# Economic woes solving plan: Government hires everyone **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 22, 2011, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944 "2011-07-22T04:18:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 3:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/81 "2011-08-03T03:31:53Z")
> [@glilly](#): > > I noticed it and addressed it in the post directly before yours. Three problems: > [ul] > [li]Public works projects take years just to get approval. [/li][li]Large scale public works (i.e. dams) are unlikely to ever be built[/li][li]Do you really think the average American is up for the rigors of a construction job?[/li][/ul] I think the average unemployed construction worker is. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/82 "2011-08-03T03:34:17Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > And? Your point being that you intend to hire millions of ditch diggers and put them on the Federal pay roll? Seriously? Where will they dig these ditches? Do you suppose that people who build roads and bridges are generally ditch diggers (in American) these days??? šŸ˜› Or that you are going to pay these people, what? Minimum wage? With no benefits?? > > Again, it comes back to what are you going to have these folks actually doing and what are you going to pay them? Are you going to give them standard federal employee benefits or not? Are they going to be exempt or non-exempt employees? Temporary or permanent? Is this going to be a one size fits all (i.e. ā€˜Here is the job \, take it or leave it!ā€™) or are you going to allow these millions of unemployed to use their former skills and experience in order to get jobs doing something remotely like what they have experience doing? > > And, again, where is the money going to come from? How are you going to pay for this? Just saying ā€˜well, weā€™ll just raise taxes on the richā€™ or ā€˜well, weā€™ll just borrow the money as we always doā€™ isnā€™t good enoughā€¦you are talking about a permanent increase in the annual federal budgetā€¦and a really, really big one. And one that will increase over time, assuming you plan to give these folks raises and such down the road, and assuming you donā€™t plan to simply cut millions loose a year or two down the road when you figure out that ā€˜Hey! This stuff is really expensive!ā€™. > > -XT I was mainly objecting to the misleading portrayal of the federal workforce and the stupid comparisons between the federal work force and the general work force. Iā€™m not supporting the notion of hiring EVERYONE but the government can certainly hire a lot of people temporarily right now and create some wage inflation. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/83 "2011-08-03T03:45:54Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Cite? The standard loaded costs for a worker are around double his or her salary. I canā€™t imagine that federal workers are magically immune to this. Consider just the expanded HR costs to process and manage 12 million new workers. I think Iā€™m actually understating what the costs would be by at least 1 to 2 times, honestly. However, if you have some other data to back up your assertion Iā€™m certainly willing to hear it. Average benefits for a federal worker hired today (you realize that the federal pension program gives you 22% of your base pay per year after 20 years?) is supposed to be between 20-25K. > [@](#): > > Iā€™m vaguely familiar with the names, yes. šŸ˜› Why donā€™t you produce some cites that show any of them claiming that massive increases in the federal work force will act as a spur to economic growth. [http://www.servicemagic.com/article.show.The-Obama-Plan-and-Keynesian-Economics-Digging-Holes.16839.html](http://www.servicemagic.com/article.show.The-Obama-Plan-and-Keynesian-Economics-Digging-Holes.16839.html) > [@](#): > > During the Great Depression the federal government didnā€™t expand by nearly 12 times, so this would be completely uncharted territory. Humongous deficits doesnā€™t even begin to describe the costs here, because you would be paying this pretty much foreverā€¦unless you plan to massively lay off all those happy federal workers down the road, which would have all sorts of other bad effects. Size of the federal workforce: > **[Executive Branch Civilian Employment Since 1940](https://www.opm.gov/policy-data-oversight/data-analysis-documentation/federal-employment-reports/historical-tables/executive-branch-civilian-employment-since-1940/)** > > Welcome to opm.gov in 1940 (earliest year on the chart, the civilian work force was 443K. "At its peak in 1938 it [WPA] provided paid jobs for three million unemployed " Not quite 12 times but you its more than halfway there. Once again, not passing on the merits of the plan to hire everyone without a good idea of what they are going to do but I can make an argument that government can absorb quite a bit of the slack in the labor market right now and put them to good use. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 6:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/84 "2011-08-03T06:03:37Z")
[QUOTE=Damuri Ajashi] Average benefits for a federal worker hired today (you realize that the federal pension program gives you 22% of your base pay per year after 20 years?) is supposed to be between 20-25K. [/QUOTE] You do realize that loaded costs entail more than the pension, right? I seriously doubt that the average loaded costs for federal employees is 20-25k. Again, if you have a cite showing otherwise then Iā€™ll certainly take a look at it. > [@](#): > > I was mainly objecting to the misleading portrayal of the federal workforce and the stupid comparisons between the federal work force and the general work force. What was the misleading portrayal of federal workers and what was the stupid comparisons between the federal work force and the general work force?? Are you sure you were talking to me about those?? Or was this part of some other discussion? I ask because you quoted me and then sort of went off on a tangent afaict. > [@](#): > > [http://www.servicemagic.com/article....les.16839.html](http://www.servicemagic.com/article....les.16839.html) Iā€™m unsure what this drive by link is supposed to prove, since you didnā€™t quote the relevant parts. Iā€™m reasonably familiar with Keynes, and while itā€™s true he did seemingly say ā€œgovernment should pay people to dig holes in the ground and then fill them up.ā€, I donā€™t believe he had in mind to hire ALL of the unemployed and bring them in as federal workersā€¦which is what the OP is about here. -XT ---
