User Tag List

First 1234 Last

Results 21 to 30 of 36

  1. #21
    Ginkgo
    Guest

    Default

    Trying to get a job is a job that doesn't pay. It requires being "okay" with not being paid in the present to find a source of income; I think it's rude to tell someone to get a job if it's said crassly. However, it's also said with charity, so it's possible to accept it as a temporary form of payment on a good day.

  2. #22
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swivelinglight View Post
    I've never come across a principle that stated anything of the sort during my studies.

    Sigh, so it isn't so much basic economic principle as is it intuitive deduction based off studies I've seen.

    I've once encountered a study showing population size and demand of workload. In communities of 7, there is enough workload to occupy all persons. In communities of 500, there is enough workload to occupy all persons. In communities of 500,000, yadda yadda. I'm sure it depends on society, such as in the group of 500 exists a king and his immediate subjects which are not really required to do "much", or in the case of california, where the population was literally saturating the infrastructure of the system, but I think I got the point across. There typically is enough work to serve the population.

    It's always made such sense that I assume it should be able to be reasoned without much depth of thought, so I call it 'basic' when presented. I will do research to empirically back my claim.





    I'm now apprehensive about using family subjects in my rationale, but recently (2008-2010) my cousin was unemployed. When someone asked him if he had any luck finding a job, he would say no, and they would talk about how poor the economy was and how hard it was hard to find work.

    The truth is was that he was holding off for a banker's job, at a bank, while collecting unemployment. He had his reasons, and I guess I don't blame him, but I don't think working is such a luxury that you can be that specifically choosey.


    Try doing that shit in the middle ages, you know? People are blessed to have the opportunity of work we have in today's society, yet no one seems to appreciate it.



  3. #23
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Not necessarily. There are people who have to be told to get a job, and no, they aren't always looking for one.

    Trust me, I've met these losers.

    I'm sure you're not one of them.

  4. #24
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prplchknz View Post
    yeah I want to work in a kitchen, but i've applied to clothing stores, fast food, office temp work ect. things i know that i'm just gonna stay at til i find something better. but i need a spring board and job number 1 is going to be my spring board
    Prpl I know that you are looking for a job, and I actually think you could qualify for disability, so I'm not sure who would bully you about this, frankly.

    NOT EVERYONE SHOULD WORK...some people are sick, disabled, in school, or have small children (nope, I'm not a big fan of forcing women with little babies to work, I think it's part of what is wrong with our society right now, the daycare culture ...which is an offshoot of Marxist ideology) ...

    On the other hand, there are able-bodied young men who can and do eventually get a job who don't. There are people who are capable of working who simply don't, and they do have options, even if those options are fast food or factory work...and those sometimes HAVE TO BE the job for someone who really won't apply themselves to doing anything else via education or even helping around the house.

    There ARE losers who make messes for other people to clean up, who could work somewhere, and don't.

    I want to reiterate that I don't think this even applies to you with your condition. Though it might be helpful for you to get part-time work maybe in a bakery or sandwich shop, that might suit you well.

  5. #25
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jontherobot View Post
    Sigh, so it isn't so much basic economic principle as is it intuitive deduction based off studies I've seen.

    I've once encountered a study showing population size and demand of workload. In communities of 7, there is enough workload to occupy all persons. In communities of 500, there is enough workload to occupy all persons. In communities of 500,000, yadda yadda. I'm sure it depends on society, such as in the group of 500 exists a king and his immediate subjects which are not really required to do "much", or in the case of california, where the population was literally saturating the infrastructure of the system, but I think I got the point across. There typically is enough work to serve the population.

    It's always made such sense that I assume it should be able to be reasoned without much depth of thought, so I call it 'basic' when presented. I will do research to empirically back my claim.

    Do



    I'm now apprehensive about using family subjects in my rationale, but recently (2008-2010) my cousin was unemployed. When someone asked him if he had any luck finding a job, he would say no, and they would talk about how poor the economy was and how hard it was hard to find work.

    The truth is was that he was holding off for a banker's job, at a bank, while collecting unemployment. He had his reasons, and I guess I don't blame him, but I don't think working is such a luxury that you can be that specifically choosey.


    Try doing that shit in the middle ages, you know? People are blessed to have the opportunity of work we have in today's society, yet no one seems to appreciate it.


