How President Obama can create jobs...

I still think we need to put all these welfare *****es to work. They are getting PAID, might as well make them do something to actually EARN that money. Put them to work cleaning up the streets, parks, schools, highways, etc! Make America a better place! Screw trying to run drug tests on them...idc if a druggy or even an occasional drug user is cleaning up the streets I walk on every day.

Of course...idiots think this is slavery (I forget the president who suggested this very thing and was shot down bc it was thought as slavery)...but when did slaves get paid more than people working at McDonalds?
 
AzzidReign said:
I still think we need to put all these welfare *****es to work. They are getting PAID, might as well make them do something to actually EARN that money. Put them to work cleaning up the streets, parks, schools, highways, etc! Make America a better place! Screw trying to run drug tests on them...idc if a druggy or even an occasional drug user is cleaning up the streets I walk on every day.

Of course...idiots think this is slavery (I forget the president who suggested this very thing and was shot down bc it was thought as slavery)...but when did slaves get paid more than people working at McDonalds?
Click to expand...


I am not from the USA, but I am on benefits, and for good reason. It's nice to know how you talk about people on welfare. I could support people on welfare by saying you're just a dumb ignorant American hick, but hey-ho. Let's not call each-other names or generalize, shall we?
 
Floris said:
I am not from the USA, but I am on benefits, and for good reason. It's nice to know how you talk about people on welfare. I could support people on welfare by saying you're just a dumb ignorant American hick, but hey-ho. Let's not call each-other names or generalize, shall we?
Click to expand...
Not sure what it's like in your country, but you should see the people on welfare here. Not all, but a large majority are scum. I've seen things like trading in food stamps for money so they could buy drugs. I've seen them getting 3 carts full of groceries at tax payer expense, then see them drive off in their Cadillac Escalade with 20 inch rims that spin. They're lazy and won't work and won't look for a job but continue to procreate and bring in more people into this world that will likely end up just like them.

No, there are people who really need the help and I'm all for it. My own mother has permanent brain damage from an accident that happened years ago, possibly before I was even born. It's only now started to affect her. She is now on disability because she could no longer teach. People like her...yeah, I have no problem helping them out. It's the leeches that I wouldn't mind wiping out completely.
 
Transfer payments (i.e., "welfare") is neither the problem nor a solution. It is the lack of jobs that are long term, stable, and of high enough wage to stimulate consumption and increase demand. If you simply put people to work who are already receiving benefits, you do get the benefit of whatever work they do....but, there is no net increase in income to these folks, so you get no additional benefit vis a vis stimulating consumption.

The debate on "welfare" is a different issue altogether that any serious discussion about fixing the unemployment issue in the US. On that issue, though, I don't see welfare or any state benefits program being so generous that people who are able to find a job would prefer to receive benefits than work. Assuming that people are rational self-interested actors (not always a valid assumption), I think those who can work would rather work than take government benefits. All of that said, I think "welfare," paid to individuals, is no where near a great an issue as "welfare" paid to corporations. People can get really emotional about individual welfare programs...and nearly immune or complacent about the Billions paid to corporations (in tax credits, deductions, or direct grants). When a person receives welfare, they are looked at as lazy or parasitic. When a corporation receives it, they are often heralded as good entrepreneurs, wise businessmen, or heroes of our capitalist system. Funny the difference many billions in lobbying and campaign contributions can make.
 
jmurrayhead said:
Not sure what it's like in your country, but you should see the people on welfare here. Not all, but a large majority are scum. I've seen things like trading in food stamps for money so they could buy drugs. I've seen them getting 3 carts full of groceries at tax payer expense, then see them drive off in their Cadillac Escalade with 20 inch rims that spin. They're lazy and won't work and won't look for a job but continue to procreate and bring in more people into this world that will likely end up just like them.

No, there are people who really need the help and I'm all for it. My own mother has permanent brain damage from an accident that happened years ago, possibly before I was even born. It's only now started to affect her. She is now on disability because she could no longer teach. People like her...yeah, I have no problem helping them out. It's the leeches that I wouldn't mind wiping out completely.
Click to expand...
You'd be surprised how few "leeches" there actually are.
 
Floris said:
I am not from the USA, but I am on benefits, and for good reason. It's nice to know how you talk about people on welfare. I could support people on welfare by saying you're just a dumb ignorant American hick, but hey-ho. Let's not call each-other names or generalize, shall we?
Click to expand...

