?
Solved

If you don't have a job...

Posted on 2011-10-19
158
Medium Priority
?
59 Views
Last Modified: 2012-05-12


Herman Cain:
If you don't have a job and you're not rich, blame yourself!

Is he correct?


0
Comment
Question by:carsRST
  • 37
  • 28
  • 20
  • +7
158 Comments
 
LVL 29

Accepted Solution

by:
leonstryker earned 24 total points
ID: 36993425
No he is not.  

Economists consider that natural rate of unemployment should be no less than 4%. At that level everyone who wants to work is working. Below that level certain people who are working, do not want to work, but do so because the job is just 'too good' not to do it. Above that, people want to work, but cannot find jobs.

In today’s economy the rate is significantly higher than 4%. So why can't these people not find work? The answers are many, but can be broken down into several categories:

- Not willing to take a lower paying job
- Not willing to take a job outside their field
- No jobs available

Lets ignore the first two (for now) since they are unemployed by choice in terms that they could get a job, but do not. The last category is the real problem since the person is basically living in the wrong area of the country. The only thing that can be done for them is "MOVE WHERE THE JOBS ARE!" But, that may not always be an option for none financial reasons. These people are victims of the economy, but it is not fair to ask them to blame themselves, since the choice of where they live may not depend on them.

With the two categories of unwilling to take lower paying or outside their field jobs, there is a conscious calculation in place. They have the means to hold out for a time in hopes of finding a 'right' position. They can do so, because they either have means of supporting themselves (thru a working spouse, savings, or unemployment). These people are unemployed due to a decrease, temporary or permanent, in need of their skill sets. For these people to be able to see this ahead of time would require a certain amount of precognition.

Ok, I started to ramble a bit here, but to sum it all up: There are situations where people become unemployed which are not subject to their control and to say that they are wholly to blame for being out of work is over simplistic and highbrow, especially coming from someone who is fairly rich and may possibly be in the position to hold the highest office of this country. To me this is Cains ‘Let them eat cake’ moment.

As you can tell, I am not a big fan of Cain, but will vote for him if he is the Republican nominee.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:Tlingit
ID: 36996387
This is taken out of context because he was referring to the protesters as opposed to the million of Americans who are currently out of work and can't find work because of the bad economy.  Some of the protesters this may be applied to but not to all of them.
0
 
LVL 2

Assisted Solution

by:beetos
beetos earned 24 total points
ID: 36996963
Which ones Tling?  And how do you know?

How do you reconcile your defense of Cain with the REALITY that the number one factor in how much wealth you will accumulate in your lifetime is how much wealth your parents accumulated in theirs?

Yes I know there are some rags to riches success stories, but they are in the very slim minority.
0
Free Tool: ZipGrep

ZipGrep is a utility that can list and search zip (.war, .ear, .jar, etc) archives for text patterns, without the need to extract the archive's contents.

One of a set of tools we're offering as a way to say thank you for being a part of the community.

 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 36998213
@Tlingit

He said "unemployed" people, not OWS!
0
 
LVL 27

Assisted Solution

by:BigRat
BigRat earned 24 total points
ID: 36998842
I  agree wholeheartedly with Leon on this one. In Europe, although we have a bigger ecomony than the US, the problems of worker migration are far more difficult because of the language barriers. Currently there is very high unemployment in Spain and plenty of jobs for skilled people in Germany. The problem is of course to be able to convince a German employer of one's skills and the willingness to learn German. In spite of that we are seeing massive migration of highly skilled Greek and Spanish workers, which is not really good for those countries. One can only hope that they eventually will return and start their own businesses, otherwise we shall worsen the North/South divide, in which Italy is the crassesest example.
0
 
LVL 27

Expert Comment

by:BigRat
ID: 36998935
>> The only thing that can be done for them is "MOVE WHERE THE JOBS ARE!" But, that may not always be an option for none financial reasons

When I lived in Britain in the seventies there were lots of jobs in London. The problem was these jobs did not pay the rent. They were taken up mainly by immigrants who were willing to live in overcrowded accommodation in the less salubrious districts. I believe this is still a problem in inner London.

It is difficult to see how Detroit ex-car workers will accept the same. Detroit at its height had some 1.5 million inhabitants. Currently it is under 800,000. The best, skilled people have moved away, leaving the poor and the badly educated behind. It will take years for the city to recover.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 36999343
>>The problem was these jobs did not pay the rent.

Then you get two jobs, as I did to pay for my college.  Then you work your way up, as Herman Cain did in  almost every job he's worked.



>>How do you reconcile your defense of Cain with the REALITY that the number one factor in how much wealth you will accumulate in your lifetime is how much wealth your parents accumulated in theirs?

Herman Cain was born poor and now is a millionaire.
0
 
LVL 6

Assisted Solution

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
Mujtaba_Alam_Khan earned 8 total points
ID: 36999388
@cars

> Then you get two jobs <

Perhaps you are not aware how bad things are. People are losing their part-time job, never-mind getting two Jobs.

> Herman Cain was born poor and now is a millionaire. <

To be rich, join Polictics & lobby for Corporation and if your not a millionaire by the age of 60. Than your probably dead or not in the US.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 36999412
>>Perhaps you are not aware how bad things are. People are losing their part-time job, never-mind getting two Jobs.

Mow grass, rake leaves, learn a skill in demand, work 3 small jobs to make up for 1 lost job

0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 36999433
Those jobs are only seasonable what you do for the rest of the year?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 36999453
>>Those jobs are only seasonable what you do for the rest of the year?

Make excuses as to why you have to sit on the couch, collect hard earned tax payer money, and do nothing.

0
 
LVL 17

Assisted Solution

by:Anthony Russo
Anthony Russo earned 24 total points
ID: 36999833
>>Make excuses as to why you have to sit on the couch, collect hard earned tax payer money, and do nothing.

I agree that people who do this are milking the system and it is wrong, but do you really think that is what the majority are doing who are unemployed?

>>Mow grass, rake leaves, learn a skill in demand, work 3 small jobs to make up for 1 lost job

In theory it all sounds like that is all you have to do, but in reality that all takes time away from going on interviews and finding a real job. Unemployment is there so you can have some income coming in while you find another job. Part time work to subsidize it is OK, but you wont get back into the real workforce without looking for a job.

Also if you take a city like Detroit as the example has been made, how many lawns and leaves do you think there are? And who is paying you to cut their grass when they have no money either. There are situations that it is a downward spiral and very hard to get out of. Some would make it, as I'm sure you would, but it is not possible for ALL to make it out of that.
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 36999844
Make excuses as to why you have to sit on the couch, collect hard earned tax payer money, and do nothing.

That will continue as long as their savings last, or we continue to enable them through unemployment extensions.  

Three yeas ago both I, and my wife lost their jobs. Thankfully it was 4 months apart, because for 5 months there were no jobs in either of our fields. We had several things going for us. We are well educated, have in demand skills, live in an area which supports multiple industries requiring our skills, and still we were out of work for months.

Was this our fault? No.
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 36999862
Also if you take a city like Detroit as the example has been made, how many lawns and leaves do you think there are?

One of the best things they started doing in Detroit is tearing down foreclosed houses. Its time to "MOVE WHERE THE JOBS ARE!" and stop trying to save a town just for nostalgia sake.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 36999929
>>Also if you take a city like Detroit as the example has been made, how many lawns and leaves do you think there are?

Sometimes it requires moving out of a state historically run by unions and Democrats to a right to work state.




>>Was this our fault? No.

Agree.  But you weren't out of work, as some are, for 99 weeks+, milking the system.   And you, Leon, seem like one that's always refining your skills and driven.  You'll always be employed for those attributes.
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 36999959
Agree.  But you weren't out of work, as some are, for 99 weeks+, milking the system.

There was nothing to milk. We could not support our family on unemployment. But again that is besides the point, the point is that Herman Cain was wrong in that statement.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37000075
>>There was nothing to milk. We could not support our family on unemployment. But again that is besides the point, the point is that Herman Cain was wrong in that statement.

Having a job and supporting your current standard of living are two different things.
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37000086
Having a job and supporting your current standard of living are two different things.