    Do you understand how the economy works? When middle class people (like your cousin the banker) take low-wage jobs in an economic downturn like this, it pushes other people out of the job market who are ONLY qualified to do either lower wage work or harder labor that may pay more, and then those people have to go on welfare, or become homeless.

    It's actually better for middle class people who are educated, and who probably have relatives financially stable enough to help them, to hold out for better work, than putting less qualified people with less options on the street or on welfare.

    CEOs of corporations are actually making MORE now than they were before the stock market crash. The job shortage isn't real, in my opinion. There are greedy hoarders at the top who don't even want to pay employees, so all the screeching the Republicans are doing about corporations creating jobs is totally a joke; the people at the top are fine and have already bounced back, and no they still aren't creating jobs. Giving them further tax breaks isn't going to change their minds, when they are ALREADY making more than they were (on average) than they were before the crash.

    The actual structure of our system needs to change to remedy this. I suggest something along the lines of real capitalism, which doesn't exist anymore, with sensible government programs.

    You probably disagree with that, but honestly I don't think you're even looking at the big picture if you think your middle class, educated cousin shouldn't collect unemployment until he finds a job he's qualified for.

  6. #26
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    690

    Default

    http://economics.about.com/od/typeso...employment.htm


    @Marmotini

    Frictional unemployment is inevitable. I don't think it's a bad thing for the fraction of individuals who are overqualified to take those lower paying jobs. It makes sense that they would eventually choose to allocate to the profession or industry they're trained for. It's not the fault of the individual that he is more attractive for the lower wage job it's the fault of the others who are not as qualified. If the case occurs where he chooses to stay at the lower paying job then that means his training was for waste. Of course that's a burden to the system but the one who has to pay for it is the individual. You say you're for capitalism yet say the individual should get unemployment checks until he finds a job that he's qualified for. I don't disagree but I do acknowledge that this scenario would involve government intervention and is not a "true capitalist" method.

  7. #27
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Swivelinglight View Post
    http://economics.about.com/od/typeso...employment.htm


    @Marmotini

    Frictional unemployment is inevitable. I don't think it's a bad thing for the fraction of individuals who are overqualified to take those lower paying jobs. It makes sense that they would eventually choose to allocate to the profession or industry they're trained for. It's not the fault of the individual that he is more attractive for the lower wage job it's the fault of the others who are not as qualified. If the case occurs where he chooses to stay at the lower paying job then that means his training was for waste. Of course that's a burden to the system but the one who has to pay for it is the individual. You say you're for capitalism yet say the individual should get unemployment checks until he finds a job that he's qualified for. I don't disagree but I do acknowledge that this scenario would involve government intervention and is not a "true capitalist" method.
    True capitalism doesn't exist though, we have corporate welfare. Why should only the richest people have help when they're the ones who caused the problem in the first place? If a false bubble of credit hadn't been created out of irresponsible greed, we wouldn't be in this shithole in the first place.

    You can say "well whomever gets the job should take it" and I agree. I never said anyone should be barred from employment of any kind. However, if a middle class educated person holds out for a job they are actually qualified for, I think that is not only a moral but sensible choice in the current economy.

    More people on welfare and on the streets doesn't help anybody, and being on unemployment is much less draining.

    We cannot operate as if we are living in real capitalism when fiscal favoritism has been shown to the upper classes; that is unjust and absurd. The tax burden currently falls upon the middle class, under the guise that the upper class will create more jobs...and despite their success, even during (or maybe even BECAUSE OF) the recession, they aren't creating more jobs. It's a bunch of baloney.

    Reaganomics doesn't work, and actually what we have now is WORSE than Reaganomics. Reagan actually argued for a greater tax for the rich than for the working and middle classes, he famously made a speech in the 80's that a greater tax burden falls on the wealthy person than the bus driver. In America's hey-day, back in the mid-20th century, the wealthy were paying the highest tax percentages ever.

    The wealthy are taxed the lowest they have been in many a year, and still they complain, even while our economy struggles to stay afloat. I really think this country is full of insane people, or full of people with no awareness of history.

    I think they should start teaching history again on the History Channel instead of talking about the apocalypse and space aliens, so that Americans are a little more grounded in reality.

