US Job Openings up 259,000 to an All-Time High - GoFuckYourself.com

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 09:32 AM

Quote:

The number of job openings in the United States rose by 259,000 to an all-time high of 6.044 million in April 2017 from an upwardly revised 5.785 million in the previous month and beating market expectations of 5.650 million. The number of job openings increased for total private (220,000), mainly in accommodation and food services (118,000), and for government (39,000). Job openings rose in the Midwest and Northeast regions. Job Offers in the United States averaged 3970.02 Thousands from 2000 until 2017, reaching an all time high of 6044 Thousands in April of 2017 and a record low of 2196 Thousands in July of 2009

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/job-offers

Bad news is that they are government jobs along with burger-flippers and hotel maids needed.

Filling job vacancies of illegal workers who were deported?
Government hiring people? To do what ? Deport more burger-flippers and hotel maids?

Rochard · 06-06-2017, 09:44 AM

Unemployment has been dropping for the past six years or so....

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 09:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Bad news is that they are government jobs along with burger-flippers and hotel maids needed.

Filling job vacancies of illegal workers who were deported?
Government hiring people? To do what ? Deport more burger-flippers and hotel maids?

Time to put up restrictions and limits on welfare people, so they have to go out and fill these jobs. Shitty or not.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 10:24 AM

What makes you think that welfare recipients are qualified and able to do these jobs.

Assuming they do not have parenting responsibilities (50% + are now ineligible).
Assuming they will get up in the morning, shower and dress, have bus fare and the discipline to go to work (now 78% are ineligible).
Assuming that they live 20 miles or less from these mostly menial job opportunities (now 83% are ineligible)

That still leaves some employment prospects.

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

What makes you think that welfare recipients are qualified and able to do these jobs.

Assuming they do not have parenting responsibilities (50% + are now ineligible).
Assuming they will get up in the morning, shower and dress, have bus fare and the discipline to go to work (now 78% are ineligible).
Assuming that they live 20 miles or less from these mostly menial job opportunities (now 83% are ineligible)

That still leaves some employment prospects.

You cut off all their funding and let them figure out the logistics of how they will get that job and put food on their table. You shit out 4 kids, that's your issue to figure out child care for them so you can earn a living. Sure as fuck isn't the taxpayers.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 04:08 PM

They would rather wonder into my neighborhood and break in to my garage (B&E) and steal something that they can sell to eat (some of these newly desperate poor anyway) -- I will pay for them anyway by my increased property insurance costs. People that do not have an established work ethics are not going to adapt easily just because you starve them.

People newly entering the workforce having completed their schooling will have no interest in taking these jobs that are menial jobs beneath the abilities they have been schooled for. Even if they do take these poor quality jobs they will harbor a resentment.

This BIGLY job increase is really a lose-lose from what I see. I would rather see the US government fund basic research incubator jobs that these newly trained workplace entrants are qualified for -- there are ways to offer opportunities at low starting wages with profitability incentives or goal based incentives -- people learn work ethics -- if you force someone to work the best you will do is create a resentful and docile slave most of the time. Let some hard working Guatemalan lady change the bed linen and clean the toilet in your hotel room. If some immigrant is happy flippin' your burger he won't be spitting in it before it gets wrapped and sent down the line.

shiraz9944 · 06-06-2017, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

They would rather wonder into my neighborhood and break in to my garage (B&E) and steal something that they can sell to eat (some of these newly desperate poor anyway) -- I will pay for them anyway by my increased property insurance costs. People that do not have an established work ethics are not going to adapt easily just because you starve them.

People newly entering the workforce having completed their schooling will have no interest in taking these jobs that are menial jobs beneath the abilities they have been schooled for. Even if they do take these poor quality jobs they will harbor a resentment.

This BIGLY job increase is really a lose-lose from what I see. I would rather see the US government fund basic research incubator jobs that these newly trained workplace entrants are qualified for -- there are ways to offer opportunities at low starting wages with profitability incentives or goal based incentives -- people learn work ethics -- if you force someone to work the best you will do is create a resentful and docile slave most of the time. Let some hard working Guatemalan lady change the bed linen and clean the toilet in your hotel room. If some immigrant is happy flippin' your burger he won't be spitting in it before it gets wrapped and sent down the line.