Yes, but it does not make Herman Cain right.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37000159
>>Yes, but it does not make Herman Cain right.

If you don't have a job, it's your own fault is Cain's message.


If I lost my job today, I could easily get consulting gigs in probably 3-4 different areas of technology.  But, say I couldn't, I would go out and apply at 50 different restaurants to work at night.  Then I would apply at Barnes and Noble, Target, Walmart, etc...to work during the day.  I'm not above manual labor - my best job ever was waiting tables.  I loved it.

Problem is these OWS yahoos wasted money on a degree in 19th century Russian art and are amazed that they can't get a job.  They can't lower themselves to work a job they feel is below them...I don't have that problem.

So I believe Cain is correct.  

0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37000184
Sorry Cars, but no.

I did not have a job, I was not rich, and it was not my fault.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37000781
>>my best job ever was waiting tables.  I loved it.

Pictures carsRST waiting tables and arguing politics with everyone that comes in.

:)
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37000808
>Pictures carsRST waiting tables and arguing politics with everyone that comes in.

Man, those tips!!!

:)
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37000820
>>Pictures carsRST waiting tables and arguing politics with everyone that comes in.
>>Man, those tips!!!

Waiting tables you're what ever party your table wants you to be.    :)
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:Tlingit
ID: 37001051
Yes, yes, I know.  It is Bush's fault.  There is no personal responsibility anymore.  Everybody else's woes is blamed on someone else.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37001186
The problem with that scenario Cars, is that both restaurant attendance and tips are way down due to unemployment and the recession.  Also, there's a lot more competition for waiting jobs.
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37001304
Lets see if you follow this:

I am sure that you cars, as well as most Americans who have a bit extra, donate to charity. I am also pretty sure that you would never give money to someone who is a leech and a loafer. Therefore, deep down you know that there are people out there who through no fault of their own are in a bad way and need help.

If you agree with that, then you can not possibly agree with Herman Cain's statement.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37001329
>>I am sure that you cars, as well as most Americans who have a bit extra, donate to charity.

I give way more than our own VP.  Not %, but in total.


>>Therefore, deep down you know that there are people out there who through no fault of their own are in a bad way and need help.

Yes, and it's the work of private charities.



>>If you agree with that, then you can not possibly agree with Herman Cain's statement.

I still think you're confusing standard of living and just having a job.  But I will concede that, if i lose my job today, that I will be out of work temporarily.  But I also know I'll be back on my feet again soon working some sort of job.

0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37001460
But I will concede that, if i lose my job today, that I will be out of work temporarily.  But I also know I'll be back on my feet again soon working some sort of job.

Bingo!!!

The problem with Cain's statement is that is too absolute, and that is why it is wrong.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37001694
>>The problem with Cain's statement is that is too absolute, and that is why it is wrong.

I know what you mean by that, but I think he didn't mean it to be taken quite that literally.

0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37001744
>I think he didn't mean it to be taken quite that literally.

Then he should have been clearer in his statement. That is the standard for Presidential contender.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37001798
>> That is the standard for Presidential contender.

I think our current and soon to be past president broke the mold for any high standards.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37001808
"The vice president is NOT part of the executive branch"  - Dick Cheney

"Me and my records are protected by executive privilege" - Dick Cheney
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37002010
Cars, I hope you don't lose your job.

But if you do, and you can't find another one, maybe you should blame the Tea Party?

http://www.teapartynation.com/profiles/blog/show?id=3355873%3ABlogPost%3A1566647&xgs=1&xg_source=msg_share_post
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37003090
> The problem with Cain's statement is that is too absolute, and that is why it is wrong. <

I agree.

But for the likes of me, I don't know why people aren't supporting the Job's Bill.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37003102
>>But for the likes of me, I don't know why people aren't supporting the Job's Bill.

Democrats killed it in the senate.  It's stimulus 2 - and we all know stimulus 1 was a huge failure.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37003150
We don't all know that Cars.

As the recession numbers have been revised upwards, it shows the economy was in much, much worse condition than reported at the time.   Had we had the correct data then, the stimulus would have been much larger.  For the size it was, it actually was quite successful:  the recession went from negative to positive territory.

More evidence as to why we NEED the jobs bill.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37003155
@cars
> Democrats killed it in the senate. <

Democrats, republican are pretty much the same!

What would you do to create Job?

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37003228
>>What would you do to create Job?

Get the community organizer out of office
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37003307
> Get the community organizer out of office <

That will open the Heavens up and God will say "Let there be Job?". Right?

-Muj ;-|

0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37006431
>I don't know why people aren't supporting the Job's Bill.

Because its a misnomer. Its a Job's Bill in name only. In reallity it is just another Stimiluos package.

> Get the community organizer out of office <

That will open the Heavens up and God will say "Let there be Job?". Right?


No, but a Republican president can get us out of the rut of ineffective, debt increasing, measures.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37006468
>>No, but a Republican president can get us out of the rut of ineffective, debt increasing, measures.

Yep!  Need government out of the way of the people.
0
 
LVL 2

Assisted Solution

by:Tlingit
Tlingit earned 24 total points
ID: 37009455
That will open the Heavens up and God will say "Let there be Job?". Right?

Wrong.  It is quite simple and won't require God to intervene.  Steve Jobs said this why President will only be a one term President, "Steve Jobs told President Obama that he was 'headed for a one-term presidency' if he did not adopt more business friendly policies."

Here is the article:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20123670-503544/steve-jobs-obamas-focus-on-excuses-infuriated-him/?tag=cbsnewsLeadStoriesAreaMain
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37009481
Now not only don't we have jobs, we don't have Jobs!!

Jobs told Obama that American regulations make it more difficult for Apple to build its products cheaply in the United States compared to the cost of building them in China. Chinese health and safety standards are more lax than the United States.

Damn you Obama, trying to destroy this country with health and safety standards!

That's not all Jobs was concerned with:

The Apple founder's legendary attention to detail emerged as they planned the dinner, hosted by a small group of tech executives at a hotel near the San Francisco airport. Jobs did not want to serve a chocolate truffle cream pie for dessert, arguing that the meal was too fancy. The White House event planners overruled him and the cream pies, a favorite of Mr. Obama's, were served, according to the book.

Looks like in the end, Obama got his just desserts.

0
 
LVL 9

Assisted Solution

by:CCSOFlag
CCSOFlag earned 24 total points
ID: 37009483
Is he correct?

I don't think it's a black and white answer, but ultimately, yes I believe he is correct.

First of all, what is rich?  We've discussed many times what rich means on these forums.   I don't think there is ever an answer.  No one ever has enough money.  Whether you make $10 or $1bil, it seems it's never enough for any one.  So to me the rich part means nothing in the question.

As for not having a job, yes you should blame yourself for the most part.  Granted you may get fired, or what not, but there is no excuse not to find another job.  There are plenty of jobs out there.  People just don't want to take a pay cut and lower their standard of living.  Everyone cries foul these days if they don't have a 3k+ sq ft house with 3 cars, a boat and 5+ children while being able to eat at MacDonalds every meal every day.  I went from a 4 bedroom house making 50k+ to a 1 bedroom place working at Pizza Hut.  I refused to be a worthless piece of trash soaking up govt money.  I did what was necessary to bring money in.  The only needs for a person is food and shelter.  Anything beyond that is on you to figure out with the income you have.  If you are in debt up to your eyeballs and can't afford your payments any more then shame on you for getting into that position in the first place.  It's not everyone else's responsibility to bail you out.

Before we were married my wife had a real problem working at Pizza Hut with me.  She felt she was too good for that kind of work.  Then I asked her, so you'd rather not have income and be a leech on society?  Fortunately she isn't a socialist and took the job.  She was glad she did.  She said it was the most humbling work experience she had.  She learned a lot about the real world and herself in the process.  Made her work harder to actually find a better paying job and a less dirty job.


leon wrote:
- Not willing to take a lower paying job

Biggest cause of unemployment imo.

- Not willing to take a job outside their field
Second cause imo

- No jobs available
Totally disagree.  I have seen many many help wanted signs, and many many job positions open online.  The problem is the first two.