    Anyway, I'm always able to generate income for myself, because I'm inventive and independent and still young and able-bodied; however, I'm aware of the conditions of the times, and the reality of now, and I can physically see it around me, especially being someone who graduated high school during the economic boom of the 90's and who lived in Vegas when it continued to have a fairly thriving economy after 9/11...even Vegas is failing now, which is pretty extreme if 9/11 didn't even impact the city the way this recession has.

    I think the future lies in small business. But we can only have this as our future - small business, and self-employment and family operated concerns - if our system reverts back to what it should be, and stops showing wealthy corporations FAVORITISM.

  8. #28
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marmotini View Post
    Do you understand how the economy works? When middle class people (like your cousin the banker) take low-wage jobs in an economic downturn like this, it pushes other people out of the job market who are ONLY qualified to do either lower wage work or harder labor that may pay more, and then those people have to go on welfare, or become homeless.

    It's actually better for middle class people who are educated, and who probably have relatives financially stable enough to help them, to hold out for better work, than putting less qualified people with less options on the street or on welfare.

    CEOs of corporations are actually making MORE now than they were before the stock market crash. The job shortage isn't real, in my opinion. There are greedy hoarders at the top who don't even want to pay employees, so all the screeching the Republicans are doing about corporations creating jobs is totally a joke; the people at the top are fine and have already bounced back, and no they still aren't creating jobs. Giving them further tax breaks isn't going to change their minds, when they are ALREADY making more than they were (on average) than they were before the crash.

    The actual structure of our system needs to change to remedy this. I suggest something along the lines of real capitalism, which doesn't exist anymore, with sensible government programs.

    You probably disagree with that, but honestly I don't think you're even looking at the big picture if you think your middle class, educated cousin shouldn't collect unemployment until he finds a job he's qualified for.

    He wasn't looking for a job he was qualified for, he was looking for the only job he was willing to take. 1.75 years of unemployment he collected.


    I guess where he and I (and maybe even you) differ is that I would rather work doing something than take anything for free.


    When I was laid off from my shop foreman position at a dealership, do you think I held out for another similar position at a different dealership? No, I got a job as a business to business salesman. It sucked. I also worked at OfficeMax as a sales rep. I also worked at Michael's, unloading inventory from trucks. Then finally, after about three months, I landed a position as an assistant manager at Uhaul. Within a year, I made GM of a store and was making more than I made ever in my life (and him as a banker). I think I ended up making about 1.8 times what I made as a shop foreman at a dealer, and gained tremendous experience.

    Then I got fired, for someone stealing money under my watch and refusing to pay it back. I qualified for unemployment, but did I take it? No, I have not filed for unemployment. I have donated plasma, I have helped shuttle friends around for money, I have lived off of my savings, I am again beginning to unload inventory from trucks.

    I refuse to let anyone pay my way through life, being of incredible capability. Maybe some day I will legitimately need government funding, and when I do, I will not feel guilty for it. I understand not everyone has my will, so whatever. I'll still judge.

  9. #29
    Honor Thy Inferior Such Irony's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    MBTI
    INtp
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII Ne
    Posts
    5,091

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by prplchknz View Post
    I find this very rude, first of all you probably don't know the situation so STFU. second of all for all you know they could be looking and possibly have some interviews lined up. but telling someone to get a job is like telling someone to grow an extra arm its futile, because they probably know they need a job
    Yes, I agree. In this economy you could do all the right things and search hard for a job and it still doesn't guarantee you'll get one.
    INtp
    5w6 or 9w1 sp/so/sx, I think
    Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff
    Neutral Good
    LII-Ne




  10. #30
    Shaman BlackCat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    MBTI
    ESFP
    Enneagram
    9w8 sx/sp
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    7,003

    Default

    I see a TON of "now hiring" and "help wanted" signs around where I live... so there isn't much excuse to not go find one IMO.
    () 9w8-3w4-7w6 tritype.

    sCueI (primary Inquisition)

Similar Threads

  1. I have a plan to get a job
    By prplchknz in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 10-12-2013, 01:46 PM
  2. [NT] NTs-Would you alter your personality test to get a job?
    By sculpting in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 09-02-2013, 09:54 PM
  3. [NF] NFs-Would you alter your personality test to get a job?
    By sculpting in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 08-15-2013, 06:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO