs understaffed, it creates oppertunity for new business to form (creating employment) to fill the demand for the products or services the understaffed companies are not fulfilling.

  12. #38
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,876
    I would guess not many here would disagree with me that there are some people that are legitimately unemployable in our society. Sure we could make a job for them but lets just say the private sector is not looking to hire them. Take them off the table (mental issues, some health issues...). Lets just look at those with a chance. You have the recently unemployed, the systematic unemployed (grew up on assistance), the youth with little experience. Do solve each group's problem to find meaningful employment with the same methods? (sorry not getting into it more than that, have stuff to do)

    Had a friend that raised a kid on SS. When the kid turned 18 she got into a government program and learned how to be a social worker. The choice between getting a low paying job (teenage mother high school dropout) with no security or minimal but secure government support she took the government assistance route. At least she would not end up on the street if the place she worked closed down jeopardizing here son's well being. When she was young her parents drummed into her she was a girl and their purpose in life was to get married and have kids. Scariest thing she done was take that leap and learn she could achieve her goals. In her case a government program helped her with the fear of stepping out of her secure world, mind you they backed her through the transition.

    The recent unemployed. The skilled but no jobs to be had. This is a tough one. In today's paper speaking of my province.

    Unemployed have a better chance of landing a job than many of their provincial counterparts, Statistics Canada data released Tuesday show.

    The agency said there were 3.4 unemployed people for every vacant job. That was the third-lowest provincial ratio behind Alberta's 1.6 and Saskatchewan's 1.9. It was also nearly two points below the national ratio of 5.3, and a modest improvement from a year earlier, when the ratio was 3.7. Provincially, Newfoundland and Labrador had the highest ratio, at 10.6.
    Our unemployment rate is 7.3 percent, Hear you guys are worse. So lets get people working. Say we had a perfect match between people out of work and the jobs that are available. My province which is doing real well has 3.4 people for every job that is out there. So for every person that gets lucky and ends up with a job there are better than two people that do not have an option to get one. And again we are doing well here, as compared to Canada's unemployment rate (and there are the people looking for work not including those chronically unemployed) ours is 5.3%.

    Now not every job finds their match, just because you want to work does not mean you will be qualified for the job. Take my work, we are looking to fill a couple of electrician positions and we are not getting any applicants even though we are a government funded (union) institution that supposedly pays well. Well the electricians in the private sector are making 25% and up more than we are paying. Had trouble getting a millwright also, skilled labor that take years to develop are in demand, not something the average unemployed can walk into.

    I used to work in a factory, I was good at what I did but when the place closed I did not have much of a prospect for a good paying job. Middle aged guy not wanting to end up in a dead end job that pays peanuts I decided to take a chance and spend two years back in school hoping to get something better. Scary taking that leap of faith especially when I did not know if I was smart enough to get through the course. (Kind of funny as ten years after that first nervous day in college I was scared sh*tless standing in front of the 2nd year class, my first day as instructor for the same program I took) I was lucky that I did not have anyone financially dependent on me, if I had kids I probably would not have taken that direction. The average middle aged person probably does not have the option. These I think are the tough ones to find jobs for.

    And then there is the youth. They used to take the entry level jobs but they are starting to be crowded out by the elder workers. Hard for these to see a future when you have the middle aged guys bumping them for scraps. The kids are worried about getting deep in debt getting an education also. Who knows if it will pay off. At least school is partly subsidized by government up here.


    So where are the jobs going to come from? Well the skilled tradesmen will have to be replaced as many of the Baby Boomers get close to retire. Don't know how it is in other places but from what I seen business really does not want to help in the training of replacement workers. A lot of the positions also come with everything but the kitchen sink as qualifications. Many of those qualifications also include letters behind your name or a piece of paper to back you up. At one time the question was could you do the job, now it is do you have the papers to do the job. No real answers here to share, just giving another perspective to color the discussion.
    Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference. —Mark Twain

  13. #39
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    1,268
    I agree printer.....it's a tough topic.

    Right now does not seem to be the right time to be asking more from applicants, seeing as how many are soon to retire and the labor force isn't ready to take those jobs.

    Many here can say that it's the fault of todays generation, which is partially true, but I would be willing to bet that most of them got their careers started when you could simply walk in and demand a job and it would be granted provided they proved themselves. I hate to say it but things aren't that way now....as you said, most places refuse to give training.

    We are trying to replace a workforce that simply had to show up and work hard, with a workforce that must be perfect in every way, in a time when people are even less perfect than the generations before them. I don't see it going well.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Comfortech Show Promo Image

Related Forums

Plumbing Talks | Contractor Magazine
Forums | Electrical Construction & Maintenance (EC&M) Magazine
Comfortech365 Virtual Event