Types of libertarians

[NoDrama]

Calling the unemployed lazy freeloaders is pretty much ignorant and mean. I'm sure you could find a few miscreants, but there are always that percentage in the society as a whole. I'd venture to say that at least 98% of the unemployed would love a decent job. Problem is, there are none. What we need, since there are no jobs, is permanent unemployment insurance compensation untill jobs come back. We could start by eliminating foriegn student Visas, then send all foriegn workers back home. Now the jobs that would be created would be shown to the unemployed and if thery were qualified and refused to take it, they would be dropped from the roles. Hopefully we would eliminate unemployment entirely. We must stop the influx of foriegners, legal or not. We don't have enough jobs to go around and filling what we do have with foriegners is totally insane. We might need an employment tzar, heck I'd take that job. I'd show up at a factory/field and demand to see the SS cards, I'd run the cards and any and all that were bogus would be rounded up and sent to a "Fema" (LOL) camp to await extradition. Of course we'd have to make sure the border was Impenetrable.

although I am dead set against a permanent unemployment anything, but your ideas to send foreign workers back home and deny any other Visas plus the idea that if the unemployed were offered a job and refused and so would be taken off the roles is a VERY GOOD IDEA!!!

The influx of Mexicans will never stop until we either have all of Mexico's oil ( they provide 40% of ours) or all of their citizens. As long as Mexico provides oil we keep the border basically open, thats the agreement between Mexico and the US.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

Calling the unemployed lazy freeloaders is pretty much ignorant and mean. I'm sure you could find a few miscreants, but there are always that percentage in the society as a whole. I'd venture to say that at least 98% of the unemployed would love a decent job. Problem is, there are none. What we need, since there are no jobs, is permanent unemployment insurance compensation untill jobs come back. We could start by eliminating foriegn student Visas, then send all foriegn workers back home. Now the jobs that would be created would be shown to the unemployed and if thery were qualified and refused to take it, they would be dropped from the roles. Hopefully we would eliminate unemployment entirely. We must stop the influx of foriegners, legal or not. We don't have enough jobs to go around and filling what we do have with foriegners is totally insane. We might need an employment tzar, heck I'd take that job. I'd show up at a factory/field and demand to see the SS cards, I'd run the cards and any and all that were bogus would be rounded up and sent to a "Fema" (LOL) camp to await extradition. Of course we'd have to make sure the border was Impenetrable.

Whenever we agree on something, I often wonder how long it will be before monkeys come flying out of my backside. I'll address the what we agree on first.

On immigration. I wholeheartedly agree. How people cannot see the correlation between immigration, both legal and illegal, and high unemployment numbers is beyond me. There was a time when our economy could absorb massive numbers of people coming in. Those days are long gone. And under no circumstances should we be in the business of importing the poor, the unskilled, the diseased, criminals, or people trying to kill us. I would like to see a moratorium on all immigration for at least two years. None. No exceptions. Nobody gets in except to visit. Then once things stabilize we can start allowing immigrants who are educated and productive. And the border must be locked down as tight as a flea's asshole. I would love to see all of the military resources we have scattered over most of the world stationed permanently at regular increments along our borders.

Permanent unemployment is an insanely stupid idea. That's what they have over there in Europe where double-digit unemployment is par for the course and has been for a long time. Unemployment benefits were never intended to be anything but temporary. The reason why the 99ers are still unemployed is because they are getting paid not to work. There is no incentive to do the things required to improve their prospects, like re-train or relocate.

Employment czar? Are you serious? The last thing we need right now is a further expansion of government. And why do we need a czar when there is already a Secretary of Labor?

 

[medicineman]

Whenever we agree on something, I often wonder how long it will be before monkeys come flying out of my backside. I'll address the what we agree on first.

On immigration. I wholeheartedly agree. How people cannot see the correlation between immigration, both legal and illegal, and high unemployment numbers is beyond me. There was a time when our economy could absorb massive numbers of people coming in. Those days are long gone. And under no circumstances should we be in the business of importing the poor, the unskilled, the diseased, criminals, or people trying to kill us. I would like to see a moratorium on all immigration for at least two years. None. No exceptions. Nobody gets in except to visit. Then once things stabilize we can start allowing immigrants who are educated and productive. And the border must be locked down as tight as a flea's asshole. I would love to see all of the military resources we have scattered over most of the world stationed permanently at regular increments along our borders.

Permanent unemployment is an insanely stupid idea. That's what they have over there in Europe where double-digit unemployment is par for the course and has been for a long time. Unemployment benefits were never intended to be anything but temporary. The reason why the 99ers are still unemployed is because they are getting paid not to work. There is no incentive to do the things required to improve their prospects, like re-train or relocate.

Employment czar? Are you serious? The last thing we need right now is a further expansion of government. And why do we need a czar when there is already a Secretary of Labor?