"People that do not have an established work ethics are not going to adapt easily just because you starve them."

WTF? because WE starve them? No, they starve themselves when they didn't finish high school, didn't get any additional training, then decided to have kids when they had no job. You have the balls to say WE starve them? You are wrong, people adapt the fastest when they're left with no other options. IF they break the law then they go to jail, most will adapt. IF they don't then a new AI powered system will replace that cheap job you think we MUST fill. What do people say here? Adapt or die?

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by shiraz9944

"People that do not have an established work ethics are not going to adapt easily just because you starve them."

WTF? because WE starve them? No, they starve themselves when they didn't finish high school, didn't get any additional training, then decided to have kids when they had no job. You have the balls to say WE starve them? You are wrong, people adapt the fastest when they're left with no other options. IF they break the law then they go to jail, most will adapt. IF they don't then a new AI powered system will replace that cheap job you think we MUST fill. What do people say here? Adapt or die?

This is the biggest issue I have with Liberalism. They went from having some compassion and giving a helping hand to those in need, to fully making it so nobody has to have personal responsibility. I have a massive problem with not holding people accountable for their choices in life.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 05:19 PM

Some crack head B&E'd my garage during the worst of the Great Recession -- it cost me $2,000 out of my pocket replacing the broken garage door and the contents stolen -- spare my your * liberal * bullshit -- I am a realist.

I have a massive problem with people that are full of shit

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

Some crack head B&E'd my garage during the worst of the Great Recession -- it cost me $2,000 out of my pocket replacing the broken garage door and the contents stolen -- spare my your * liberal * bullshit -- I am a realist.

I have a massive problem with people that are full of shit

Great, get these clown in prison and keep them there. If they want to commit theft, punish them hard. But don't stick your head in the sand, and say fuck it, here is free money, just so my life is not as impacted. That is selfish and completly counters your we are for the good of the society. No you are for the good of only your pocketbook. Take that welfare money and give cities more police presence. But don't make it so people can live off the government, shit out kids and have zero personal responsibility.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 05:32 PM

You are irrational.

And now ignored. And not because you don't agree with me. Because you are an asshat.

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 05:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

You are irrational.

And now ignored. And not because you don't agree with me. Because you are an asshat.

LOL another snowflake. Talks as a Liberal, but really has no compassion for people at all. As long as his garage isn't broken in. Fuck uplifting people into better lives. Screw making people personally responsible. Forget trying to get people to contribute to society instead of being a drain on it. As long as my garage is safe.

Yes, there is going to be pitfalls and spikes in crime during a hard change such as putting severe restrictions on welfare and food stamps. Yes, sometimes you might face trauma in your life. But in the end, that is how the society grows and improves. That is how you life people up from the bottom. So really who cares about people? Sure as fuck isn't you, as you made perfectly clear.

I commend you saying that when push comes to shove, you don't care about anyone but yourself. Own it. But don't claim you ever care about making the lives of the poor and less fortunate better. You are not willing to sacrifice to make that happen at all.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 05:47 PM

blah blah blah FUCK OFF

Police and prisons cost tax money -- it costs $77K a year to incarcerate a petty criminal in California -- Asshat logic

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

blah blah blah FUCK OFF

Police and prisons cost tax money -- it costs $77K a year to incarcerate a petty criminal in California -- Asshat logic

Damn rights they cost money. But I'd rather lock up those people for a long time and hold them accountable, then just ignore the problem and let the poor and unfortunate slide into further despair. Only hard consequence can help break the cycle.

kane · 06-06-2017, 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman

You cut off all their funding and let them figure out the logistics of how they will get that job and put food on their table. You shit out 4 kids, that's your issue to figure out child care for them so you can earn a living. Sure as fuck isn't the taxpayers.

