Quote: Only in America do some worry about what "working class" folks make and ignore what the CEO or upper management or lower management make or if their contribution is worth the amount being paid...
How do you judge their "worth" mac? How much is a senior manager "worth"? How much is the girl that answers the phone "worth"? How do you determine that? Are you talking about "worth" to the bottom line of the company or "worth" to society?
Is any athlete in the world "worth" $20 million a year?
Quote: ...but the guy who punches a time clock and busts his butt for 40 hours or more a week...you worry about him...you worry about how much he makes?
Do you know who I worry about? I worry about how much I make. I worry about how much the people who work for me make. I worry about how much my wife makes.. I could care less how much other people make whether they are CEOs or clock punchers... I want to make as much as I can without sacrificing the other things in life that are important to me.. and I want to pay my people enough that they feel satisfied and properly rewarded but since I have to be able to bill for their time I also have to pay them at a level where I can them at a rate that our company can still make money off their time...
So I care how much you make mac? No, I really don't.
...but the guy who punches a time clock and busts his butt for 40 hours or more a week...you worry about him...you worry about how much he makes?
The only way I'd worry about how much that guy makes is if he worked for me. And if he did, I'd want to get his services as cheap as I could get them. If I could spend $8 per hour for a guy to do a job but instead I am paying him $10 an hour, you bet your ass I'm either looking into using this guy in a more important role or he's being let go.
And why is that bad? Am I not allowed to strive for money? Is the American dream fairness for all of my employees?
I'm not in the business to be nice to my employees, I'm in the business to make money. Not sure how you can demonize someone for wanting to make profit out of their services/products.
Unemployment claims surge, as jobs outlook sours Unemployment claims moved above this year's average, mirroring a gloomier job outlook from Ben Bernanke.
A scene at the JobTrain employment office in Menlo Park, Calif., July 20. Unemployment claims surged to 464,000, the Labor Department reported Thursday, adding to the gloomy jobs outlook. (Paul Sakuma/AP) By Laurent Belsie
posted July 22, 2010 at 10:18 am EDT
America's job machine is stuck in neutral. And that's a worrying sign.
The number of Americans signing up for first-time unemployment benefits – a gauge of layoffs – surged to 464,000 last week, the Labor Department reported Thursday. That was higher than a consensus of economists expected and slightly above the average for the year.
With first-time claims staying stubbornly high, it's unlikely that unemployment will come down quickly. If unemployed Americans don't return to work, they can't spend, which slows the recovery.
There's an outside chance that it stops recovery altogether.
"Initial unemployment claims hovering near the 450K mark have historically been consistent with weak labor market conditions characterized by 100K or greater declines in nonfarm payrolls," says Joshua Shapiro, an economist with New York economic consulting firm MFR, in a written analysis.
Yet, the government's official employment numbers have been showing slowly rising private-sector employment. "So, either the long-standing relationship between jobless claims and payroll employment has broken down, or the payroll figures are being overstated," Mr. Shapiro writes. "Our bet is on overstatement."
Even if the numbers aren't being overstated, the outlook for job growth is weak. At the end of 2012, the United States will still be struggling with an unemployment rate between 7 and 7.5 percent, Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke forecast in Senate testimony Wednesday. And that may be optimistic.
"Most participants [in the Fed's policymaking committee] viewed uncertainty about the outlook for growth and unemployment as greater than normal, and the majority saw the risks to growth as weighted to the downside," Mr. Bernanke said.
_____
At some point we will be forced to stop borrowing the money to pay the unemployed... It's only going to hurt worse them.. We are delaying the inevitable.
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
At the rate we're going, I would bet that unemployment will be between 8.5% and 8.75% at the end of 2012.
The only way I see it dropping is if people give up and stop looking for work ... thus falling out of the counts.
I could also see it going higher if the health care law goes into effect as currently constructed. If there are no changes, we could see over 10% by the end of next year.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
Everyone who had been on unemployment, but then had the benefits terminated because they expired a week or whatever ago, would be new claims to get back on it.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
I agree, let's let them starve and while we are at it, if anyone of the unemployed gets so disparate that they steal from us working folks, let's just string them up...
I know you don't mean that Tux,, I'm exaggerating to prove a point.
Sometimes I think that people that oppose unemployment extensions or benefits in general have the feeling that everyone that is unemployed is unemployed by choice.. That they don't attempt to find work and that they are just freeloading.