**Author:** ![gallan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/ee59a6/32.png) [@gallan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gallan)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 11:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/85 "2011-08-03T11:08:05Z")
Iā€™m late to the game, but hereā€™s what I think. The whole idea sounds like itā€™s doomed to fail because itā€™s based on the assumption that all 12.5 million unemployed people are willing to take any job thatā€™s offered to them. This is untrue. Unless we intend to create a position based on each individualā€™s existing skill set, itā€™s likely that many people would turn down these new jobs. If you were a systems administrator for ten years with an $80k salary, itā€™s unlikely that youā€™d be happy answering phones at the DMV for $30k. And letā€™s face it, there are only so many sys admins needed, unless, as I said, youā€™re willing to create jobs specifically for these people. However, even if you are, what happens if the person gets fired, or quits, or dies? Do you start looking for another sys admin or do you find another person who needs a job, create a new job for them, and get rid of that sys admin position? And if you do get rid of that position, wouldnā€™t that leave that department short-handed? If not, does that mean the position wasnā€™t really needed in the first place and the work that was created was unnecessary? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/86 "2011-08-03T15:47:13Z")
Nor will people pick crops for a buck an hour. One stupid Repub said Americans wont pick crops for 25 bucks an hour. He is an idiot swallowed up in Republican belief that Americans wont do hard work. He believed it because he has lived so far away from those who have to work hard for little money. A living wage would be reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/87 "2011-08-03T20:25:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > You can get fired for being bad at your job, its just harder, not impossible. During your first year of federal, you are on probation and its pretty easy to fire you. > > You get fired for missing your tour of duty. > > You would get fired. > > You have a very warped view of the federal workforce. There are a lot of federal employees around here and I deal with govt attorneys on a regular basis and I have not noticed this sort of behaviour. You seemed to have missed the main gist of this thread. We arenā€™t talking about current federal employees, or about adding a few more federal employees. The proposal is to guarantee 12 million people (or more) a job doing something/anything with the federal government. It also seems to imply that the DMV is going to become federal. My ā€œwarped viewā€ has nothing to do with the federal workforce, Iā€™m quite accurately describing the potential workforce this program would create. But letā€™s pretend it plays out the way you suggest, and 11million people get fired, weā€™re back to where we started. Except that the program guarantees everyone a job, so theyā€™ll have to be re-hired, only to be fired again, requiring that they be re-hired. If the job is guaranteed, a person can never actually be fired. Are you really going to let those people starve to death in the streets just because they refuse to show up to work on time? Not cool man, not cool. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/88 "2011-08-03T20:40:20Z")
Seems Georgia Gov. Nathan is trying a new twist on the idea, [heā€™s hiring people on probation to toil in the fields.](http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D9NSA7SO0.htm) Fighting unemployment and illegal immigration all at once. ---
**Author:** ![ptug101](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e36b37/32.png) [@ptug101](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ptug101)\ **Post date:** [August 3, 2011, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/89 "2011-08-03T21:10:20Z")
A better soloution would be for the federal reserve to sell its 2.5 trillion dollars worth of assets and buy vacant houses and either bull doze them or convert them into rental properties. this will stabalize home prices and facilitate lending and consumption. Another thing would be to allow people to take money out of there 401Kā€™s tax free to pay down debt. the department of education should just forgive about 500 billion worth of student loan debt. as well ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/90 "2011-08-04T18:17:14Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > You do realize that loaded costs entail more than the pension, right? I seriously doubt that the average loaded costs for federal employees is 20-25k. Again, if you have a cite showing otherwise then Iā€™ll certainly take a look at it. [http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=821&type=0](http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=821&type=0) > [@](#): > > What was the misleading portrayal of federal workers and what was the stupid comparisons between the federal work force and the general work force?? Are you sure you were talking to me about those?? Or was this part of some other discussion? I ask because you quoted me and then sort of went off on a tangent afaict. Maybe Iā€™m confusing you with someone who was trying to compare federal employee compensation adn ebenfits with private sector workforce and benefits. > [@](#): > > Iā€™m unsure what this drive by link is supposed to prove, since you didnā€™t quote the relevant parts. Iā€™m reasonably familiar with Keynes, and while itā€™s true he did seemingly say ā€œgovernment should pay people to dig holes in the ground and then fill them up.