This reminds me of a woman that I went to high school with. She would always say that she never believed in birth control because she felt if you were mature enough to have sex you were mature enough to deal with the potential consequences. So, of course, she got knocked up our senior year and was very pregnant at our graduation. She ended up have five kids with four different guys and lives on welfare. She has zero interest in getting off of it as well. What's worse? Recently her oldest daughter turned 17 and became pregnant. The woman, my former classmate, was on Facebook bragging about being a grandma. When someone asked her how her kid was going to support a kid she said, "I showed her how to get her benefits." For this family, welfare is the family business. It's fucking infuriating.

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 06:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

This reminds me of a woman that I went to high school with. She would always say that she never believed in birth control because she felt if you were mature enough to have sex you were mature enough to deal with the potential consequences. So, of course, she got knocked up our senior year and was very pregnant at our graduation. She ended up have five kids with four different guys and lives on welfare. She has zero interest in getting off of it as well. What's worse? Recently her oldest daughter turned 17 and became pregnant. The woman, my former classmate, was on Facebook bragging about being a grandma. When someone asked her how her kid was going to support a kid she said, "I showed her how to get her benefits." For this family, welfare is the family business. It's fucking infuriating.

Agreed. And in the end, it does nobody any good. Doesn't do anything for them to lead a higher quality of life. Doesn't help their communities. And it doesn't help the country as a whole to have a welfare generation, pass that same situation on their kids. If you want these things to change, then major restrictions must be put on welfare and foot stamps. A fixed timeline of receiving the benefits with no strings attached. After that timeline, they need to figure it out on their own. I'd be open to being on welfare having to work 25 hours a week on government or non-profit jobs for their money. At least then they are giving some value back to the community and country. Might also get some to realize if I am going to work 25 hours a week, I might as well go work the 15 other hours and actually make more money.

No 100% easy fix. But keeping the cycle of handouts going, surely isn't the answer.

kane · 06-06-2017, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman

Agreed. And in the end, it does nobody any good. Doesn't do anything for them to lead a higher quality of life. Doesn't help their communities. And it doesn't help the country as a whole to have a welfare generation, pass that same situation on their kids. If you want these things to change, then major restrictions must be put on welfare and foot stamps. A fixed timeline of receiving the benefits with no strings attached. After that timeline, they need to figure it out on their own. I'd be open to being on welfare having to work 25 hours a week on government or non-profit jobs for their money. At least then they are giving some value back to the community and country. Might also get some to realize if I am going to work 25 hours a week, I might as well go work the 15 other hours and actually make more money.

No 100% easy fix. But keeping the cycle of handouts going, surely isn't the answer.

I know in some states you have to work a certain amount of hours in order to get welfare benefits. I would love to see some kind of a jobs program. If you sign up for welfare you have to attend some classes or counseling sessions or something where they sit down with you and chart a path off of welfare. Even if that means they need to stay on it for a few years while they go to school to learn a trade, great. The minute someone begins getting welfare, we should be working with them to get them off it and supporting themselves.

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 06:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

I know in some states you have to work a certain amount of hours in order to get welfare benefits. I would love to see some kind of a jobs program. If you sign up for welfare you have to attend some classes or counseling sessions or something where they sit down with you and chart a path off of welfare. Even if that means they need to stay on it for a few years while they go to school to learn a trade, great. The minute someone begins getting welfare, we should be working with them to get them off it and supporting themselves.

Yes, a good job training program would be great too. Mandatory until completion. They should be teaching these people highly sought after, well paying jobs too. Basically a trade school for welfare recipients. Train them how to weld. How to be a plummer. Electrician. Construction management program. Garden/Landscape design. Solar/wind techs etc. If you are going to train them, train them for good paying jobs as well.

Barry-xlovecam · 06-06-2017, 06:19 PM

Naw -- just throw them off the deep end and when they come to steal your shit shoot them dead -- you know the the drill -- the asshat shuffle -- don't even waste your breath

Bladewire · 06-06-2017, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rochard

Unemployment has been dropping for the past six years or so....