I'm in the employment field, have been for a hell of a long time. I can assure you that there is a certain segment of the population out there that will always game the system for all it's worth...
I know this because I've offered them jobs and they've rejected saying they'd rather just stay on unemployment. I can't even begin to tell you how many times I"ve heard,, "Hell, I'll make more sitting on my arse than taking the job you offer"
However I believe that the vast majority of the unemployed today aren't unemployed by choice.
I don't want to see them sleeping in a washing machine box under the detroit superior bridge in downtown cleveland?
Once they get there they are most likely lost for good...
I don't really know what the answer is, but leaving them out there doesn't sound like the smart thing to me...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: Everyone who had been on unemployment, but then had the benefits terminated because they expired a week or whatever ago, would be new claims to get back on it.
Nevermind.... that surge is still coming; I just saw the part where this said "last week". The new surge from them ramming the bill through is still coming.
Browns is the Browns
... there goes Joe Thomas, the best there ever was in this game.
Quote: I agree, let's let them starve and while we are at it, if anyone of the unemployed gets so disparate that they steal from us working folks, let's just string them up...
I know you don't mean that Tux,, I'm exaggerating to prove a point.
Sometimes I think that people that oppose unemployment extensions or benefits in general have the feeling that everyone that is unemployed is unemployed by choice.. That they don't attempt to find work and that they are just freeloading.
I'm in the employment field, have been for a hell of a long time. I can assure you that there is a certain segment of the population out there that will always game the system for all it's worth...
I know this because I've offered them jobs and they've rejected saying they'd rather just stay on unemployment. I can't even begin to tell you how many times I"ve heard,, "Hell, I'll make more sitting on my arse than taking the job you offer"
However I believe that the vast majority of the unemployed today aren't unemployed by choice.
I don't want to see them sleeping in a washing machine box under the detroit superior bridge in downtown cleveland?
Once they get there they are most likely lost for good...
I don't really know what the answer is, but leaving them out there doesn't sound like the smart thing to me...
We need to stop borrowing the money to pay for it.. and at some point we need to tell them you already got X amount of weeks and we are sorry, but you have to find something out there.. Or at least subisidize their wages if they choose a lower paying job..
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
At some point we will be forced to stop borrowing the money to pay the unemployed... It's only going to hurt worse them.. We are delaying the inevitable.
We've been delaying the inevitable for years - a long time. And all it's doing is postponing the inevitable, and making the inevitable worse. Much worse.
Too many people dependent on gov't. for their very existence, too much borrowing, and all of congress hell bent on "porking" their way to re-election.
I've said it for a long time - the worst is yet to come. And it won't be long till it hits, but it will hit for a long time also. Don't believe me? Grab a seat and watch, cause this country is crashing.
Yes he did. You made a passionate plea regarding the humanitarian nature of extending unemployment so people aren't living in boxes under bridges.... which is fine. His point (if I understand him correctly) is.. why were the democrats so adament about not finding any way to pay for it? Contrary to what mac has posted 80 brazillion times, the republicans WERE NOT OPPOSED TO EXTENDING THE BENEFITS.. they just wanted to cut something or find some way to pay for it.. the dems weren't interested. Have you read a single article where a democrat made any attempt at all to figure out a way (other than just printing more money) to pay for it? No, because they didn't make an effort.... they just wanted to shove it down republicans throats and paint the republicans as evil.. that's how they roll in their politics...
You want the truth, both parties are guilty of it but the republicans are hypocrits as it pertains to deficits right now.. for the longest time they didn't give a flying rats ass about the budget or deficits or anything else.. now all of the sudden they do because Obama is the president..... it's shameful.. but at least its shameful in the right direction.. whatever it takes to get SOMEBODY worried about the deficit is a good thing...
His other statement holds some truth too.. can't we subsidize a persons wages if they are forced to take a job that is beneath their skills? Let me tell you, we fired a girl a couple weeks ago. While she worked here full time and made a decent living, she was working part time as a retail night manager.. as soon as we fired her they offered her a full time management position making over $40K with benes and she turned it down to stay on unemployment. She's a single mom with a daughter in college and she turned down a $40K/year job to stay on unemployment. This woman, or so I thought, was always pretty independent and didn't like having things handed to her.. I try to look for the best in people but if this woman, who I knew well, is capable of making that choice, how many others are making that choice? I don't know.