ā€, I donā€™t believe he had in mind to hire ALL of the unemployed and bring them in as federal workersā€¦which is what the OP is about here. Like I said, Iā€™m not passing on the merits of this particular plan but I thought you asked for a cite supporting the claim that massivley increasing teh federal workforce would spur the economy. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/91 "2011-08-04T18:57:14Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > You seemed to have missed the main gist of this thread. We arenā€™t talking about current federal employees, or about adding a few more federal employees. The proposal is to guarantee 12 million people (or more) a job doing something/anything with the federal government. It also seems to imply that the DMV is going to become federal. > > My ā€œwarped viewā€ has nothing to do with the federal workforce, Iā€™m quite accurately describing the potential workforce this program would create. > > But letā€™s pretend it plays out the way you suggest, and 11million people get fired, weā€™re back to where we started. Except that the program guarantees everyone a job, so theyā€™ll have to be re-hired, only to be fired again, requiring that they be re-hired. If the job is guaranteed, a person can never actually be fired. > > Are you really going to let those people starve to death in the streets just because they refuse to show up to work on time? Not cool man, not cool. Maybe the disconnect is that I am addressing what seemed to be underlying assumptions on your part when in fact you were addressing what would happen if the OPs suggestion were adopted as written, AND that you havenā€™t picked up on the fact that I donā€™t really agree with teh OP in the particulars but the notion of a federeal jobs program where the government directly hires people to soak up some of the slack in the labor supply. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/92 "2011-08-04T19:09:09Z")
[QUOTE=Damuri Ajashi] [http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=821&type=0](http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=821&type=0) [/QUOTE] And what is this drive by link supposed to prove? Loaded costs include pensions, vacation, holiday, sick leave, medical/dental, ā€˜other benefitsā€™, plus overhead costs such as HR costs and processing, even IT costs. IOW, itā€™s all the other costs besides salary that is associated with having an employee. So, assuming you agree with the above, what does your link have to do with that? How does it demonstrateā€¦well, let me rephrase. What IS it supposed to demonstrate wrt the discussion or wrt anything I was saying that you quoted? Could you, perhaps, elaborate instead of just giving a drive by link? > [@](#): > > Maybe Iā€™m confusing you with someone who was trying to compare federal employee compensation adn ebenfits with private sector workforce and benefits. You must be confusing me with someone else since nothing Iā€™ve said in this thread has anything to do with this. My own point is to try and establish some sort of realistic cost for these 12+ million new federal workersā€¦a cost that includes the loaded costs that will be associated with hiring and supporting these 12+ million new federal employees. A cost that will include benefits. So, in light of this, do you have anything to add? > [@](#): > > Like I said, Iā€™m not passing on the merits of this particular plan but I thought you asked for a cite supporting the claim that massivley increasing teh federal workforce would spur the economy. Your cite doesnā€™t demonstrate support that massively increasing the federal work force will in any way spur the economy. Do you have anything else? -XT ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/93 "2011-08-04T21:08:58Z")
Since we all know the infrastructure needs to be updated, is this not a good time to do it? We have a mass of unemployed people who need work. We have work that needs to be done. We could hardly have a better time to take care of business. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/94 "2011-08-04T21:11:32Z")
So, you are going to hire 12 million people, most of who have no idea how to build infrastructure or do road construction, to build roads and bridges? -XT ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/95 "2011-08-04T21:55:15Z")
[http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html?\_r=2&ref=todayspaper](http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/24/opinion/sunday/24sun4.html?_r=2&ref=todayspaper) Here is where the deficits came from. Did I say I would hire 12 million people? The point is ,that if you spend the money to get honest work done now, you will increase demand. That is where more jobs are created. Poorer people with money in their pocket, buying the things they need. The workers would create more jobs and more demand. Then more people with more demand. That is how it is done. The multiplier effect in action. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2011, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/96 "2011-08-04T22:01:34Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] Here is where the deficits came from. [/QUOTE] What is your drive by supposed to prove? Could you (please) quote the relevant parts and why you linked to it in the context of this thread? > [@](#): > > Did I say I would hire 12 million people? Have you actually read the OP or the thread? Thatā€™s what we are discussing here. If you donā€™t plan to use the people who are currently unemployed to build your infrastructure then you arenā€™t responding to the OP, and are essentially arguing some other point. If you want to discuss and debate whether we should spend money to rebuild infrastructure then start a new thread on that subject and Iā€™ll gladly give my two cents worthā€¦my answer might surprise you, since you have a ton of preconceptions about my beliefs. > [@](#): > > The point is ,that if you spend the money to get honest work done now, you will increase demand. No, the point is that the OP is talking about hiring all of the people who are currently unemployed. If you want them to do road construction and bridge building then what you are talking about is relevant to the OP and we can discuss that. If not, then you are hijacking the OP to talk about something not relevant. > [@](#): > > That is where more jobs are created. Poorer people with money in their pocket, buying the things they need. The workers would create more jobs and more demand. Then more people with more demand. That is how it is done. The multiplier effect in action. Blah blah blah. Are you saying you want to use the 12 million people currently unemployed to do this construction or not? The OP wants to hire them all as federal workers. Would you do so and put them to work building bridges, dams, roads and other infrastructure? Yes? No? Donā€™t want to discuss and wish to go off on a tangent? -XT ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2011, 12:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/97 "2011-08-05T00:28:19Z")
Are you new to this board? There have been lots of posts and who said 12 million? The thread was practically whimsical while suggesting hire everybody. But since you lack humor, you want to fight about the numbers. Discuss that with YoGSOSOTH if that is your intention. It would be interesting to come up with a real number that would effectively cut unemployment and provide the repair the infrastructure demands. But you are not looking for that. You want to insult and squabble. That is a game I donā€™t like playing. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2011, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/98 "2011-08-05T01:03:06Z")
[QUOTE=gonzomax] There have been lots of posts and who said 12 million? [/QUOTE] The OP. Did you read it? Granted, he mentioned 12.5 million, so perhaps thatā€™s where your confusion is coming from. > [@](#): > > The thread was practically whimsical while suggesting hire everybody. Um, I think the OP was completely serious. Why do you think he was not? He said that he wants to hire most of the 14.1 million unemployed, and that 12.5 million was a good figure for what heā€™s proposing. Perhaps if you READ the OP you would be on the same page as everyone else in this threadā€¦none of who are confused by what the OP was wanting to debate in his thread. > [@](#): > > But since you lack humor, you want to fight about the numbers. If the thread was a joke thread then you are rightā€¦Iā€™m missing that. Perhaps the thread needs to be reported to the mods so that they can move this joke thread to some other, more appropriate forum. > [@](#): > > Discuss that with YoGSOSOTH if that is your intention. Discuss your views on the OP with, well, the OP. Or a mod if you think itā€™s a joke thread. > [@](#): > > It would be interesting to come up with a real number that would effectively cut unemployment and provide the repair the infrastructure demands. Perhaps you should discuss that with the OP? > [@](#): > > But you are not looking for that. Iā€™m not looking for anything, since itā€™s not MY OP. Perhaps you are confused and should scroll back up to the top and actually read the OP and see what it is he is looking for? Itā€™s a thought. > [@](#): > > You want to insult and squabble. You should probably take that up with a mod, if you think I have insulted you in GD. If answering questions and posing new ones in a debate is considered and ā€˜insultā€™ then they probably need to rename this forum. Or, maybe you could tell the folks who run this board what they REALLY were thinking when they created this forum and the other ones, since they might be confused as well. > [@](#): > > That is a game I donā€™t like playing. Thatā€™s nice. Perhaps youā€™d like to play ā€˜letā€™s actually debate the OP as itā€™s written and as the person who wrote it intendedā€™ game? Does that sound fun? -XT ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2011, 3:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/99 "2011-08-05T03:29:54Z")
> [@gonzomax](#): > > Are you new to this board? Are you? Why are you hijacking this thread with irrelevant posts that are off topic. If you want to discuss your own brand of ā€œwhimsicalā€ ideas, then open a new thread with a link to this one. Otherwise, stop the hijack and stop getting personal with other posters. > [@gonzomax](#): > > You want to insult and squabble. That is a game I donā€™t like playing. Really? That is all you have done for the last several posts, making snide remarks about another poster while acting in ignorance of the actual OP. Knock it off. [/Moderating] ---
**Author:** ![glilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/48db29/32.png) [@glilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/glilly)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2011, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944/100 "2011-08-05T03:43:49Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think the average unemployed construction worker is. What percent of the current unemployed came from a construction background? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/economic-woes-solving-plan-government-hires-everyone/589944.md?page=6)