Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfy
Did you do the math on that, from an employer's perspective?
(Sorry, I fucking HATE rhetorical questions. I know you didn't do the math, just like I know you don't have many employees in that range. If you did, you'd know your math makes as much sense as this "Stimulus2" package that Obama is pushing. In other words... you don't have employees in that range, and you didn't do the math. End of story.)
(P.S. I don't know you, please don't take offense - it wasn't meant to be personal. Also, please don't reply if you're a liberal. Those fucking idiots annoy the shit out of me.)
(P.P.S. Do you realize that a $4000 credit barely covers the employers tax liability on a "highly qualified" yet "picky and intelligent" and "discriminating" employee of that caliber if you employ that individual long enough to actually earn the credit? I could and SHOULD rant on this subject, but I don't want to steal someone else's thunder. I'm too busy to follow up on that thunder, because I actually DO know how to make profit.)
|
First, I don't employ anyone. I work for myself and am self-employed, but don't have any employees.
Second, not a liberal nor a conservative I would be more of a libertarian, just a little less batshit than most of them.
Third, my math has nothing to do with an employer. You simply said that Obama is offering credits to businesses who hire those who are long term unemployed and you went on to refer to those people has being "undesirable" or not wanting to work or that nobody wants them. My math was meant to point out that if I once had a job making $20 per hour an I got laid off and I am now making what is the equivalent of $11-$12 per hour on unemployment I don't have a whole lot of motivation to take a $9 per hour job. So maybe some of these long term unemployed people are just choosing the lesser of two evils and are deciding to stay on unemployment while they continue to look for a better job instead of settling for a lesser paying job.
Another example could be that people make different decisions based on family needs. I have a friend whose wife got laid off from her job. She got another job, then got hurt (not on the job) and had to have surgery. Her employer didn't hold her job for her so she was out of work again and back looking. After a couple of months they decided that it would be better for her to just stay home for now and be a stay at home mom. They would save money on gas and babysitting and it would almost be the same as if she were working part time or making a low wage. So for 2 years she did this. Then their youngest started first grade and with the kids gone all day to school she started looking for work again and found a pretty good job. So she wasn't "undesirable" she and her family simply made a choice that it was better for them that she not work at that exact moment.
All I am trying to do is point out that every person who is long term unemployed is not some lazy welfare loving piece of garbage. There are some of those, but to assume that of everyone is simply an over simplification especially during the times we are experiencing now.