Quote: Yes he did. You made a passionate plea regarding the humanitarian nature of extending unemployment so people aren't living in boxes under bridges.... which is fine.
I did that, but I also made it clear that I didn't and don't believe that the majority of those that are unemployed are in that situation by choice.. He didn't get that part.., or if he did, he glossed right over it.
Quote: You want the truth, both parties are guilty of it but the republicans are hypocrits as it pertains to deficits right now
Yup,, but some don't understand that fact., it's a shame but it's a fact.
Quote: for the longest time they didn't give a flying rats ass about the budget or deficits or anything else.. now all of the sudden they do because Obama is the president.....
Absolutely,, What's the difference between Obama and any other liberal president we've had? (If you say race, I'm coming to your house and kicking you in the butt )
I'll tell you what the difference is, this country wasn't in this financial shape when Kennedy or Carter or Clinton took over.
we weren't fighting one war, let alone two when Kennedy, Carter and Clinton took over.
we didn't have banks and other financial/insurance institutions collapsing or getting close to it.
we didn't have the Big Three American Auto Makers in peril (well, Chrysler at one point, even then they weren't in this bad of shape)
And because of all that, we didn't have unemployment at these levels either. Close, but not with all the other stuff going on at once,.
Quote: it's shameful.. but at least its shameful in the right direction.. whatever it takes to get SOMEBODY worried about the deficit is a good thing...
it is shameful. As for it being the right direction,, Yeah, it could very well be, but if you are going to play politics with peoples lives, then at least make sure they don't starve while the point is being made.. That would be irresponsible.
Quote: His other statement holds some truth too.. can't we subsidize a persons wages if they are forced to take a job that is beneath their skills
Yeah, that would be terrific, except you would need another layer of governement employees to adminster that program.. Whew, that would be a task.., with that extra layer of bodies needed, I'm not sure the payoff would be any better. Just not sure. maybe, maybe not,, when the crisis is over, what do you do with all those folks we hired to adminster that program.. Just some questions but if they can be answered, I'm good with it.
Quote: Let me tell you, we fired a girl a couple weeks ago.
If she was FIRED, why the hell are you allowing her to collect unemployment? you do know you can fight that and win if you fired her for cause don't you?
If you leave one job of your own choice to take another job, then you get fired from the other job for cause, you won't be allowed to collect unemployment. I know this because I just fought a girl that tried to collect unemployment from me after having quit my job to take anther one from which she was fired for cause.
I won, she lost.. she's collecting nothing...
But, I suspect you mean she was layed off.. am I right?
Look, I bet you dollars to donuts, for every example you give like that, someone else can give you an opposite example
Back to another point you made about politicians,, when they play these little games to prove a point, (no matter if they are right or wrong) they are messing with REAL people. When its determined they messed with these people to the point allowing lives to be ruined, then who do we see about that?
and to do it to score some cheap political points.. don't, please don't tell me you condon that from anyone,, no matter what party,,,,,,
Can I get an AMEN for starting a prison just to house the politicians that are convicted of lying, cheating, stealing, take bribes, adding needless pork and for miss using thier power to prove points while allowing the very people they are elected to serve go down the drain. Can I get and AMEN from the masses?
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
You would need to be an idiot to believe most of them are there by choice. It is just that at some point you do need to say enough is enough. This is the eighth extension and they are borrowing to pay for it. There is no quick end in sight and we just cannot continue on this path. At some point we do need to stop and say sorry but you are going to need to find your own way. It may ge harsh and cold, but we need to let them go rather just continue to depend on the government. Are we as Americans that weak that we cannot handle it eventually?
"Don't be burdened by regrets or make your failures an obsession or become embittered or possessed by ruined hopes"
Quote: You would need to be an idiot to believe most of them are there by choice. It is just that at some point you do need to say enough is enough. This is the eighth extension and they are borrowing to pay for it. There is no quick end in sight and we just cannot continue on this path. At some point we do need to stop and say sorry but you are going to need to find your own way. It may ge harsh and cold, but we need to let them go rather just continue to depend on the government. Are we as Americans that weak that we cannot handle it eventually?
It does sound terrible.
The alternative is to suck more and more and more people into the unemployment lines.