The only thing that can be done for them is "MOVE WHERE THE JOBS ARE!" But, that may not always be an option for none financial reasons. These people are victims of the economy, but it is not fair to ask them to blame themselves, since the choice of where they live may not depend on them.

Sorry, no reason you can't move where the jobs are.  No reason at all.  IF it's money, sell your possessions.  Oh that's right possessions are more important these days then being responsible to yourself and society.  No such thing as a victim of the economy.  Economy changes constantly.  Jobs change constantly.  You either need to keep up or get out of the way.  

They can do so, because they either have means of supporting themselves (thru a working spouse, savings, or unemployment).
Working spouse and savings are great, but unemployment is a crock.  Sorry everyone else shouldn't be footing your bill.  Find some friends, family, or charity to help, not all th eother taxpayers.

There are situations where people become unemployed which are not subject to their control and to say that they are wholly to blame for being out of work is over simplistic and highbrow
I agree that losing a job can be beyond your immediate control, but you shouldn't be out of work for very long.  The Pizza hut I used to work at is actually still hiring.  Never stopped hiring the whole time I worked there, so until I stop seeing help wanted signs and available job positions online, I don't see a reason to not have a job for more than a few weeks.


Beetos wrote:
How do you reconcile your defense of Cain with the REALITY that the number one factor in how much wealth you will accumulate in your lifetime is how much wealth your parents accumulated in theirs?

What?  Come on, That is not reality.  Sorry.  I make more money than my parents every did.  It's up to the individual to get themselves into a position to make money.  People today are too into the moment and spend rather than invest like they should.  Not necessarily invest in stock market.  There are plenty of things to invest in: stock market, precious jewels/metals, housing, businesses, etc.  Just because you don't make a smart decision isn't everyone else's fault.

The problem with that scenario Cars, is that both restaurant attendance and tips are way down due to unemployment and the recession.
You sure as heck can't tell where I live.  In fact there are new restaurants opening even.  The line at MacDonald's is always out to the street.  The expensive places in town are always full like normal as well.  I don't see any decline in people eating out.  


BigRat wrote:
They were taken up mainly by immigrants who were willing to live in overcrowded accommodation in the less salubrious districts.

Good on them for not expecting to live a luxurious life.  That should be earned not given or expected.

The best, skilled people have moved away, leaving the poor and the badly educated behind.
Good on them for moving where the jobs were.  Smart imo.


Cars wrote:
Then you get two jobs, as I did to pay for my college.  Then you work your way up, as Herman Cain did in  almost every job he's worked.

Totally agree.  I worked all through college.  I didn't have much free time at all during my college time like most my friends did.  I was either working or studying.  When I did go out it was usually at the expense of homework here and there.

Mow grass, rake leaves, learn a skill in demand, work 3 small jobs to make up for 1 lost job
Couldn't agree more.  If you don't make yourself useful then you don't deserve to be paid.

Sometimes it requires moving out of a state historically run by unions and Democrats to a right to work state.
...
Having a job and supporting your current standard of living are two different things.

Agree


Muj Wrote:
Perhaps you are not aware how bad things are. People are losing their part-time job, never-mind getting two Jobs.

Oh come on.  There are for hire signs everywhere.  People need to get down from the pedestal they hold themselves on and get those jobs.


AnthonyRusso wrote:
I agree that people who do this are milking the system and it is wrong, but do you really think that is what the majority are doing who are unemployed?

To some extent, yes.  They are refusing to get the jobs that they don't WANT to get for one of the two reasons leon wrote.

In theory it all sounds like that is all you have to do, but in reality that all takes time away from going on interviews and finding a real job.
I haven't had a job yet that didn't let you take time off.  You only need an hour or two to go to an interview.  It doesn't take that long to alter an updated Resume so that it applies to a specific job position.  Come on now.

Unemployment is there so you can have some income coming in while you find another job.
That income should be another job, or help from charities, friends, etc.


Leon wrote:
Three yeas ago both I, and my wife lost their jobs. Thankfully it was 4 months apart, because for 5 months there were no jobs in either of our fields. We had several things going for us. We are well educated, have in demand skills, live in an area which supports multiple industries requiring our skills, and still we were out of work for months.

Was this our fault? No.


Aye not your fault for losing the job per say, but technically it is your fault for not being in a reliable field.  Not saying it's a bad field, but if your field is not reliable, you should be saving up for bad times.  Don't have the money you say?  Lower your standard of living to save money.

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37009519
You make some good points, but some things I disagree with.  

The way you make it sound, there's so many places hiring, there should be NO UNEMPLOYMENT issues.  So I have to ask, why are there so many unemployment issues?

You also said you went from a 4 bedroom to a 1 bedroom.   Trouble is, if you owe way more on your house than it's worth, you can't sell it.  Not only can't you afford that house, you can't afford the lesser house.

Being born into wealth determines wealth - yes you'll make more than your parents, just not likely enough to change classes ( from poor to middle class, or middle class to rich ).  I didn't make that up. There's lots of research on the subject.

You go from a $50k job to pizza hut.  That's great if it's just you, but if you have a family or kids to support, that's pretty difficult.

Every individual situation is different, so it's difficult to make blanket statements, but you have to realize that these issues are plaguing the global economy, not just the lazy.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:Tlingit
ID: 37009555
>>Damn you Obama, trying to destroy this country with health and safety standards!

He's not trying to destroy this coutry, he is destroying this country.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37009652
Beetos wrote:
The way you make it sound, there's so many places hiring, there should be NO UNEMPLOYMENT issues.  So I have to ask, why are there so many unemployment issues?


Leon gave three reasons, but I only agree with the first two.  There is plenty of demand for goods everywhere.  You have to make yourself useful toward those services/goods.  Technology changes and if you don't keep up with the changes, that's your fault.  For example automobiles replaced horses.  People who raises horses, cared for them, sold them, etc had to either choose to be unemployed or learn something else to make themselves useful.  And it's not like the replacement happened overnight, so they had plenty of time to make their adjustments.  My point is sure you may have to make a pay cut permanently or temporarily, but at least you can find a job that can pay your necessary bills.

You also said you went from a 4 bedroom to a 1 bedroom.   Trouble is, if you owe way more on your house than it's worth, you can't sell it.  Not only can't you afford that house, you can't afford the lesser house.
This is at the buyers fault.  One you should have done your homework and not bought a house that could have lost so much value.  Two, you can always foreclose and give it back to the bank.  The bank is ultimately responsible for the house, they decided to trust you with it, so they eat the bullet if you can't for some reason.  Three, that's the risk you take when going into debt.  Personally I think everything should be paid in cash.  Granted there is a debate on whether to rent or buy a home, but this leads me back to 1.  A home is an investment.  If you don't invest wisely, it's your fault, and you need to own up to the consequences.

Being born into wealth determines wealth - yes you'll make more than your parents, just not likely enough to change classes ( from poor to middle class, or middle class to rich ).  I didn't make that up. There's lots of research on the subject.
Yea well there's also research that said all those drugs that are now banned by the FDA were ok and approved by the FDA at one time.  I take pretty much all research like that with a grain of salt.  Research more often then not is biased and slanted.

Now I do agree that just HAVING wealth can be passed down the family.  I mean sure I can be born into wealth or what now, but I don't agree that how much you make is dependent upon your parents outside of them giving you a job within that company or what not.  Just within my circle of friends, I've seen most of them making way more than their parents.  One friend is making 6 figures when his parents were poor as dirt when I met him in 6th grade.  My best friend's wife makes tremendously more than her parents did, since they came over as refugees from Bosnia.  My wife even makes more than her mom and step dad.  I make way more than my parents.  Another friend again probably makes at least double than both his parents put together.  I could keep going, but I have yet to see one of my friends make the same or less than their parents.  Maybe I just picked the right friends, who knows.  I just have a hard time believing any study that goes against what I have experienced myself.