If I had my way in England I certainly would be putting those claiming benefits to more useful purposes like cleaning, repairing roads, making number plates. I get that the minority are geninue but sod the majority, make them work for my money.
 
jmurrayhead said:
My comment was based off of only what I have seen. Where I've lived, they are many.
Click to expand...
Granted, and that's why a lot of people feel that way. But largely, this comes from a lot of outside observation. Having been poor (and technically, still am) and knowing how folks looking in from the outside can shape public opinion, I know that everyone's circumstances don't look right from the outside all the time. Yes, there are plenty of dishonest ones gaming the system. They are fewer and farther between then you may realize. Getting rid of them would be nice, but would hardly make a dent in even a better economy. There's also the issue of opportunities, which aren't as prevalent among the poor as people seem to think. Compounding that is a mentality among poor and minorities that's been perpetuated for hundreds of years, despite our best efforts, that you can't get ahead no matter what you do. And yeah, we're going to breed. That's kind of an incidental side effect of having relationships and being, well, alive. Compound that even further with outside rhetoric that, well let's be honest, lumps everyone of a specific social background into this amorphous group of bad, bad people, well, what happens is, no one looks at specific circumstances, and just assumes the bad is all there is. That's something that we, as humans, tend to do with any kind of group, when we take umbrage with something a handful have done. Paint the whole with the broad brush of a bad few.
 
Digital Jedi said:
Granted, and that's why a lot of people feel that way. But largely, this comes from a lot of outside observation. Having been poor (and technically, still am) and knowing how folks looking in from the outside can shape public opinion, I know that everyone's circumstances don't look right from the outside all the time. Yes, there are plenty of dishonest ones gaming the system. They are fewer and farther between then you may realize. Getting rid of them would be nice, but would hardly make a dent in even a better economy. There's also the issue of opportunities, which aren't as prevalent among the poor as people seem to think. Compounding that is a mentality among poor and minorities that's been perpetuated for hundreds of years, despite our best efforts, that you can't get ahead no matter what you do. And yeah, we're going to breed. That's kind of an incidental side effect of having relationships and being, well, alive. Compound that even further with outside rhetoric that, well let's be honest, lumps everyone of a specific social background into this amorphous group of bad, bad people, well, what happens is, no one looks at specific circumstances, and just assumes the bad is all there is. That's something that we, as humans, tend to do with any kind of group, when we take umbrage with something a handful have done. Paint the whole with the broad brush of a bad few.
Click to expand...
I agree with everything you said. The first 10 years of my life I was considered poor (or from a poor family). My comment wasn't really related to the economical portion, either.

Just read my second paragraph. I'm all for helping those who need it. I'm not for helping those who abuse it. And that's regardless of what their specific social background is.
 
jmurrayhead said:
I agree with everything you said. The first 10 years of my life I was considered poor (or from a poor family). My comment wasn't really related to the economical portion, either.

Just read my second paragraph. I'm all for helping those who need it. I'm not for helping those who abuse it. And that's regardless of what their specific social background is.
Click to expand...
Understood. I just hope we are careful we don't lump everyone together, even when we add a caveat. And I'm kinda big on the "specific situation" thing. Been judged a few times on what people saw from the outside myself, when there were crucial details they simply weren't ever going to know about. (Something I'm reminded of every time I go park in a handicap spot to pick up my daughter, rather than when she's already in car with me when I arrive.)
 
Digital Jedi said:
Understood. I just hope we are careful we don't lump everyone together, even when we add a caveat. And I'm kinda big on the "specific situation" thing. Been judged a few times on what people saw from the outside myself, when there were crucial details they simply weren't ever going to know about. (Something I'm reminded of every time I go park in a handicap spot to pick up my daughter, rather than when she's already in car with me when I arrive.)
Click to expand...

Can you not be measured on how much you payed in taxes to the welfare? ( sore subject here for me).
 
Fred Sherman said:
I'll be uncharacteristicly brief:

1. The able-bodied should not be on welfare. There should be a workfare system for them.
2. Welfare should be a helping hand, not a lifestyle.
3. For those that truly need the help, there should be no social stigma.
Click to expand...