Look Johnny, there are no jobs, the McDonalds down the street from me gets more than a hundred applications a week, how do I know this, My son in law is a manager there. Where my wife works, when they put a job opening on craigs list they get the phone tied up all day and have to remove the post. It is definently an employers market. What are we supposed to do with the long term unemployed that for no fault of their own they got layed off. Just let them starve, live on the streets, just throw away people??? You advertise any job opening and hundreds of people come out, so you'd just say, "Fuck-em"? Do you actually have a heart, or is it a mechanical whirrer?

 

[Johnnyorganic]

Look Johnny, there are no jobs, the McDonalds down the street from me gets more than a hundred applications a week, how do I know this, My son in law is a manager there. Where my wife works, when they put a job opening on craigs list they get the phone tied up all day and have to remove the post. It is definently an employers market. What are we supposed to do with the long term unemployed that for no fault of their own they got layed off. Just let them starve, live on the streets, just throw away people??? You advertise any job opening and hundreds of people come out, so you'd just say, "Fuck-em"? Do you actually have a heart, or is it a mechanical whirrer?

Who pays federal and state unemployment taxes? Employers. The more money we throw down the bottomless pit that is unemployment insurance is seized from businesses who subsequently have less money to hire new employees; or like the situation we are seeing with the extensions, it is borrowed.

Either way, the program takes money out of the private sector and places it into the greedy paws of a government bureaucracy which then disperses the money after taking out its own cut for administrative purposes.

Are you truly unable see the connection between government burdens placed on businesses and their ability hire new employees? Or do you simply refuse to acknowledge it?

As far as my not having a heart is concerned, just call me the Tin Man.

I'll call you the Scarecrow. You do recall what he was missing, right?

 

[NoDrama]

When are people going to realize that government does not create anything. In order for the Government to give ANYONE ANYTHING they have to take it from someone else first, plus remove a little off the top to pay themselves.

 

[doc111]

When are people going to realize that government does not create anything. In order for the Government to give ANYONE ANYTHING they have to take it from someone else first, plus remove a little off the top to pay themselves.

It seems like they remove more than a little.

 

[findme]

im a straight up anarchist. so i guess im the naive one

 

[medicineman]

im a straight up anarchist. so i guess im the naive one

Anarchy makes absolutely no sense to me. What you would have is 350+ million people running around with guns trying to take everyone elses stuff. That is what comes to my mind. If you like anarchy then I suppose you would have to like complete chaos.

 

[UncleBuck]

johnny, why the hell would you think employers are going to hire anyone new when there is no demand in the market? quashing unemployment insurance would surely lower not only the burden on employers, but also lower demand in the market. employers are already sitting on top of trillions of dollars but won't hire thanks to lack of demand in the market.

also, unemployment insurance currently works such that if you turn down ANY job, you lose your benefits. for the record, i am not for permanent unemployment insurance.

nodrama, thanks for the job offer. i'll stick with what i'm doing now, however. client base is building and things look better every day.

so the wife was away the last couple days so i built the gift she requested, hence my absence here. still needs to be sanded, stained, and sealed. i am not the most skilled carpenter, more of a general handyman, but i think it came out ok.

 

[findme]

Anarchy makes absolutely no sense to me. What you would have is 350+ million people running around with guns trying to take everyone elses stuff. That is what comes to my mind. If you like anarchy then I suppose you would have to like complete chaos.

I figured, thats what comes to anyones mind when you say anarchy. but...
What makes you think that 350+ million people will be running around with guns?

I like complete freedom without having a government because they are essentially evil.

 

[UncleBuck]

I figured, thats what comes to anyones mind when you say anarchy.

because that is what anarchy is.

there are (or have been) peaceful anarchists, but guess what? they get ran off by violent anarchists that have more guns and force.

i know a few places in this world you can move to and give anarchy a try.

good luck dealing with the warlords though.

 

[doc111]

johnny, why the hell would you think employers are going to hire anyone new when there is no demand in the market? quashing unemployment insurance would surely lower not only the burden on employers, but also lower demand in the market. employers are already sitting on top of trillions of dollars but won't hire thanks to lack of demand in the market.

also, unemployment insurance currently works such that if you turn down ANY job, you lose your benefits. for the record, i am not for permanent unemployment insurance.

nodrama, thanks for the job offer. i'll stick with what i'm doing now, however. client base is building and things look better every day.

so the wife was away the last couple days so i built the gift she requested, hence my absence here. still needs to be sanded, stained, and sealed. i am not the most skilled carpenter, more of a general handyman, but i think it came out ok.

I guess it depends on the state you live in but that's not how it works in my state. You are not required to take a job making less money than you were making when you were laid off. You don't have to take ANY job. You have to be physically capable of performing and be qualified for the job. How stupid would it be to take a job making less money than what you were being paid to sit at home? I know I wouldn't do it. Call me a deadbeat if you want to. I call it being smart.