You go from a $50k job to pizza hut.  That's great if it's just you, but if you have a family or kids to support, that's pretty difficult.
I experienced it while I was a kid.  We lived well while my dad was in the Army.  Then he got out when I was four and they both struggled to find jobs that paid that much.  We were literally poor.  We ended up living with family, taking handouts, living off dehydrated food, wearing second, third, fourth hand clothes, etc.  As a kid you think I cared?  Absolutely not. I think parents are too caught up in "giving their kids everything they want" instead of making the sacrifices when needed to provide for them what they NEED instead of what they want.  It goes back to the idea that when you buy a kid a toy, they end up playing with the box instead.  I know I played with lots of boxes, sticks, rocks, and other things that my parents didn't buy rather than the toys they bought me.  Not to mention just playing sports or what not with friends.  Do kids really need cell phones?  Do they really need name brand clothing?  Do they really need their own computer?  Come on now.  My mom worked at pizza hut as a waitress when I was a kid when my dad didn't work at all because of his back.  We managed ok.  I always had food to eat and always had a roof over my head, along with my sister and brother.  Sure we didn't go to the movies, or go to theme parks, or have a shiny new car, but we had what we needed.  That's all that matters.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37009737
I agree that there's a lot to be said for self motivation, investment risk, adjusting to circumstances, etc. but the housing crash affected so many so severely, combined with the market crash, combined with the recession, combined with high unemployment that I believe a lot more people ended up in extremely difficult situations.  That's why I think Government intervention was required.

Under normal circumstances, having or getting a job and buying a house should not be guaranteed, but should not be so daunting.  

Being born with wealth ( and I don't mean rich, just middle class) gives you a LOT more opportunity than being born poor, and makes it much easier for you to make your own way.  It's just the way it is.  Being born rich, not only do you have money, but you have connections and opportunities someone with less means just doesn't have access to.  

Now, on your last point, I love this sentiment:  

I think parents are too caught up in "giving their kids everything they want" instead of making the sacrifices when needed to provide for them what they NEED instead of what they want.

THAT should be a continuous topic on these talk and opinion shows that are so popular.  Instead we have Paris Hilton, the Kardashians and the Jersey Shore telling kids they should have this great consumer life without ever doing anything to earn it.

For example, It's absolutely disgusting the way technology has us buying new versions of the same thing every year.  Maybe not you and me personally,  but you know what I mean.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37010842
> Oh come on.  There are for hire signs everywhere.  People need to get down from the pedestal they hold themselves on and get those jobs. <

Maybe in the part of the USA but in Europe people with part-time job(s) are even losing them.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37011047
>>Maybe in the part of the USA but in Europe people with part-time job(s) are even losing them.

That's b/c in Europe it's hard to fire anyone, so that prevents employers from wanting to take on additional help.

Another sign that government needs to get out of the way.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37011856
> That's b/c in Europe it's hard to fire anyone <

Not true at all. As I just mentioned people with Part-time jobs are losing their job.
I basically had a job with a institute liked to the Government & we were first to go.

In Greece things might be different but the rest of the people in the public sections have either lost their job or have their salary cut by a huge margin.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37011901
>>Not true at all


Like some other European Union countries, France has laws making it hard to fire anybody.

More important, they have long remained oblivious to the fact that countries with such laws, such as France and Germany, usually have higher unemployment rates than countries without such laws, such as the United States.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/mar/20/20060320-093052-8263r/?page=all
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37012087
@cars

Public Sectors rarely have part-time jobs and even if they do, people can be made redundant easily.
Just like I was even though I had a full time Job in what was mostly the Public Sector.
The reason is simply, you are never in the public sector if you are contracted

> France and Germany, usually have higher unemployment rates than countries without such laws <

Yet their economies are doing much better than the rest of the EU.

-
BTW this crises has nothing to do with Public Sectors because Government can control all aspects of it, Education, Health, Jobs. If they can't fire you, doesn't mean they can't pay you less.

This is all to do with the Private Banks, who were given money for the Bailout.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37014088
>France and Germany, usually have higher unemployment rates than countries without such laws <

Yet their economies are doing much better than the rest of the EU.


Define the rest of EU. If you mean Greece, Ireland, Spain then yes. But if you start comparing France to Netherlands, Sweden and Finland; then I would say no.
0
 
LVL 27

Expert Comment

by:BigRat
ID: 37019135
>>That's b/c in Europe it's hard to fire anyone, so that prevents employers from wanting to take on additional help.

That is basically true, compared to the US. There is another side to it, namely that getting fired in Europe has a stigma associated with it, which one does not find in the US.

>>Another sign that government needs to get out of the way.

Why?  In fact the decision to hire is about planning, and with proper company planning the restrictions don't really get in the way. We have never found it so.

>>Define the rest of EU

That's dead easy. There are twenty-five countries in it and removing France and Germany that leaves 23.

>France and Germany, usually have higher unemployment rates than countries without such laws

Rubbish. Germany has a lot of very restrictive labour laws, regarding hiring and firing and employee representation, in fact more strict than anybody else. But other than the odd year here and there, the country has boomed since WWII.

0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37019612
>In fact the decision to hire is about planning, and with proper company planning the restrictions don't really get in the way.

Yeah, that is the prevailing view with socialism 'As long as we plan properly everything will be right'; has not worked out for Russia or China.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37022965
> Yeah, that is the prevailing view with socialism 'As long as we plan properly everything will be right'; has not worked out for Russia or China <


Last time I checked Russia was a some sort of Democracy & Chinas economy was doing much than the USA/Europe.

I only wish we hadn't bailed out the banks (Which I was always against). That's what Iceland did & they are on their way to recovery.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37023945
Last I checked, Russia and China no longer subscribe to the planned economy theory and Iceland is in deep dodo owing millions to British and Dutch who bailed out their depositors.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37024105
> Iceland is in deep dodo owing millions to British and Dutch who bailed out their depositors.<

Actually that matter has been settled.

0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37024166
Also from the IMF:
Iceland's Recovery: Can the Lessons Be Applied Elsewhere?

Key to Iceland’s recovery was an IMF-supported program worth $2.1 billion that was agreed in November 2008, shortly after the country’s three main banks collapsed in spectacular fashion. The program included controversial measures such as capital controls and a decision not to tighten fiscal policy during the first year. It also sought to ensure that the restructuring of the banks would not require Icelandic taxpayers to shoulder excessive private sector losses

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2011/SurveyartF.htm

-Muj ;-)
0
 
LVL 34

Assisted Solution

by:Big Monty
Big Monty earned 24 total points
ID: 37024544
if you don't have a job, and you're not rich, blame yourself

is he right? of course not. there are countless scenarios where this is not true. people with disabilities, those fortunate enought to get into the work force at least, often depend on the skillset(s) they've learned in college or whatever training they've had to get them a job they can do. they dont have the luxury of just walking into a Micky D's and getting a job, they would be physically unable to do that kind of job, in fact, they would be unable to do most retail type of jobs. is that their fault?

its a proven fact that inner city kids growing up have a much more difficult time "breaking the cycle" of poverty. is it their fault? w/out the direction and resources to provide them with a way out, I cant see how it is. Research backs this up (although I see CCSOFlag is particlar to the type of research he believes. if its not his own, its shady)

While I enjoy Cain's rants and antics from a purely entainment perspective, this statement just disgusts me
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37024630
>>of course not. there are countless scenarios where this is not true. people with disabilities,

I don't believe Cain was referring to those with disabilities.


Rather, I believe he was referring to the OWS deadbeats who make these sort of stupid comments:


“It’s weird protesting on Bay Street. You get there at 9 a.m. and the rich bankers who you want to hurl insults at and change their worldview have been at work for two hours already. And then when it's time to go, they're still there. I guess that's why they call them the one per cent. I mean, who wants to work those kinds of hours? That's the power of greed.”




>>its a proven fact that inner city kids growing up have a much more difficult time "breaking the cycle" of poverty. is it their fault?

We all make personal choices.  Yes, it's their fault if they don't amount to anything.  
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37024715
>>its a proven fact that inner city kids growing up have a much more difficult time "breaking the cycle" of poverty. is it their fault?


