- Joined
- Jul 14, 2012
- Messages
- 16,516
- Reaction score
- 8,229
- Location
- Montreal, QC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Who said anything about unskilled? I have worked 4 different careers tied to industry. Each getting me to the next one but none of them in the exact same field. For instance some one familiar with production planning at one plant could possibly be a quality or facility manager at another.
Seriously? Who can't find a job in 6 months that pays more than unemployment? Are you really serious?:lamo
The reason why is because people who are on unemployment benefits usually pay into it when they were employed. That is unemployment benefits are a type of insurance that gets paid to the government so when they do get unemployed they can collect on it while they look for work.
They already earned that money when they were employed. So why should they be forced to work for money that they paid into when they were working?
As for welfare, there are many people who are employed at low wage jobs who do get welfare benefits. Mostly because the low wage jobs they work at don't pay them enough money to live on. So they are on "workfare".
So how about instead of making them work even more hours we instead increase the minimum wage employers are required to pay out so they can afford to just barely survive?
unemployment is already dependent on taking a similar job offer in your field, at least in my state.
i'm simply saying that it makes no sense to have a highly skilled worker filling a lower tier job in order to collect the insurance that they've already paid for. the system can always benefit from tweaking, though. the insurance isn't intended to last forever, and you shouldn't be able to collect if you won't take a similar job in your field.
So you are just assuming that's the case? I mean seriously do you have any data or maybe a personal story, something? I'm just curious where 6 months came from. Why not 8 months? Why not 5 months? Why not 3? What's the different between 3 and 6?
I agree, but I think it shouldn't last if you are qualified to take a job paying more than the unemployment itself after 26 weeks
How about we make them work after the first 26 weeks or draw, the unemployment plan was not designed to go for years.
How about we cap executive salaries so corporations would have more incentive to pay higher wages to their labor force, or to hire larger number of laborers.
how about letting those who own the company make such decisions. and a company is stupid to pay more than the going rate for the commodity known as labor
The company is stupider to pay executives bloated salaries. Especially when they lose customers because they pay those bloated salaries to executives rather than to updating equipment or hiring more employees to provide better quality service to their customers.
How about we cap executive salaries so corporations would have more incentive to pay higher wages to their labor force, or to hire larger number of laborers.
Why should we, liberals would rather sit at home and draw?
There are plenty of liberals who are out working right now, just as there are plenty of conservatives out there collecting unemployment and getting welfare.
And the reason why we should is because those executives demanding such inflated pay means that those corporations have less money with which to hire laborers.
Corporations have limited amounts of capital and income. The more of that money that is paid to executives, the less money that corporation has to hire more workers to provide greater quality services or to expand and grow.
So by capping executive pay we allow corporations to limit how much they pay to executives, which allows a greater amount of that pie of capital and income to be pay for other things, which include more workers or paying more money to higher quality workers.
Which also has the side effect of increasing the number of employees that corporation has, which means we have fewer people collecting unemployment and needing welfare.
actually if we can get top management talent for less money the money saved should go to the stockholders.
paying more than the going rate for labor is stupid
Or we are grossly overpaying executives and grossly underpaying workers, and paying executives less so that we can pay workers more will mean that both types of employees will be paid what they are worth.
Especially if by paying those workers more they are better able to pay for the things they need, such as shelter, transportation, and medical care rather than have the government provide those things to them since they are too underpaid to afford such things themselves.
the market determines what we pay common labor
executives often is a combination of unique circumstances and in some cases the ego of boards
I am quite aware of all the variables of market forces. However, this thread is specifically talking about getting people off unemployment and welfare. And one of the problems of those who are unemployed and on welfare is that many of them are "the working poor" - those who work but not at wage levels that allows them to survive.
So not only are they working at low wages, but the original poster of this thread wants them to work even more to get welfare just to survive.
When, instead of the government giving these working poor money to just survive, corporations could be called on to allow these workers to earn enough in wages just to survive.
If corporations don't want to provide wages at a level that allow workers to survive, then the government will step in and provide welfare to allow workers to survive, which they do anyways by taxing people who work but get higher salaries.
So this can be paid for either by paying executives less and paying workers more or by paying executives more and then taxing them more. Either way, it's going to happen.
So if it's going to happen we may as well pay them viable wages for doing an honest day's job.
So they can survive on unemployment but can't survive working? WTF?:shock::roll:
I wasn't talking about unemployment in that post. I was talking about welfare, workfare, and those who work low wage jobs and still get welfare because those jobs don't pay them enough for them to survive.
Then maybe they need to develop some better job skills so they can get better jobs?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?