Hard choices are coming. Soon. Not just with unemployment.
Quote: You would need to be an idiot to believe most of them are there by choice. It is just that at some point you do need to say enough is enough.
Yet, in some cases, I think that's what some think. Not all and I don't believe you feel that way,, you and Arch and DC,, you guys aren't idiots, I know you know that.. Not everyone is like that however.
As for enough being enough,, tell me Tux, what do you say to a guy that worked his entire life for one company, got laid off a year and a half ago, on many extensions for unemployment and is out there everyday looking for work but still can't find it. you don't look at that guy and say,, enough is enough. You just don't say that to that man. that would be beyond cruel. hell, we treat prisoners of war better than that. (at least we are supposed to)
the person that is gaming the system,, oh HELL YA. Nail them to the wall for all I care.
Quote: This is the eighth extension and they are borrowing to pay for it. There is no quick end in sight and we just cannot continue on this path.
that sounds a lot like what people were saying when we bailed out GM, Chrysler and AIG among others.
People on here wanted the US to just let them fail and let those that are thrown out of work to fend for themselves.
you think things are bad now,, Ha,, if we'd have let that happen it would be a ton worse.
I'm saying, I don't think we have a choice at this point.
we can't let our fellow americans starve, it's wrong, it will NEVER, under any circumstances be right.. you just don't let your neighbor down.
The alternative is, if you end unemployment, we'll have even more people living in shelters, under bridges in cardboard boxes, on welfare and any other program,, that is of course, unless you eliminate all of those as well.. then what..
You think the burden of paying unemployment is bad, think about the burden for those of us that are still working. talk about what the tax rates need to be then.
no no, the answer, as distastful as you may feel it is, is to support these people until this economy turns the corner.. More people working, more payroll taxes collected, less unemployment and welfare and other subsidies need paid out.
it's not the perfect answer.. unless we learn from it and never go there again.. yeah,, fat chance.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
daman - here's a little insight from my perspective:
The economy is not going to "turn the corner". Not in a year, not in 5 years. The days of one generation living better than their parents generation is gone - long gone. Most people just haven't admitted it yet.
High paying union jobs are gone - or at least going quickly. See, the problem with unions is, as much as they WERE needed, they aren't now. They only serve to raise the price of the product they produce. And with our real jobs headed/gone to mexico and china.........for cheaper goods - hey, we're screwed.
Gov't. does not live in the here and now - they gripe and complain that there isn't enough money for them to expand like they planned.
Hello? What about the working guy? Gov't. needs to be cut - 10% or more per year for about a decade. Taxes need to be cut - ALL taxes - not just income tax. We've been through it before, all the taxes - but bottom line is a person, a working person, is lucky if they get to keep half of their income after all taxes are taken into account.
Hate to be a pessimist, but really I'm being a realist. Unless huge changes take place in gov't., we, the U.S., will be a beggar nation. Soon. Like within 10 years, probably less.
Hell, at this point all we need is for china to say "show me the money", and the middle east to say "we don't want dollars for oil, we want something real", and we are done.
I don't believe that. I've been through too many of these believe it's nearly as gloomy as you say.. So with that, the rest of your argument won't work for me.
Sorry, I mean no disrespect for your belieifs, I just don't share them.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: I don't believe that. I've been through too many of these believe it's nearly as gloomy as you say.. So with that, the rest of your argument won't work for me.
Sorry, I mean no disrespect for your belieifs, I just don't share them.
Fair enough. You were of age during the depression?
Get back to me in a year or so. Or, I'll get back to you. One of us will be right. My money is on me, but I hope I'm wrong.
Where I work, we've been trying to hire 4 people for about two months now. There are literally hundreds of out of work steel workers, yet none will take the job. The pay is decent, but not the $20+ per hour they made in the union.
Many of these guys want to work under the table so they can keep their unemployment benefits. Most won't take the job, or want to wait until their benefits run out.
I keep hearing that people aren't turning down work, but in reality, it is happening more than most think. I understand why too. If you are collecting $480 a week to not work, would you take a job paying $400?
I don't like the thought of people struggling, but I know folks, including myself, that have been out of work and at the end of the 26 weeks, that was it. The thing is we didn't have the high paying union job that many of these guys had. We also didn't receive sub pay from the union along with our unemployment. Nobody extended us, even though it was during a bad economic time in the area and country. We survived by cutting back and living within our means.