It's this sort of mentality that keep minorities voting Democrat.  It's not your fault you didn't do your homework.  It's not your fault you don't learn a trade.  It's not your fault you had 10 kids with 5 different dads.  It's not your fault that you didn't finish high school.   List goes on....

Democrats need victims in order to survive.  Self-reliance is the enemy.
0
 
LVL 34

Expert Comment

by:Big Monty
ID: 37024763
its impossible to know what he was referring to because you didnt cite where you got the quote from, so I just assumed he was talking about everyone since thats what most of the thread is about.

>> Rather, I believe he was referring to the OWS deadbeats who make these sort of stupid comments:

yes, this is definitely what he was referring to, because this is NOT a bias site whatsoever....cmon, you can do better than that, cant you?

so, because your parent was unfit to care for you and left you to your own devices to grow up in an environment that is no place for a child, its the childs fault? how is this child suppose to know that they are in an environment thats not healthy for them when thats all they've known their whole life? you ever work in the inner city? maybe you ought to before making these types of blanket statements that fit your own agenda
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37025280
Actually that matter has been settled.

Yeah, they did not bail out, rather what they did is outright nationalized, got IMF to cover their ass, and applied for EU membership to hide. A Bailout by any other name is still a bailout.

 
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37027065
> A Bailout by any other name is still a bailout. <

But they didn't ask the Tax payers to pay for it beside the point was that it was mostly the Private Sector. Which the let fall. People in the USA and EU have taken the tab to bailout the banks. They have become to big to fail rather than the people.

As the question on EU membership. That is an on going process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Iceland_to_the_European_Union

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37027095
>But they didn't ask the Tax payers to pay for it beside the point was that it was mostly the Private Sector.

Sure they did, what do you call nationalization, increased taxation and IMF funding?
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37027137
> Sure they did, what do you call nationalization, increased taxation and IMF funding?  <

Your just disappointed that didn't pay the money to the Bailout the Bank and hence the banks couldn't pay bonuses.

-Muj ;-)
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37027197
>Your just disappointed

You are just disappointed that some people actually earn money through hard work and not from a government dole.
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37027375
> You are just disappointed that some people actually earn money through hard work and not from a government dole. <

I find it strange that you would say that since your were one of those people who was unemployed for a while. You rather have the money given to the Banks than it be used to create jobs?

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:Tlingit
ID: 37027423
>>You rather have the money given to the Banks than it be used to create jobs?

Create jobs, how?  Through a second failed stimulus?
0
 
LVL 6

Expert Comment

by:Mujtaba_Alam_Khan
ID: 37029593
>  Through a second failed stimulus <

If you had read my comment. You would have notice I said for the banks to lend out money to small business which the TAX PAYER paid to bail the BANKS out. They are still have a huge chuck of that.

-Muj ;-|
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37030934
>You rather have the money given to the Banks than it be used to create jobs?

You are the one that brought up Bailouts. I was pointing out that central planning is great in theory, but does not work in practice, and Iceland should not be used as a model since its "solution" was to sweep the problem under the rug of taxation, governement and IMF bailouts.

I would have perfered to let the banks fail, and the next jobs plan I see put forth by the government will be the first one.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37031518
Maybe Cain's wrong.  If you don't have a job and you're poor, it's the government's fault for not providing an inflated wage and pension.




Reid signals government jobs must take priority over private-sector jobs
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/188443-reid-says-public-sector-jobs-must-take-priority-over-private-sector-jobs

"It's very clear that private-sector jobs have been doing just fine; it's the public-sector jobs where we've lost huge numbers, and that's what this legislation is all about," Reid said on the Senate floor.



AND HERE'S HOW THEY DO IT....


One-day rehiring nets former Chicago labor leader a $158,000 city pension
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/ct-met-pensions-gannon-20110922,0,913026.story


Top Rahm aide set herself up for sweet CTA pension
http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20111022/ISSUE01/310229971/top-rahm-aide-set-herself-up-for-sweet-cta-pension#ixzz1bhm537dC
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37031568
>If you don't have a job and you're poor, it's the government's fault for not providing an inflated wage and pension.

You are mixing apples (fault) and oranges (blame).
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37032115
You are mixing apples (fault) and oranges (blame).
ROFL
0
 
LVL 2

Assisted Solution

by:bergertime
bergertime earned 24 total points
ID: 37047268
Yes he is correct, I think leon is the perfect example.  He lost his job along with his wife, but they got new jobs.  Why.......how was such a person able to get a job in the worst job market since the beginning of time succeed where everyone else failed and died a horrible gut wrenching death?  Can I lose my job?  Sure, will I get another one, you better believe I will.  I'm not gonna sit on the sofa eating bon bons, till the perfect job makes me get off the sofa.  Do bad things happen to good people, yeah all the time.  What if I lost my job when unemployment was under 4% and don't get a job, does that make me lazy?
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37066896
So should the alleged woman in the alleged harassment suit blame herself or Herman Cain?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37066950
>>So should the alleged woman in the alleged harassment suit blame herself or Herman Cain?


What are the details of the case?  What exactly happened?

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37066970
Since when do you need actual details of what actually happened?

Isn't Obama guilty in Solyndra?  Isn't holder guilty in Fast and Furious?

0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37066991
>>Isn't Obama guilty in Solyndra?  Isn't holder guilty in Fast and Furious?

We know the details of these issues, but not on Cain.

But we do know that Cain is a patriot, and Obama and Holder are left-wing radicals.

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37066998
How do we know that? What makes a Patriot Cars?  What makes a Radical?  What makes a left-wing Radical?
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:Tlingit
ID: 37067004
>>Since when do you need actual details of what actually happened?

What is her name?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37067009
>>What makes a left-wing Radical?

 obama-ayers-review.jpg







>>What makes a Patriot Cars?

 images
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37067029
I see,


So a book review makes one a left-wing radical, while an appearance at a right wing political rally with a corporate sponsor makes one a patriot?

Maybe I need a Cars to reality translating dictionary for us to debate properly?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37067040
>>So a book review makes one a left-wing radical

I'll apologize and call Obama a patriot if you show Cain reviewing a terrorists' book
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37067082
So you consider Obama a radical, but if Cain is also a radical by your same criteria, then Obama automatically becomes a Patriot?

No wonder you hate the education system!
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37067098
>>but if Cain is also a radical by your same criteria,

That's a big if.

Cain will end up being the first black president.



0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37067396
I guess we can just add that to the list of accomplishments you won't give Obama credit for?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37070412
Cain will end up being the first black president.

Huh?  Obama isn't black?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37070444


>>Huh?  Obama isn't black?


 obamamomanddad1.jpg
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37070475
It's funny how people can be racist without even knowing it.  If Cain got elected, would these same people say Obama was the last white president?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37070505
He's no more black than he is white.

0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37070529
ok, well I think this is the first huge disagreement between cars and me.  I'm only 1/4 irish, but I'm still irish.  Ethnicity runs in your blood.  He has a black parent thus he is black.  He is also white though.  It's his choice to relate with whatever one he wants imo.  It's not our job to tell him what ethnicity to relate to.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37070535
Actually isn't he less black?  I thought his dad was mixed.  But in the end does it really matter?
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37070558
CCSOFlag, so are you telling me that if Cain gets elected then you would call Obama the last white president?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37070582
he was the last black and/or white president.  However he wants to slant it he can, that's his choice and benefit to being from both lines.  Just like NAtive Americans can be .00001% and still claim to be native american.  Honestly, I couldn't care less.  Race has no effect on me as far as stuff like this is concerned.  
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37070639
Obama is going to pick what ever color is going to give him an edge, and, per his census, he selected African American.


0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37070651
>>It's funny how people can be racist without even knowing it.

How is being factually correct racist?

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37070751
Cars, I didn't mean that at you.  It's funny, we were talking along these same lines here at work today.  Cain and all.  One of the guys who has a man crush on Obama said something along the lines of how Cain would never get the nomination from the repubs because they are too racist to put a black man in the white house, unlike the dems.  At this point I asked him the question if Cain were elected would it make Obama the last white pres....at which point he said of course not, Obama's black.  I just thought it was interesting.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37071075
>>Cars, I didn't mean that at you.

My apologies.  


On a national level, Cain is leading over Romney.   So not sure how your co-worker gets to that conclusion.  

Herman Cain tops Mitt Romney in latest CBS/NYT poll
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20125120-503544/herman-cain-tops-mitt-romney-in-latest-cbs-nyt-poll/

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37071105
CCSOFlag, who was our first Native American pres?  Surely we've have a pres that had some Native American in them.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071117
Obama is going to pick what ever color is going to give him an edge, and, per his census, he selected African American.

I agree.  He will for sure.  I'm just saying he has that advantage coming from two lines.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071142
CCSOFlag, who was our first Native American pres?  Surely we've have a pres that had some Native American in them.

No clue.  As I said, I don't really care tbh.  I vote for the person's morals/views not the race/ethnicity.  But I'd imagine we've had someone who had native blood in them, they just chose not to run using that as a sales pitch.  I don't think race should ever be a sales pitch like Obama made it.  Nor should gender be a sales pitch as Clinton (Hillary) made it.  When you are calling on people to vote for you because or race or gender that's just wrong imo.  Both of them lost my respect once they dipped to those levels.  And yes I have respect for boths side of the party list.  I have great respect for Billy boy for balancing the budget (well ahving a surplus for that matter), but then I lost respect once he lied in front of America about his sexual relations.  I couldn't care less about his sexual relations, but I do care about the leader of my country deciding to lie to us.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37071180
From two?  Isn't he part Native American.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071191
huh?  From two?
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37071196
CSSOFlag, I agree.  Although I don't give Billy any credit for balancing the budget.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37071207
>>I don't think race should ever be a sales pitch like Obama made it.  Nor should gender be a sales pitch as Clinton (Hillary) made it.

I probably just missed it but I don't remember either of them playing the race/gender card. Everyone else did it for them and they may not have stopped it, but did they ever say anything to play it themselves?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071209
Although I don't give Billy any credit for balancing the budget.

Well I don't give him all the credit.  It has to do with congress too.  He at least worked with them and compromised unlike Obama.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071221
but did they ever say anything to play it themselves?

Yes, both did unfortunately.  I don't have links, but they both were talking about setting history and telling blacks/women to vote to make history and all that crap.  If I have some time I can try to find some links for you.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37071222
Anthony, I was wondering the same thing.  
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37071257
>>Yes, both did unfortunately.  I don't have links, but they both were talking about setting history and telling blacks/women to vote to make history and all that crap.  If I have some time I can try to find some links for you.

I think you might be mistaken though it might have very well seemed like they did. Even them mentioning making history could have been "for their movement" or some subjective crap like that knowing what others would take it as, but I don't think either of them made a point of addressing their race or gender unless asked for the hundredth time from everyone else, and still then would downplay it.

I could be mistaken though and missed something.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071498
I could have read into it too much.  I was following most the candidates' speeches at the time, and I remember both of them were addressing women/blacks and said they needed to vote to make history.  I remember hillary specifically address that she needed the women's support to make history.  Granted they never came right out and said it, that would be political suicide.  With Obama, it was just one time that he said something about blacks and all of it rubbe dme the wrong way.  Maybe I read into that a bit much.  But Clinton it was in several of her speeches.  Again I don't remember exactly what they said, I just remember getting the impression that they were trying to get women/blacks to make history by voting them in.  I mean seriously what other candidate claims to be able to make history just by getting voted in?  I don't know.  Like I said, I can try to look for some links later, but prolly won't find much since it was more of a play on words in speeches from 4 years ago.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37071570
>> I can try to look for some links later, but prolly won't find much since it was more of a play on words in speeches from 4 years ago.

Dont bother man. The media very much spun it and they sure did nothing to slow it down.

0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37071820
The media very much spun it and they sure did nothing to slow it down.

The media didn't say anything.  I was listening to their live campaign speeches, so any sort of misunderstandings would have been on me.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37115508
Why Americans Won't Do Dirty Jobs
In the wake of an immigrant exodus, Alabama has jobs. Trouble is, Americans don't want them

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/why-americans-wont-do-dirty-jobs-11092011.html

Thoughts?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37115528
>>Thoughts?

Why should they?  All they have to do is wait for B Hussein to borrow from China or print some new cash and extend unemployment benefits (a way of buying votes).

If you can't find a job after 99 weeks, then you're a low life bum that has no intentions of working.  
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37115598
Why would they want them?  
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37116015
>>All they have to do is wait for B Hussein to borrow from China or print some new cash and extend unemployment benefits (a way of buying votes).

>>If you can't find a job after 99 weeks, then you're a low life bum that has no intentions of working.  

Can we please hold off on the party bashing and try to stay on the topic.

The point of the article brings up a strong point against the conservative view of kicking out all the immigrants. They are the only ones willing to do the lower end jobs in our society. Alabama has 18% unemployment, but people dont want to work those low end jobs for low end pay.

What is your answer? What does the business owner do when he can't fill the jobs? Pay more and then you are paying $4 per apple at the grocery store?

>>Why would they want them?  

They are unemployed and of don't want to stay on unemployment and need to make more money.

Please refrain from just blaming party policies and just bashing Obama or whatever and discuss the issue.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116056
>>Can we please hold off on the party bashing and try to stay on the topic.

It very much IS on topic.  You're NOT going to take a manual labor position that pays less than you receive from the government.  You also need to eliminate the minimum wage, b/c it prevents very low-skilled job seekers from finding employment.

It's that simple.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37116059
AR I agree, I'm not bashing anyone.  I've tried to make this point before.  You said it brings up a strong point against kicking out illegals.  I think it does just the opposite, it makes a good case for kicking them out while letting the free market decide a fair wage.  But when you go f'n with the system to try and "make it fair'  this is what you are left with.  Our life styles are so over inflated here in the US.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37116106
>>You're NOT going to take a manual labor position that pays less than you receive from the government.  You also need to eliminate the minimum wage, b/c it prevents very low-skilled job seekers from finding employment.

So the free market will force these business owners to raise their prices to get American workers to do these jobs. This either means the business goes under with the higher expense or the product cost goes up. So we pay for $4.00 apples. I'm sure the country will be fine with that. They lost their minds on $4.00 gasoline.

Other alternative is to ship more jobs overseas like Apple does having everything made in China where they pay peanuts to the workers.

>>Our life styles are so over inflated here in the US.

Agree. Think America would accept that and change?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116109
What is your answer? What does the business owner do when he can't fill the jobs? Pay more and then you are paying $4 per apple at the grocery store?
Yes, that's how the free market works.  If you don't like paying $4 an apple don't buy it.  People sure as heck pay a fortune on alcohol, because it cost money to make it, how are apples any different?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116127
It very much IS on topic.  You're NOT going to take a manual labor position that pays less than you receive from the government.  You also need to eliminate the minimum wage, b/c it prevents very low-skilled job seekers from finding employment.

It's that simple.


Agree


But when you go f'n with the system to try and "make it fair'  this is what you are left with.  Our life styles are so over inflated here in the US.

Double agree



0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37116132
The American people will HAVE to accept it at some point.  So the solution is to do what we're doing?
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116142
>>So the free market will force these business owners to raise their prices to get American workers to do these jobs.

See supply and demand curves for an answer.

Again, eliminating the minimum wage is probably the best answer.

0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37116146
Besides what will Americans do?  Occupy the apple grove and demand cheaper apples?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116150
This either means the business goes under with the higher expense or the product cost goes up. So we pay for $4.00 apples. I'm sure the country will be fine with that. They lost their minds on $4.00 gasoline.
What's wrong with that.  If Americans want apples, then they'll pay for them.  The cost of cars keep going up, they keep buying them.  Cost of fast food goes up, they keep buying it.  Cost of gas keeps going up, they still buy it.  Americans just want something to complain about.  They really don't care about the prices.  If they did, they would do something about it.  If something is expensive to me, I don't buy it.  A country where people pay more per gallon for their coffee and booz than their gasoline that drives their car and complain about the latter is totally out of whack and I honestly do not listen to the complaining.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116159
Besides what will Americans do?  Occupy the apple grove and demand cheaper apples?
Hey could you guys pick those apples right there while you're standing there yelling?  Thanks. :)
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37116175
Don't forget......they don't want the job, it's easier to bitch and moan and try and take from someone who earns a living.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116183
true story
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37116531
Food prices go up and people keep buying food.  Um, ya think?

