Its not that hard o find a job if you are willing to downgrade your requirements while at the same time waiting for job openings at the places you want. But yeah some people are just "too good" for lower job than they used to have.

he is a builder... its what he does :1orglaugh

Actually, Jon Stewart is on The Bill O'Reilly show all the time and the two of them are doing a debate on the election together that's going to be streamed live on the web.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/entert...b7e_story.html

Fox News is definitely right wing...but as I said, they at least bring on the Dems to give their side of it too.

MSNBC is just completely one-sided in ways you can't imagine until you actually see it.

I never thought I'd say this...but CNN is starting to look like the closest thing we have in the U.S. to honest reporting (and that ain't saying much)

So let me ask you this. And please answer honestly.

Say for example you are the average married American guy. You have a wife and two kids. Your wife is a stay at home mom and you had a job that you made $54K a year at. So you were the exact average American family. You lost your job and are now drawing $500 per week on unemployment. You are looking, but you can't find anything that pays what you were making so your choices are: 1. Take whatever you can find and get a job that pays $8-$10 per hour so you are making less than unemployment plus you have the expense of commuting to work everyday and it is going to likely slow your search for a higher paying job or 2. You stay on unemployment and spend all of your time looking for the better job. Which makes the most sense?

There is a misconception that there are millions of people out there living the high life and soaking up the unemployment. The reality is that there are some of these people (I read that unemployment for 16-20 year olds is 16% so I can see some 18 year old guy who just got out of high school and got laid off drawing unemployment and partying), but the reality is that many of these people are looking for work, but are trying not to take a step backwards and bringing in half or less than half of what they were making when they were working is not some glamorous life they want to stay in forever.

kane...from what I keep seeing of salaries in the news...is there even an $8 an hour job left in this country? It damn near seems like everyone is making $30 an hour and higher these days. lol

In the scenario you mentioned...if it were me:
I would first off tell my wife that she needs to go to work. And using my own experience in life, and not being stupid...I know that bartenders and waitresses can make really good money. So my wife would be off to work a club as a bartender or waitress (my wife already was a club manager and bartender 11 years ago so that would be a no-brainer....she'd easily make $400 to $500 a night in cash).

Second, I would personally go out and take the first manual labor job I could find. I don't care if it's digging a ditch.
I personally love the outdoors and love it when the temps are scalding hot. I also love to work out and be physical. So working outside doing manual labor wouldn't bother me one little bit. Exactly the kind of job that a lot of guys think is "beneath" them.

And then...I would go in with my work ethic and attitude and do what I've done in everything I've ever approached in my life. I'd try to be the very best at it and outwork everybody else (I'm competitive like that).

I would assume that everyone would have to approach that scenario using their own experience, skills, and proficiency levels and of course....drive and ambition.

But that's why some of us DO make more money and get ahead in life...and why we don't like the govt. redistributing the wealth to people who can't achieve at the same levels.

In all honesty you are one of the rare people in this world that can and does carve your own path. Most people don't have the drive, confidence or determination to do so.

If it were me I would also be on the wife about getting a job and helping out while I tried to get back to getting a decent a job. Whether I would take a lower paying job or not would depend on several things. First would be what the job is. For example if I were working in the tech industry, getting a job at McDonalds or working at a grocery store isn't going to help me get back into the tech field, but maybe a temp job at a tech company would. I could get in the door and show them what I was capable of and they might end up hiring and promoting me. Also how far I had to drive for the job would come into consideration. It is no use making $320 per week if I have to pay $150 a week in gas. The last consideration would be the situation with the kids. Would I need to get them daycare and what would that cost?

So what I would do would depend on many variables. I could find a lower paying tech job that could turn into something much better down the road and it would be well worth taking, but if I had to drive a long ways to stock shelves at a grocery store and all my money was going to go to gas and daycare it would make more sense to just stay on unemployment.

All this said, I have been self employed since November of 1998. Like you I have a scratched and clawed for my independence. Just the idea of having to get a 9-5 job working for someone else makes my skin crawl and it motivates me every day to work hard.

Working family of five earning less than $50K qualifies to be in the 47% Mitt Rmoney doesn't care about.

When you say "working family of five" Do you mean just one person in that family working? If that's the case then it's just irresponsible of them to have a family of five to begin with. If both spouses are working, then something is really wrong there if they are only bringing in $50K between them.

A person working at McDonalds makes between $11,000 and $21,000 a year for God's sakes: http://www.careerleak.com/salaries/mcdonalds/cashier/

I would hope that two people who have THREE kids (family of five) would have the ability to work better than McDonalds. And if they don't...then what kind of irresponsibility was it to bring 3 children into this world in the first place?