These extensions are purely political moves ahead of an election. Believing otherwise is fooling yourself.
Sure people want to work, but in this day and age, most would take the freebie without blinking an eye. That's reality.
Quote: Hell, at this point all we need is for china to say "show me the money", and the middle east to say "we don't want dollars for oil, we want something real", and we are done.
That will never happen, it would cause chaos throughout the world, possibly even a strategic default by the US government. China doesnt want that Chaos, they have a vested interest in keepin us going. Think about what that would mean, if the dollar crashes, who is going to buy Chineese goods ?, soon everyone would want our goods, because a rock bottom dollar would mean we have no purchasing power, but the abilitly to sell very cheaply. Beside they hold T notes and bonds that cant just be called in willy nilly like that.
Quote: Hell, at this point all we need is for china to say "show me the money", and the middle east to say "we don't want dollars for oil, we want something real", and we are done.
That will never happen, it would cause chaos throughout the world, possibly even a strategic default by the US government. China doesnt want that Chaos, they have a vested interest in keepin us going. Think about what that would mean, if the dollar crashes, who is going to buy Chineese goods ?, soon everyone would want our goods, because a rock bottom dollar would mean we have no purchasing power, but the abilitly to sell very cheaply. Beside they hold T notes and bonds that cant just be called in willy nilly like that.
Fair enough.
Now, stop and think what china is getting in return when our gov't. continues to just print money. They are getting paper that is useless. Well, as of now, they think it has value, but........
Then what happens? When the world economy looks at the dollar as nothing but a piece of paper, similar to dog crap, (or cow crap, if you aren't a vegan)
Things will change soon. Probably not for the good. Hell, just look at what we are doing as a country now - printing money with no backing whatsoever in order to pay interest, and borrowing more money than we can ever think of repaying.
Sorry man, we're adding programs that have been proven, by most of europe, to be bottomless pits. Many european countries are dealing with crisis right now due to spending, Yet what do we do? Spend spend spend. We're cutting off our own energy supply and trying to mandate alternative energy. (here's a clue - if alternative energy was reliable, and and affordable, the market would take care of it).
We are attacking the small portion of our society that can create TRUE jobs - not government jobs - but jobs that pay for themselves, all in the name of "it's the right thing to do".
Screw that - the "right thing to do" is NOT to suck more people into the abyss.
I wish I was as optimistic as you. I am not. I am a realist.
Quote: You want the truth, both parties are guilty of it but the republicans are hypocrits as it pertains to deficits right now
You
Quote: Yup,, but some don't understand that fact., it's a shame but it's a fact.
Name who doesn't understand this...Arch? Tux? Me? Excel? JFan?
The fact is all of the above name know Bush is to be blamed for his deficits, as well as the Republicans who controlled Congress. Many of us have bitched for years now that they turned their backs on us who are for restraint in spending.
What we refuse to do is allow hacks like Mac get away with his BS that everything that has gone wrong is Bush's fault. Just because Bush and the Republican Congress overspent doesn't mean we do not have the right to blame Obama for the incredible increases in spending he has asked for and received, almost completely along party lines.
Quote: What's the difference between Obama and any other liberal president we've had? (If you say race, I'm coming to your house and kicking you in the butt )
Bring it on homeboy..
Quote: I'll tell you what the difference is, this country wasn't in this financial shape when Kennedy or Carter or Clinton took over.
we weren't fighting one war, let alone two when Kennedy, Carter and Clinton took over.
Kennedy and Clinton were really moderate and I don't remember exactly what the economy was like when Carter took over, but it was in the toilet before he left... of the group, it's not even close, Obama is most like Carter... liberal economically, weak internationally...
Quote: we didn't have banks and other financial/insurance institutions collapsing or getting close to it.
We had gasoline rationing under Carter... and we had 16% inflation, 17% interest rates, and a 70% top marginal tax rate... yep, Obama = Carter... Iran was taking American hostages and we weren't doing anything about it....
Quote: Obama is most like Carter... liberal economically, weak internationally...
How is he weak internationally outside of the notion being attached by right-wing commentators?
Personally, I don't care for his international policy at all ... but in practice it's barely different from Bush's, who would've never bee described as 'weak internationally'.