Immigrants are the only ones willing to work for such low wages.

You guys want to turn working class America into a third world nation.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116588
Food prices go up and people keep buying food.  Um, ya think?

Immigrants are the only ones willing to work for such low wages.

You guys want to turn working class America into a third world nation.

Necessary food is still very cheap.  the problem is most people consider doritos, soda, Porterhouse Steaks, Crab legs, lobster, baby back ribs, etc as necessary food.  I'm sorry but you can easily feed a family of 5 with <200 a month if you stick to the necessities (bread, milk, basic meats, etc).

The bottom line is picking an apple, is not rocket science.  99% of people in this country are capable of learning how to pick an apple.  Thus the wage is going to be small.  You think someone who picks apples should be paid as much as someone who knows how to develop/program a software operating system?  Wages should be dependent on the work.  If there are a lot of people who can program an OS, then the wage will typically go down.  If you want apple pickers to be paid a lot then you need to accept high apple prices.  Illegals should not be working in this country.  period.  If they come over legally fine let them work for those wages.  But they can't because the government says there is a minimum wage.  they need to get out of it and let free market work.  The government is who is turning America into a third world nation, not us nor businesses.  Businesses drive the economy, not the government.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116600
>>You guys want to turn working class America into a third world nation.

Where as you want the government to loan a kid $100K to major in Dance Studies or journalism.  My toilet paper is worth more than the paper those diplomas are printed on.

After 20 yeas, it's up to good ol' carsRST to pay off the loan.


0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37116606
I think you guys are a little ignorant about the farm workers.   Minimum wage DOES NOT apply to them.

Recently in California there was an initiative to pay overtime to farmworkers who worked more than 8 hours.  It failed.

If you have a student loan of say $30,000 + interest - how long would you have to work to pay that off as a farm worker?

The severe economic conditions of farm workers is reflected in the following facts:

·        The reported average hourly wage of farm workers nationally is about $6.17, which is 7 per cent less than in 1977, after inflation (New York Times)  (However, many farm worker advocates contend that this figure is very misleading and is actually much lower. Farm workers work as many as 12 to 14 hours per day, but a workday of 8 hours is used to calculate the hourly wage.)  

·        In the peak season farm workers work as much as 12 to 14 hours per day, six or seven days per week but no overtime is paid.

·        The average annual income of farm workers is between $7,000.00 and $8,000.00. This is lowest of all wage and salary workers in the US.

·        The number of farm workers living in poverty is increasing. In 1994-95, sixty one per cent of farm workers lived in poverty compared to fifty per cent in 1990.

 


http://www.ncccusa.org/publicwitness/mtolive/conditions.html

So blame yourself if you don't have a job - you have every right to be an indentured servant for the rest of your life!
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116607
>>The government is who is turning America into a third world nation, not us nor businesses.

Agree.  Beetos thinks you can artificially bump the wage up and all will be fine.  The company is going to say f*ck off and build a plant in India.

0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116629
Unemployment rate is 9.1% - and really much higher if you account for those that have simply given up.

A lot of these people are still on unemployment and have been so for more than a year.  Take that option away and people absolutely will do the work illegals did.
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37116638
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/why-americans-wont-do-dirty-jobs-11092011_page_2.html

Would you take this job? It's easy to say you would but honestly and with truth for more than a week? I can honestly say I don't believe I would be able to do it for long.

If there were people who would, then the farmers on that page wouldn't be telling the stories they are:

"The state’s efforts to help him and other farmers attract Americans are a joke, as far as he is concerned. “Oh, I tried to hire them,” Smith says. “I put a radio ad out—out of Birmingham. About 15 to 20 people showed up, and most of them quit. They couldn’t work fast enough to make the money they thought they could make, so they just quit.”

Joey Bearden, who owns a 30-acre farm nearby, waits for his turn to speak. “The governor stepped in and started this bill because he wants to put people back to work—they’re not coming!” says Bearden. “I’ve been farming 25 years, and I can count on my hand the number of Americans that stuck.”

We're a spoiled country and don't want to do this work and don't want to pay the real price of what it costs.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116708
>We're a spoiled country and don't want to do this work and don't want to pay the real price of what it costs.

For years now, we've had union factory jobs that pay $50 an hour, a pension, lifetime health insurance, etc.. for a job that a retarded blind monkey could do.  The result was the company either went out of business or relocated to a better business friendly environment.


Eventually people will come to realize that taking a job considered below them is necessary.

0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116709
Beetos,

It's not quite so hideous as that web site portrays.  Yes there are plenty of exceptions to the min wage law.  Only small farm workers are exempt from minimum wage requirement (for numerous reasons including family workers, etc).  Large farm workers are only exempt from overtime, not the minimum wage.

http://www.dol.gov/compliance/guide/minwage.htm

That website will confirm what I wrote.  It's not like farm workers are the only ones who are overtime exempt.  My boss is overtime exempt.  Contractors are overtime exempt because it's a contract for a specific job, unless there is something in the contract saying if they work more time then they get paid more.  It's the same concept.  If you want overtime then find a job that pays overtime.  I didn't get paid overtime while in the Air Force.  If you do the math you'll find that some of the lower enlisted personnel get paid less than these farm workers you are talking about per hour.  Why are there no complaints about that?  These are people out there training and dieing for out country and they get paid less than farm workers?  

There shouldn't be a minimum wage.  Everyone agrees to get paid what they get paid.  You can always skew statistics.  Of course you get paid crap if you end up working lots of overtime and don't get paid extra.  That's part of that job.  You knew it before you started it, so those people shouldn't complain about the wages they get for the work they do.  
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116756
We're a spoiled country and don't want to do this work and don't want to pay the real price of what it costs.
Yup

Eventually people will come to realize that taking a job considered below them is necessary.
Not until we cease and desist the unemployment.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116781
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37116804
Industry will always drive down wages - that's why we have minimum wage, overtime, and unions.  That's also why industry via their political influence is trying to break unions.  As a lone worker, you don't have much  voice.  Americans should not be indentured servants, which is what industry would like.

Those jobs you've listed that don't pay overtime also have much higher salaries, and often include other benefits.  I'm sure you have many benefits from your time in the service.

I'm guessing you include ALL of your time, even when you're sleeping when you calculated your hourly wage?  Did you miss the part where it said farm workers hourly wages are based on an 8 hour work day when they usually work much longer?

Here's the small farm definition you mentioned:

Farm workers employed on small farms (i.e., those that used less than 500 "man-days" of farm labor in any calendar quarter of the preceding calendar year)

So a quarter is 90 days, including Sundays.   I'm not familiar with the intimate workings of farms, but don't they usually have an off season?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/11/09/363883/washington-company-strands-60-farmworkers-for-refusing-to-work-below-minimum-wage/

nearly three-quarters of U.S. farmworkers earn less than $10,000 a year, and three out of five farmworker families have incomes below the poverty line.

I hope you were paid more than $10K per year for your service to our country.

I really don't think you understand what it's like to be in their position.  
0
 
LVL 29

Expert Comment

by:leonstryker
ID: 37116830
>Industry will always drive down wages

Its not industry that drives down wages, its competition. Those same workers buy the cheapest items they can then they go to the store, and thus undercutting their own jobs.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37116853
>>Industry will always drive down wages - that's why we have minimum wage, overtime, and unions.

If Beetos had his way, we'd still have ice boxes, vacuum tubes, and typewriters.

Those jobs must be protected!
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37116857
>>You knew it before you started it, so those people shouldn't complain about the wages they get for the work they do.  

That's the point of the article. Americans just wont take those jobs.

>>So blame yourself if you don't have a job - you have every right to be an indentured servant for the rest of your life!

So what is the answer then? Raise the wage?