Many years ago I worked for a big tech company. There was a guy working there who did a job that I know paid between $10-$12 per hour. This was in the late 90's so it was worth more than it is today, but still he was married, his wife didn't work and they had five kids. I never asked how they made it, but I'm pretty sure they must have gotten government assistance. The crazy thing was this job was the best paying job the guy had ever had so it wasn't like he once had a great paying job that he had lost.

I hear ya. And you're right...$10 to $12 USED to be a high paying gig.

These days...the garbage men make more than that. And people wonder why the cost of living is sky high. :(

At one point in time college Professors in San Francisco (if I recall correctly during Pete Wilson's term as Governor) pitched a bitch about being paid less than the city paid garbage collectors.

My first thought was that the Professors...could apply for a job as a garbage collector if they did not like making less than a garbage collector. My point being that I have never understood why people think that the most miserable/harder jobs shouldn't pay more than a more comfortable job...such as being a professor.

By the way I do not recall the results of the Professor's vs the garbage men.

There is a huge section of the population that have nothing but the government to support them after Romney and his crew shipped their jobs overseas.

Are these the guys we can trust to get us back to work? This applies across the Western World.

He talks about wanting to get all Americans jobs. So will he stop shipping them over seas to make more money?

I think it's bullshit. 47%? Americans are some of the hardest working people on Earth. All people want is a real shot at a middle class life.

Compare that to people like Mitt. Like the 47% that Mitt denigrates, that motherfucker doesn't pay any income tax, either. He pays capital gains tax - and only @ 13%. Hell, he probably has paid nothing for 10 years. We'll never know because the slippery bastard is still hiding his taxes.

Why does Mitt, who is incredibly wealthy, get to pay 13% (if that) while the average worker pays 25% or more? Because the tax system is rigged in their favor. Why? Because THE ONES WHO REALLY FEEL "ENTITLED" ARE PEOPLE LIKE MITT.

"Only the little people pay taxes." -- rancid cunt Leona Helmsley, who would have written big checks to Mitt if she weren't burning in hell.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/dk-productio...jpg?1347966480

For the record.

I would love to see Governments spending, borrowing and taxing us less. While increasing job, production and my benefits. But I live in the real world of 2012 and realise I left the 80s behind a long time ago.

How and where will all these new jobs be created?

What will happen between the job losses, from cuts in spending and new private sector jobs being created?

How will the new jobs, keep pace with the outsourcing, bankruptcies, automation and the job losses from cuts in spending?

Will corporate funding be cut along the same lines as Social Security?

Yes businesses should be allowed to make big profits and employ people on good wages. Then taxed to keep those they put out of work eating. If you have a better plan, without cutting regulation, please write it here.

The problem with some who want the poor to get less, is their entitlement culture. They think they are entitled to make money and screw everyone else. They want to make money in a society and contribute as little as possible to is, if they could nothing at all.

Today the Government spends money, so just stop them spending, fuck the casualties and go to Cancun twice a year. Are they entitled to fuck those they leave behind

It's all corporate media. They're beholden to other corporate advertisers.

And fyi - MSNBC has Joe Scarborough - a right winger - on in the morning. And this "liberal" network kicked Phil Donahue off the air - despite the fact that his was their highest rated show at the time - because he would not let up on his criticism of the impending Iraq invasion. MSNBC is owned by GE - a huge defense contractor that profited handsomely from the bloody, needless invasion. It's a corporate network.

Public and reader/listener/viewer supported media is beholden only to their supporters.


Some to try:

PBS
Alternet
Slate
Salon
Buzzflash

Some may have a few advertisers, but the bulk of their $$ comes from their viewers.

http://www.freepress.net/sites/defau...m-banner-1.png

Come on man, it's called the cost of living . . . it goes up.

People with real jobs get paid accordingly. People with shit jobs get paid Indian wages.

Think about it.

Which of these two groups fuel the economy with their spending . . . and which ones don't.

This ain't rocket science.

Businesses - like yours and mine - need customers with disposable income.

The way I see it, impoverishing the general population is bad for business. Very bad.

You seem to think otherwise?

Why?

Like Mitt. That fucker doesn't pay income tax, either. And if we all parked our money offshore the way that bastard does, our economic system would collapse. In addition, Mitt made a fortune liquidating companies and laying people off.

Mitt Romney is the worthless leach of which you speak.

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m6...hkvho1_500.jpg

Exactly right.

I'd guess a large number of that "47%" Romney refers to are from shit-kicking "red" states that consistently vote GOP.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/...296/morans.jpg

Romney's a funny guy.