He's perpetuating the same wars as Bush ... is friendly with the same dictators ... frosty with the same dictators ... he's continued similar sanctions ...
... and yet he is branded as having some vastly different international policy.
The only difference is the speeches they give. Bush spoke of a hard-line 'we don't tolerate terrorists' policy (but dealt with terrorists frequently) ... Obama has taken a 'can't we all get along?' view in his speeches (but doesn't get along with everybody).
If you removed the rhetoric used in speeches, and looked just at international policies regarding money, government sanctions, military action, etc. ... outside of a few instances, it would be very difficult to tell them apart.
Quote: I don't believe that. I've been through too many of these believe it's nearly as gloomy as you say.. So with that, the rest of your argument won't work for me.
Sorry, I mean no disrespect for your belieifs, I just don't share them.
Fair enough. You were of age during the depression?
Get back to me in a year or so. Or, I'll get back to you. One of us will be right. My money is on me, but I hope I'm wrong.
Geez Arch,, I'm 58 not 88
I hope you are wrong also,,
The thing is,, my business is usually the first to feel a downturn, we are also the first to feel an upturn. Statistically, the Temp services business is picking up on a national level. that's encouraging. My business is ticking up ever so slowly at this time.
We'll see how it goes..
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
In a temp circumstance, who will be required to pay for the employee's healthcare when the law takes effect? Will it be you, as the agency/employer ...... or will it be the person who actually has the tem working for them?
Personally, if I was uncertain about the economy, and uncertain about the healthcare expense, and it was reasonably priced, I'd hire temps to "fill" all of my open spots until I know exactly what is going to happen.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
By the way ...... In the short term ..... that might not be a bad way to market your business to emloyers.
You cna just send me a royalty check for each deal closed .......
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
In a temp circumstance, who will be required to pay for the employee's healthcare when the law takes effect? Will it be you, as the agency/employer ...... or will it be the person who actually has the tem working for them?
Personally, if I was uncertain about the economy, and uncertain about the healthcare expense, and it was reasonably priced, I'd hire temps to "fill" all of my open spots until I know exactly what is going to happen.
As a temp service, I'm the responsible party. I would be the one that has to provide the insurance. We've been researching that to see what our cost structure will be when this takes effect., Can't get information on how it's going to affect us because the target keeps moving.
But instead of worrying about it, we've decided to just bite the bullet and provide health insurance. Obviously, we aren't carrying the complete burden but we'll pay 25% of the cost of insurance. (generally required by insurance carriers) 75% will be deducted from the employees pay on a weekly basis. If they want it, they can have it, if not, they can decline. From what little I know, I'm clear as long as I offer it. I can't force them to take it.
Employers (my customers) will feel it a little also. If I want to continue earning the same % I do now, I'll have to increase hourly rates to an extent. But it's still going to be less than if they hired on thier own anyway.
Each company is different so please understand, this is just an average example;
If you the employer want to hire a person, you pay:
wage Vacation and Holiday FICA SUI FUI Desk Cost Health Benefits
Add all that up and it runs from about 1.38 to 1.55 of the wage dollar.
Meaning, $10 hour wage x 1.38 to 1.55 depending on the number of days of vacation and holiday you pay, and the cost of health insurance and the desk cost (space a person works in as it relates to office lease cost)
With me they pay an hourly rate + applicable sales tax,, and that's that. I take care of the rest. (for some reason, they don't look at desk cost the same, don't ask me why but if you must, you can add that in)
I don't care how you slice it, I'm the cheapest way to go on the planet.. that's if you are a responsible employer that offers benefits..,, if you don't, then no, I'm not.
This is one of the reasons why our business is the first to come back after a recession. Companies are gun shy,, after getting hit hard in a recession, they are cautious about hiring full time and making a long term committment to employees and the termination costs associated.
So, they bring in employees as temps until they are once again comfortable..
When business turns for us, it comes back like a lion and after a year or two, usually levels off as direct hireing increases.
Then, when the next recession/downturn hits, they will cut temp staff first, and then move into cutting direct employees. Meaning, we feel it first.
Does any of that make sense to you Ytown? If not, ask and I'll try and explain it better.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Where I work, we've been trying to hire 4 people for about two months now. There are literally hundreds of out of work steel workers, yet none will take the job. The pay is decent, but not the $20+ per hour they made in the union.