Fred,

I don't disagree, for the most part, with your sentiments. However, I wanted to point out something (which may not be of your doing, this post on jobs has stretched out a bit into welfare policy). Your first point seems to go against what I take to be your original point that government cannot create "jobs." (Or maybe, you mean should not be in the business of creating jobs). Seems to me that "workfare" is essentially that- a government jobs program. That is, if the government is making you do work in return for compensation, this seems to no longer be a welfare program but a jobs program.

A few comments on that, though. If administered by the government and the jobs are essentially "make-work" (pushing a broom in a local government office building, or sweeping the side of the road, or clearing brush, whatever), then you do have a "benefit" by putting money in the "workers" hands (and I would agree that there is something beneficial about keeping people accustomed to work, i.e., showing up somewhere, on time, and following directions, etc.). But, these "jobs" are not likely to prepare anyone for any type of skilled work or keep them competitive for long term, living wage jobs. It may be that there is a net loss by keeping these folks from acquiring other skills by virtue of their being occupied doing make work when their time might be better put to use in training in skilled fields. I also recognize that an unaddressed problem is that some people are never going to be suitable for anything but marginal employment, they just are not equipped to be successful (whether it is just that they are not packing the right mental/physical/social attributes to be successful participants in our economy- which raises the issue of whether the government should still require these folks to do the "make work" jobs...while this may have a certain attractive moral cachet, I would point out that this type of program sounds like it would require a full government infrastructure to supervise and administer this "work-fare" program). Maybe this is a good thing or a bad thing; my point is that it seems to be contrary to your first point that government should just get out of the way of private business as a way to create jobs (a side consequence, too, of this program would strike me as "competing" with private companies, like, say a landscaping company who would otherwise bid out for contracts to mow the lawn of government buildings, but would not be able to compete with the "workfare" folks under what sounds like the logical result of your proposal).

Not trying to be contrary or pick a bone with your positions, Fred. Just giving my 2 cents on the topic. I won't claim to be the ultimate arbiter of the best policies. I do think the topic is nuanced.
 
My gut tells me that the Jobs Bill is well intended but it's more theoretical hooey that doesn't wash in reality. There is no question that we need to get better return on investment, e.g. welfare. But what will put people to work?

Here's one area that nobody has discussed and is a touchy subject. I've found that many of my friends - excellent and talented programmers - are having trouble finding good jobs. There are some other industries I've heard far more of the same. Why? Because corporations would rather pay 40% of a US citizen's salary to someone here on a work visa. Do we truly not have sufficient supply to fill these "specialist" positions? Essentially we've created a situation where large corporations can pay less than market for people who have been hoping to come here in exchange for getting the minimum wage for a specialty job.

I don't mean to offend anyone here in that capacity and I'm happy for you. Much of this is about the desire in the US to live at the very high standard of living for some, regardless of what it costs to maintain it. And until we're ready to accept that our prices for a number of items are borrowed subsidies somewhere, this jobless situation isn't going to change. We're at the point where it needs to be a complete overhaul, not yet another attempt to delve into one area and pretend like it will fix a gargantuan problem.

PS - If anyone needs a job in the UK in the financial sector, there's a good one available. Looks like you can have fun in this position -- all smiles!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424053111903927204576574130471400852.html?mod=djemTEW_t
 
It's very simple ...:rolleyes:

1.webp
 
Floris said:
I am not from the USA, but I am on benefits, and for good reason. It's nice to know how you talk about people on welfare. I could support people on welfare by saying you're just a dumb ignorant American hick, but hey-ho. Let's not call each-other names or generalize, shall we?
Click to expand...
No I agree...there are some people that do need it. But the majority I've seen walking around in grocery stores or various other places (or those on unemployment that come in for an interview and do not accept a job bc they want to continue to collect unemployment and not work when they very well COULD! They just have to show the judge that they are attempting to find a job by showing they went to interviews and applied to jobs). So, with my experiences and seeing these types of people, yes I have a harsh view on them. Those who truly can't work or find a job, I'm ok with that. But there is a LOT of people that are collecting all this money and food stamps that definitely do not deserve it and I feel if we are going to be paying them, they ought to work for that money. But we all have our own experiences and opinions...mine is just more harsh due to my experiences with interviewing and hiring people.

And with people saying there is a lack of jobs...let us pay them to do the work I've stated in my previous post. They will get paid for a job and doing society good by making our cities cleaner and a better place for our kids and us to live.
 
Back
Top Bottom