The most telling byproduct from his business career at Bain Capital - aside from enriching himself that is - is all of the people who subsequently lost their jobs.

And now, this same guy has the tacks to criticize those same people - and others just like them - for not taking "personal responsibility" and somehow becoming solvent taxpayers again.

Any normal human being, in his shoes, might see some "personal responsibility" staring right back at him in the bathroom mirror . . . but not Mitt.

And, as if all that wasn't bad enough, Mitt now wants to become our president.

Huh?

After building 40k square feet of datacenter using both union and non union labor, Yes, I can say without a doubt, UNION ARE PAID WAY TOO FUCKING MUCH.

the non union labor was still overpriced, but atleast it was semi realistic.

yes. It all should have gone under the axe.

I will start a flame war but I believe Ted nugent said it best.: Being poor is a career choice.

LOL what are you talking about? I love my life and I dont I dont care if people if get ahead of me. work and earn to your level of comfort in your life. I care if they are sitting on their ass Making babies and eating fast food on my fucking DIME.

Doesn't care about?

Or said he knows he will not get their vote?

The "American Dream" of a house, two cars, lots of holidays abroad or in the sun and lots of gadgets isn't exclusive to America. Much of the West holds that dream and it fuelled our economies for years.

Then the people with the dream became too expensive compared to people in Central Europe and businesses moved here after they joined the EU. We came before and can see the difference. It pales in comparison to other places.

http://www.zonaeuropa.com/20060522_02.jpg

They are buying iPhones. Made in China.
http://webification.com/wp-content/u...one4s-riot.jpg

Living in the 1970s with solutions that worked in those days. Will never cure the problems of today.

So I will tell you my solutions. They will not work, because I posted them. :1orglaugh

The West has exported jobs, industry and wealth for decades. It will take decades to solve.

Either we invest in the technology race to stay ahead of the East. By investing in research, infrastructure, education, health, etc. Then protect the inventions, patents and copyrights, so scum can't steal the hard work and investment. By doing this we can let Third World produce the goods, they will not want to stay as factories for the West, so we have to keep progressing faster than them.

By doing this we will create an elite, not on inherited wealth, of people with great thinking, vision and imagination. With the ethic of hard work. So the opportunities have to be open for everyone and not exclusive for the dumb sons of rich men. Watch Jeeves and Wooster to see a parody of the truth in England prior to WW1 and to WW2.

If the West can do this it will produce a lot of wealth for some. To maintain the businesses it will require lots of customers, not an elite few. Jobs will be created in industries servicing the companies leading the technical race. To create more, there has to be a Government creating them as well. Otherwise the shops selling the goods will be emptier than they could be.

It's all about funds being in motion. Or the money going round and round.

Letting some guy like Romney get in with his "Pig in the trough" attitude will lead to ruin.

Because there is only so much the elite can buy.

Yes your taxes fuel the economy better than you spending them would.

This is 2012, I saw Mitt's solutions work in 1970. The 70s are calling him. Telling him to think in the present. :1orglaugh

hes dead wrong in that everyone who doesn't pay income taxes won't vote for him. there are plenty who view themselves as republican regardless..although that might change for some now.

as for the government 'providing' for people...EVERYONE expects. even all you guys bitching about them all the time. when is obama going to 'fix' the economy..when is obama going to 'create' more jobs. when is obama going to change my diapers...this is ALL expecting the government to provide.

and making stupid statements is your choice

He might be right.

It's a choice made for people by people called Mitt Romney and his ilk.

In 1993 I was homeless in L.A., right out of the army,and before I got into this business. I have plenty of friends that are "working poor" here in Miami. I'm friends with people because they are good people that I get along with, not because of what they have or what they do.

I completely agree with you about the working poor in the center of the country, ( I lived in Iowa for 3 years running call centers in the late 90s). However I see HUGE sections of the populations in all the coastal cities that do not have the pride of the working poor. My wife works with them every day at a pediatric clinic. They truly do believe that the government is supposed to take care of them in every way.


Personally I'm really offended at Romney saying that he will "create 100k jobs in this state" and "500k jobs in that state", etc....

The government doesn't create anything. It simply redistributes, or it inflates, or it borrows at interest. None of those things create jobs. And the VAST amount of government regulation on business, that has been skyrocketing the last 7 years, is causing business owners all over the country to stop hiring, or close up shop altogether. Even more than taxes, government regulation is what is killing jobs and small business now in the country. (I have a diverse network of acquaintances all over, and in all kinds of businesses) And no one votes on those new regulations. They are enforced like federal felonies, but your representative had no oversight in their creation.