"Rhodes says he understands why Americans aren’t jumping at the chance to slice up catfish for minimum wage. He just doesn’t know what he can do about it. “I’m sorry, but I can’t pay those kids $13 an hour,” he says. Although the Uniontown plant, which processes about 850,000 pounds of fish a week, is the largest in Alabama and sells to big supermarket chains including Food Lion (DEG), Harris Teeter, and Sam’s Club (WMT), Rhodes says overseas competitors, which pay employees even lower wages, are squeezing the industry."

>> http://www.dol.gov/wecanhelp/farm_workers.htm

>>The problem is that is what an American would want. The employers wont offer this for the reason in the quote above. So they hire illegals, who will work without that.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/why-americans-wont-do-dirty-jobs-11092011_page_3.html

What this all comes down to is there really is no simple answer to fix it like "raise the wage" take away unemployment" etc. It just doesn't work like the article points out.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37116905
>>If Beetos had his way, we'd still have ice boxes, vacuum tubes, and typewriters.

Aren't you the one always bitching about incandescent light bulbs?

AR - we were talking about jobs that pay LESS than the minimum wage, much less.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116915
I'm guessing you include ALL of your time, even when you're sleeping when you calculated your hourly wage?  

No I'm referring to time actually working.  an E-1 makes 1491 a month.  Some E-1s, depending on their job, and especially during combat can work 16+ hours a day.  Is it right?  Not saying it is at all.  Just saying even your own military members experience very low pay at time if you want to spread it over the time they actually worked.



Did you miss the part where it said farm workers hourly wages are based on an 8 hour work day when they usually work much longer?
Most salaried workers are.  The pay is irrelevant imo.  Overtime is overtime.  You choose to work an overtime job or not.  FLSA Exempt Salaried workers no matter their pay will always be taken advantage of.  Whether you get paid 2.00 an hour or 100 an hour.  It doesn't matter.


nearly three-quarters of U.S. farmworkers earn less than $10,000 a year, and three out of five farmworker families have incomes below the poverty line.
As you said farm work is seasonal.  Let them get another job on the off season.  Just like Teachers.  I get tired of people complaining about teacher salaries.  They only work 8 months out of the year.  And if they DO work through summerschool they get paid extra.  If you want more money then work a summer and winter break job.  I know I have to work all year round.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37116937
Anthony wrote:
The problem is that is what an American would want. The employers wont offer this for the reason in the quote above. So they hire illegals, who will work without that.


Right, but if all the companies decided to start selling their products for higher price they could pay the workers more.  the problem is the illegals are getting the jobs.  If the illegals weren't getting the jobs, then one of two things would happen:

1.  said company would have to raise their pay thus raise the cost of their product.
2.  Said company goes out of business.

Most companies would choose to raise pay and costs rather than go out of business.
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:bergertime
ID: 37117052
beetos, not it's me that's always bitching about the bulb, those WERE good jobs.  And yeah I can say I would take that job, I worked at Taco Bell for 4 years......I picked watermelons in the Sunshine state for two seasons.  I've had some really crappy jobs because at one point in my life I didn't bring anything to the table to barter with.  Through hard work and many hours spend alone with my computer I can do things a lot of people want done, yet won't take the time to learn.  I worked at an amusement park when I was 16 and 17 and got paid below the minimum wage, becuse it was considered seasonal, but I was glad to have a job, of course back then we didn't have iphones or big screen tv's or cable with 300 channels........I made enough to support myself.
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37117059
two thumbs up for you bergertime.  I just wish all american's had your attitude about working.
0
 
LVL 16

Author Comment

by:carsRST
ID: 37117092
>>Aren't you the one always bitching about incandescent light bulbs?

What's that have to with the price of Al Gore's private jet fuel?


Point is we'd be living in the stone age and paying an arm and a leg for it if we protected every job the Democrats wanted to protect.

0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37117198
>>Right, but if all the companies decided to start selling their products for higher price they could pay the workers more.

"I’m sorry, but I can’t pay those kids $13 an hour,"

>>Most companies would choose to raise pay and costs rather than go out of business.

"Rhodes says overseas competitors, which pay employees even lower wages, are squeezing the industry."

So the companies go under and we import everything from China?

>>You choose to work an overtime job or not.

>>"Eventually people will come to realize that taking a job considered below them is necessary"
>>"A lot of these people are still on unemployment and have been so for more than a year.  Take that option away and people absolutely will do the work illegals did."
>>"Don't forget......they don't want the job, it's easier to bitch and moan and try and take from someone who earns a living."
But if they choose not they are called bums. So where is the choice?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37117216
no they are only called bums when they suck up taxpayers dollars in programs like welfare, unemployment, etc.  Personally I ahve no problem with people who decide to not work and still provide for themselves.  Not problem at all.  But I'm sorry if you choose not to work, I refuse to support you with my tax dollars.  Well, not that I have a choice, but if I did, I would refuse. :P
0
 
LVL 17

Expert Comment

by:Anthony Russo
ID: 37117249
>>Personally I ahve no problem with people who decide to not work and still provide for themselves.

Other than work, how should they provide for themselves? Begging? Crime?
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37117274
That's what they have to figure out.  There's savings, retirements, peddling, fishing at the lake, I don't care.  Of course crime isn't an option though.  But if you don't want to work, sorry you need to figure it out yourself.  It's not our responsibility to support you.  
0
 
LVL 2

Expert Comment

by:beetos
ID: 37117346
CC,

Please tell me you think a job in the armed forces is a better deal than being a farm worker?  

As for the missing farm workers in Alabama, maybe the Jefferson County  politicians should take those jobs now that they've bankrupted the county?

http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/alabama_county_goes_really_really_bankrupt_20111109/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Truthdig%2FEarToTheGround+Truthdig+|+Ear+to+the+Ground

BTW - I hear a lot of conservatives accusing the poor of not being poor.  "They have TV's, refrigerators, lights!"  - you do realize that we live in a disposable society where every few months there's a newer better version of whatever you have?  And thanks to low wages in foreign countries, these things are always getting cheaper as well?   Can you not figure out then, that it would be easy to come by these items on the second hand market for pennies on the dollar of what they originally cost?

Conservative philosophy:  "The poor have to much stuff; the rich don't have enough"
0
 
LVL 9

Expert Comment

by:CCSOFlag
ID: 37117477
Please tell me you think a job in the armed forces is a better deal than being a farm worker?  
Heh, I'd say it depends on your job in the armed forces.  My job?  No I'd rather do that than work in a field, but other jobs I'd rather work in a field.

BTW - I hear a lot of conservatives accusing the poor of not being poor.  "They have TV's, refrigerators, lights!"  - you do realize that we live in a disposable society where every few months there's a newer better version of whatever you have?  And thanks to low wages in foreign countries, these things are always getting cheaper as well?   Can you not figure out then, that it would be easy to come by these items on the second hand market for pennies on the dollar of what they originally cost?
That's just like saying, "OH these new shoes are on sale, even though I already ahve 50 pairs let's buy them cuz they're cheap!!!"  Sorry if you don't need something you shouldn't be buying it if you don't have the extra money to.


Conservative philosophy:  "The poor have to much stuff; the rich don't have enough"
No the conservative philosophy is the poor need to pay their own way if they want more.  The rich are already paying their way, so they can have all they want.
0

Featured Post

Hire Technology Freelancers with Gigs

Work with freelancers specializing in everything from database administration to programming, who have proven themselves as experts in their field. Hire the best, collaborate easily, pay securely, and get projects done right.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Learn more about the importance of email disclaimers with our top 10 email disclaimer DOs and DON’Ts.
Get an idea of what you should include in an email disclaimer with these Top 5 email disclaimer tips.
Are you ready to place your question in front of subject-matter experts for more timely responses? With the release of Priority Question, Premium Members, Team Accounts and Qualified Experts can now identify the emergent level of their issue, signal…
Despite its rising prevalence in the business world, "the cloud" is still misunderstood. Some companies still believe common misconceptions about lack of security in cloud solutions and many misuses of cloud storage options still occur every day. …
Suggested Courses

862 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question