I hope that these people working 68 hours a week are just loading blanks when the machine tells them to, since I’ve seen studies showing that after 50 hours or so you make so many mistakes that your productivity is like you were working 40. At 68 hours I wouldn’t want to buy a car with your bolts in it.
Where the hell did I say I’d hurt myself? How the hell would a business hurt them-selves by hiring qualified but unemployed applicants? How the hell would giving you $1,000 help the economy?
That would require looking at the big picture. And if there’s one thing a lot of corporations in this country don’t do very well, it’s looking at the big picture.
If you haven’t bought a Chevy, GMC, Ford, Chrysler ,Honda, Toyota, Nissan, Volkswagon, or a tank from the D.O.D then I say you are somewhat safe. The machines are set up and torn down all day long. Our PPM is less than 1. We run 11-13 million a week, so I say we do a pretty good job.
Le sigh. Many employers apparently view unemployed applicants as inferior. Whether they are correct or not doesn’t matter–it only matters that they think that. You want employers to hire unemployed (ie, inferior, in their view) people because you think it woulkd help the economy. Therefore, you want employers to hurt themselves to do something you believe would help the economy.
Its often great for business. They have LOTS of choice in candidates and it keeps salaries low.
No. I said I understand now that employers either don’t view the economy as hurting them, or they believe that unemployment has nothing to do with it.
Before I thought that businesses would want to hire the unemployed, because according to the news we have a shitty economy and everybody’s effected, but apparently that’s incorrect and businesses are doing just fine. I understand that now.
Is it a problem for you when companies lower prices on their products?
Is having a surplus of labor instead of a labor shortage a problem? This isn’t baffling. Companies like to be able to hire skilled labor at rock bottom prices - it’s best for their bottom line. It’s only if demand is insufficient for a business due to the economic situation that it’s a problem.
Frankly, I understand to a point why this occurs. A lot of people - not all or most, but a significant chunk of people - are unemployed or on assistance because they’re a pain in the ass for whatever reason. There are lots of unpleasant, untalented, stupid, foolhardy, aggressive, entitled, and lazy people out there, and they need money, too. And to keep unemployment money flowing, or other assistance, you often need to demonstrate you’re searching for a job.
I’m not defending the practice as a blanket policy by any means. I can completely empathize with people in that position and I know an awful lot of people have been laid off for no fault of their own. But, if I came across someone who wasn’t employed right now, I’d want to know why. A lot of “layoffs” are used to get rid of untalented employees and interviewers want the best possible applicants.
I’d generally just ask people what had happened and discuss it with them. People clue you in a lot more than you’d think when you’re direct with them about your concern. This ranged from the understandable (laid off, family issues) to the suspect (“my boss was mean!”) to the alarming (stealing, violence). It was a flag for exploration in the same way someone saying “I had a hard time getting along with the people at my previous job.” Sure, the reason might be “Because I worked with assholes” but it might also be “Because I’m an impossible-to-please jerk who will irritate the shit out of you and not do any work”.
I worked at a production plant which shut down in 2007 because a lot of our work was being done in China. Hundreds of us got laid off. Not everybody who loses their job does so because they’re a bad employee.
Sure, not everybody, but also not nobody.
Also, I think you’ve got cause and effect backwards with respect to unemployment and the state of the economy. That is, you seem to think that businesses could improve the economy by reducing unemployment, but really the unemployment rate is one indicator of the state of the economy.
Would you mind explaining that a little more please?
Well, when people talk about the uneployment rate, they are using it as a measure of how well the economý is doing. So, when the UR falls, people take that as an indication that the economy is getting better.
But the opposite isn’t necessarily true–it is not the case that the economy will be better simply by reducing the UR.
For example, the federal government could hire all unemployed people and put tem to work in two shifts–one to dig a hole and the oter to fill it. The UR is now zero, but do you think the economy is better?
I would not hire someone who has lived on unemployment benefits for more than three months. I would assume someone who has received unemployment benefits for that long is lazy.
Ah, John Maynard Keyne. I never took economics classes, so I can’t give you an educated answer, but since employers only want to hire people who are employed, then it seems to me that once we have ditch-digging/filling jobs then it will be easier for us to get real jobs because now employers will hire us since we no longer have the stigma of being unemployed.
So you, and a lot of other businesses won’t hire someone who’s unemployed, but yet you blame it on us. It’s our fault for being unemployed because you won’t hire us because we’re unemployed. Interesting “logic” you have there.
Nobody, you seem really focused on yourself. The economy doesn’t really give a shit about how ell you personally are doing. Other people aren’t obligated to create a system that benefits you personally the most of all possible systems.
When did I say that they were? And where the hell did you see me asking for anything that only benefits me?
A damned silly assumption in this economy.
Well, everything you say seems to come back to how it helps or hurts the currently unemployed.
Right. And as part of that group I would like to see something being done about the problem, but for all of us that are unemployed (13.9 million). Not just me.