When Romney or Obama start talking about getting government out of the way of people that actually DO create jobs, as opposed to erroneously claiming that government will do it, then I will start considering them.




.:2 cents:

in his speech he said he will create 12 million jobs

Exactly. It's that kind of bullcrap that drives me nuts.




.

If the minimum wage were increased tomorrow, it would bring many thousands of working poor up to the point where they would earn enough to pay federal income taxes.

If your congressman or woman does not represent your viewpoints in their voting history, please vote against them.

Obviously this would result in lower profits for employers, and since employer is likely in a higher tax bracket, it would result in lower tax revenue for the government? So besides increasing unemployment, what exactly would your brilliant idea accomplish? :helpme

With pork barrel spending out of control, the last thing we need is to be giving the government more cash in the coffers. Right now they can't seem to stop spending, starting with defense, which should be cut by literally 50%. They need to increase tariff's to make it a fair playing field. Force more U.S. companies to bring jobs back to the states. Clean up the U.S. tax code. We should not be policing the world. Let China do it for awhile.

Nothing will topple an empire like trying to control the fate of the world. Open a history book.

:2 cents:

It would increase tax revenues for the government and allow people who currently stay on foodstamps to earn enough to get off of them. If it's raised just enough, they will become disqualified to receive them.

I'm not as pessimistic as you are it seems. If a company's profit margin is so razor thin that an increase in pay for minimum wage workers would cause them to fire employees, then they have bigger problems to worry about.

Not enough tax breaks for business yet to pay someone more than poverty pay, is that it?

Did he say where or how?

So where should the money go?

Into cabbage farming. :eek7

/sarcasm

Millions

That is NOT what he said, and you know it. Why do you feel the need to twist the facts? You can't get by on reality?

You mean it isn't the same? </sarcasm>

I hope he was being facetious.

It would be interesting to see you applying the same energy to debunk the "facts" being thrown around by the Republicans. :1orglaugh

Got some figures on that?

Sadly no one will answer with the truth.

You're not factoring in that the reason to own a business in the first place is to make money. When the minimum wage OR taxes go up...guess what? The company doesn't lose that money. They raise prices and pass it on to the consumer.

Then the cost of living goes up. And then that wage increase becomes nullified because your money no longer buys what it once did.

It's a vicious circle. When wages increase...so does the cost of living.

And no, I don't have a clue how to fix that. Maybe with a big magic "reset" button to bring everything back down to reality (prices and wages). It shouldn't require a bank loan to buy a car for instance. And it shouldn't cost $400 to go to the grocery store.

And it shouldn't cost 50% to get some guy to send you traffic. I agree with your analogy. The problem is, as I pointed out, people who don't deserve to live "the dream" demanded they should and the whole thing blew up like a bubble.

Until Third World cheap labour burst it. :Oh crap

The only solution the West has is to stay ahead of the Third World and then taxes the profitable businesses and good to higher earners to keep the money in the consumer countries circulating.

Reading the article the WSJ has, sperbonzo posted it, they want it reserved for the few. They quote lies and half truths to back it up. Was it 2/3 of Government spending goes to the poor and unemployed and it costs $200,000 to create one job?

Well they lied. The money the Government spend to keep those on welfare eating. Goes to people working in offices, shops and the shop owners. $200,000 to create a job, that also goes to create far more than one job. Probably helps to create or keep 4-5 jobs.

The tax cutting lobby wants to put it into the pockets of the few, so they can do what with it? Create jobs in the US or overseas?

Mitt just proved to the world that the 2 (two) party system in the US is completely flawed.

At any given point, +\- 50% of the population is against its own president.

Amazing.........

You get elected to Senate. After raising money for your next campaign, your next job is to get things for your district. Now they call it pork barrel but they all do it or they wouldnt get re elected.

The only problem is that is is not a two party system, there are probably a dozen people on the ballot for president. There are two major parties, pretty much like any country.

I am Canadian and I am entitled to Health Care, Housing, and education. its pretty sweet.

After a year full of medical tragedies in my family nobody owes anything.

After my wifes sister wanted to move out from her asshole boyfriend there were many options available to her and her daughter to find government housing

One of my friends is going through a government funded retraining for free because he's in forestry and that industry is dead. I have a lot of friends using government backed student loans to get degrees.

Right now I am working with the government to secure funding for a new renewable technology company.

Does this make me dependant on the government?

Lloyd, both you and I know that THAT does not matter. It IS a two party country, and it is flawed.

200 hopeless losers :)