 

[UncleBuck]

I guess it depends on the state you live in but that's not how it works in my state. You are not required to take a job making less money than you were making when you were laid off. You don't have to take ANY job. You have to be physically capable of performing and be qualified for the job. How stupid would it be to take a job making less money than what you were being paid to sit at home? I know I wouldn't do it. Call me a deadbeat if you want to. I call it being smart.

deadbeat.

just kidding

here you have to take any job, full time or part time, temp, seasonal, whatever. if you turn down a job and they find out, kiss UI goodbye. it does not mater the pay level. you are, however, supposed to look for work in your field(s) and at about your pay rate.

and i would not go for the sitting at home just because it paid more. keeping yourself marketable includes not leaving huge gaps between employment. i never had that problem. i didn't even get a call back for a job that was near min wage picking organic veggies and other farmwork.

anybody want to pay me to build them a bed? how about a grow space?

 

[doc111]

deadbeat.

just kidding

here you have to take any job, full time or part time, temp, seasonal, whatever. if you turn down a job and they find out, kiss UI goodbye. it does not mater the pay level. you are, however, supposed to look for work in your field(s) and at about your pay rate.

and i would not go for the sitting at home just because it paid more. keeping yourself marketable includes not leaving huge gaps between employment. i never had that problem. i didn't even get a call back for a job that was near min wage picking organic veggies and other farmwork.

anybody want to pay me to build them a bed? how about a grow space?

Ahhhhh! You bring up a very valid point! Marketability can be a double edged sword. If you are a chemical engineer and you take a job as a pizza delivery guy or wal-mart greeter, that can hurt the resume just as bad as a gap. I know many people in your situation. I'm sorry you're going through this but it sounds like you are doing ok. Try starting up a business in this mess! I'm afraid that human resources managers are going to have to re-think their hiring criteria in light of the economic crisis. Some of the old red flags just don't hold up anymore. I find it amazing that a lot of places aren't even looking at unemployed peoples' resumes! Then again, if you have 5 people for every 1 job, I guess you can be picky.

 

[UncleBuck]

I find it amazing that a lot of places aren't even looking at unemployed peoples' resumes! Then again, if you have 5 people for every 1 job, I guess you can be picky.

yep, that surprised the shit out of me when i heard about it. the more i think about it, the more it makes sense, especially from the perspective of a soulless, evil hr department.

and yes, i plan to start an actual business this spring....you know...for cover. the farce of legitimacy.

and your last sentence brings up a valid point...hard to call the long term people who no longer work through no fault of their own deadbeats when such competition exists out there for what jobs are available. that number does not even speak to how many people are qualified for that one job. for example, my parents have a friend who has a pet care business. they put out an ad for someone to pick up dog shit. they got back 270+ applications within a day. to pick up dog shit.

yep, getting a job nowadays sure is easy. o_0

 

[NoDrama]

j
nodrama, thanks for the job offer. i'll stick with what i'm doing now, however. client base is building and things look better every day.

NP dude, the last person I know that took that same job moved up the ranks and 4 years later he is making about $460,000 a year. But I understand how it would be an inconvenience to have to work in crappy conditions and having to move and all.

 

[UncleBuck]

NP dude, the last person I know that took that same job moved up the ranks and 4 years later he is making about $460,000 a year. But I understand how it would be an inconvenience to have to work in crappy conditions and having to move and all.

no amount of money is worth uprooting my existence from the ones i love.

i am the last one that would flee working conditions as you describe, i would probably take it as a challenge more than anything and endure it so i could tell the conditions "fuck you, i won".

but if i can scrape by and be with my loved ones, no need.

 

[doc111]

no amount of money is worth uprooting my existence from the ones i love.

i am the last one that would flee working conditions as you describe, i would probably take it as a challenge more than anything and endure it so i could tell the conditions "fuck you, i won".

but if i can scrape by and be with my loved ones, no need.

Buck, I feel the same way about uprooting. There are a lot of places I would rather live but I stay where I'm at to be close to my family.

BTW, I like the new sig. Happy Hanukkah my friend.

 

[Johnnyorganic]

no amount of money is worth uprooting my existence from the ones i love.

i am the last one that would flee working conditions as you describe, i would probably take it as a challenge more than anything and endure it so i could tell the conditions "fuck you, i won".

but if i can scrape by and be with my loved ones, no need.

Okay. I will ignore the most obvious point - that this example proves I am right.

That UI is a trap and encourages people to stay unemployed.

Oops. I suppose I ididn't.

This is not a chicken and egg argument.

We know what drives job creation - small business/entrepreneurs.

The question is: Why they have not been creating employment?

Why are the producers sitting on their retained earnings?

It has to do with risk. Risk brings the possibility of success or failure.

The only problem is is Progressives hate success.

Which leaves us with the risk of failure unchanged, but a hostility towards success.

The answer is right there. All one has to do is recognize it.

 

[Rob Roy]

Anarchy makes absolutely no sense to me. What you would have is 350+ million people running around with guns trying to take everyone elses stuff. That is what comes to my mind. If you like anarchy then I suppose you would have to like complete chaos.

Anarchy can also be defined as simply the absence of a central authority. Meaning individuals are not ruled by others, they are free to
have self rule. Most of the Anarchists that I know subscribe to the Non aggression principle, which is another way of saying do not initiate force against another. IE : Peaceful, voluntary and consensual interactions are part of and the main stay of their credo.