Trump says the jobs reports are fake so no need to pay attention to them

kane · 06-06-2017, 06:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Axeman

Yes, a good job training program would be great too. Mandatory until completion. They should be teaching these people highly sought after, well paying jobs too. Basically a trade school for welfare recipients. Train them how to weld. How to be a plummer. Electrician. Construction management program. Garden/Landscape design. Solar/wind techs etc. If you are going to train them, train them for good paying jobs as well.

Agree 100%. Don't pay to send them to college so they can get a degree in Feminist Studies or Medival Literature, teach them to do things like you said. A friend of mine is an electrition. Even during the recession, he was working overtime. It's not an easy job, but it is a good paying job, with good benefits and it doesn't take 4 years to learn how to do it. He went to school for two years then joined an apprentice program.

Axeman · 06-06-2017, 06:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kane

Agree 100%. Don't pay to send them to college so they can get a degree in Feminist Studies or Medival Literature, teach them to do things like you said. A friend of mine is an electrition. Even during the recession, he was working overtime. It's not an easy job, but it is a good paying job, with good benefits and it doesn't take 4 years to learn how to do it. He went to school for two years then joined an apprentice program.

My uncle took a one year course to work with hydraulics. He could have worked 50 hours overtime evey week if he wanted it. He was able to retire at 53. He barely got thru high school, but found a trade that was quick to study, and paid amazing, with high demand.

06-06-2017, 09:44 AM	#2
Rochard Jägermeister Test Pilot Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: NORCAL Posts: 70,242	Unemployment has been dropping for the past six years or so.... __________________ “The choice is no longer between right or left. The choice is between normal and crazy.” - Sarah Huckabee Sanders YNOT MAIL \| THE BEST ADULT MAILING SOLUTION

06-06-2017, 10:24 AM	#4
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	What makes you think that welfare recipients are qualified and able to do these jobs. Assuming they do not have parenting responsibilities (50% + are now ineligible). Assuming they will get up in the morning, shower and dress, have bus fare and the discipline to go to work (now 78% are ineligible). Assuming that they live 20 miles or less from these mostly menial job opportunities (now 83% are ineligible) That still leaves some employment prospects.

06-06-2017, 04:08 PM	#6
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	They would rather wonder into my neighborhood and break in to my garage (B&E) and steal something that they can sell to eat (some of these newly desperate poor anyway) -- I will pay for them anyway by my increased property insurance costs. People that do not have an established work ethics are not going to adapt easily just because you starve them. People newly entering the workforce having completed their schooling will have no interest in taking these jobs that are menial jobs beneath the abilities they have been schooled for. Even if they do take these poor quality jobs they will harbor a resentment. This BIGLY job increase is really a lose-lose from what I see. I would rather see the US government fund basic research incubator jobs that these newly trained workplace entrants are qualified for -- there are ways to offer opportunities at low starting wages with profitability incentives or goal based incentives -- people learn work ethics -- if you force someone to work the best you will do is create a resentful and docile slave most of the time. Let some hard working Guatemalan lady change the bed linen and clean the toilet in your hotel room. If some immigrant is happy flippin' your burger he won't be spitting in it before it gets wrapped and sent down the line.

06-06-2017, 05:19 PM	#9
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Some crack head B&E'd my garage during the worst of the Great Recession -- it cost me $2,000 out of my pocket replacing the broken garage door and the contents stolen -- spare my your * liberal * bullshit -- I am a realist. I have a massive problem with people that are full of shit

06-06-2017, 05:32 PM	#11
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	You are irrational. And now ignored. And not because you don't agree with me. Because you are an asshat.

06-06-2017, 05:47 PM	#13
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	blah blah blah FUCK OFF Police and prisons cost tax money -- it costs $77K a year to incarcerate a petty criminal in California -- Asshat logic

06-06-2017, 06:19 PM	#19
Barry-xlovecam It's 42 Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Global Posts: 18,083	Naw -- just throw them off the deep end and when they come to steal your shit shoot them dead -- you know the the drill -- the asshat shuffle -- don't even waste your breath