Many of these guys want to work under the table so they can keep their unemployment benefits. Most won't take the job, or want to wait until their benefits run out.
I keep hearing that people aren't turning down work, but in reality, it is happening more than most think. I understand why too. If you are collecting $480 a week to not work, would you take a job paying $400?
I don't like the thought of people struggling, but I know folks, including myself, that have been out of work and at the end of the 26 weeks, that was it. The thing is we didn't have the high paying union job that many of these guys had. We also didn't receive sub pay from the union along with our unemployment. Nobody extended us, even though it was during a bad economic time in the area and country. We survived by cutting back and living within our means.
These extensions are purely political moves ahead of an election. Believing otherwise is fooling yourself.
Sure people want to work, but in this day and age, most would take the freebie without blinking an eye. That's reality.
You do know that you can report these folks that don't accept the jobs don't you? I wouldn't do it, but some will. Not exactly sure what the results would be.
But you are talking about paying someone HALF of what they were making. And probably without benefits I bet.
I do understand that when it comes to putting food on the table, 480 buys more than 400 less taxes..
As I said earlier, there are those that Game the system,, those folks aren't who I'm concerned for.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: What's the difference between Obama and any other liberal president we've had? (If you say race, I'm coming to your house and kicking you in the butt )
Bring it on homeboy..
Quote: I'll tell you what the difference is, this country wasn't in this financial shape when Kennedy or Carter or Clinton took over.
we weren't fighting one war, let alone two when Kennedy, Carter and Clinton took over.
Kennedy and Clinton were really moderate and I don't remember exactly what the economy was like when Carter took over, but it was in the toilet before he left... of the group, it's not even close, Obama is most like Carter... liberal economically, weak internationally...
Quote: we didn't have banks and other financial/insurance institutions collapsing or getting close to it.
We had gasoline rationing under Carter... and we had 16% inflation, 17% interest rates, and a 70% top marginal tax rate... yep, Obama = Carter... Iran was taking American hostages and we weren't doing anything about it....
We also had Gasoline rationing under Nixon and Ford so please don't go there.
Iran did take hostages,, and yeah, Carter did try to get them out by force and the military failed in thier only (public attempt) So it's not like he did nothing. But after that failed attempt, things got dicey.
FYI, I voted for Reagan so I understand the failings of the carter admin.
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: By the way ...... In the short term ..... that might not be a bad way to market your business to emloyers.
You cna just send me a royalty check for each deal closed .......
LOL,, too late, been doing that for years.. it's not even close to new..
I actually have one customer, a rather large one in fact, that keeps thier direct payroll low and fills in with temps. Right now, it's a 1:1 ratio of direct hires to temps. thier direct employees haven't seen a lay off in 15 years no matter how the economy goes.. However, they've turned over the temp staff several times via layoffs and hiring..
GENERAL REPLY:
I've tried to answer every post questioning me,, If I missed someone, let me know.. I assure you, it was not on purpose.
Unlike some, I respond (sometimes to my own detriment)..., or try to anyway.
Quote: Name who doesn't understand this...Arch? Tux? Me? Excel? JFan?
I didn't say folks on here did I.. Go back and re read my comment that you quoted me on.
I meant those in the press, those that are complaining. I DID NOT MEAN YOU, Jfan, DC, or anyone else on here in particular..,
You need to calm down and read what I wrote again..,
I reread your comment. I even went back and reread your entire post just in case I missed something. I didn't. Your statement was vague. You didn't specify anyone. So tell me who in the media you are talking about?
BTW. I don't need to calm down because I'm already calm. I'm actually laughing at these threads when I read some of the posts.
Quote: Name who doesn't understand this...Arch? Tux? Me? Excel? JFan?
I didn't say folks on here did I.. Go back and re read my comment that you quoted me on.
I meant those in the press, those that are complaining. I DID NOT MEAN YOU, Jfan, DC, or anyone else on here in particular..,
You need to calm down and read what I wrote again..,
I reread your comment. I even went back and reread your entire post just in case I missed something. I didn't. Your statement was vague. You didn't specify anyone. So tell me who in the media you are talking about?
BTW. I don't need to calm down because I'm already calm. I'm actually laughing at these threads when I read some of the posts.
FOR THE RECORD,, you did misunderstand.. I didn't mention folks here because, well, frankly I don't need thier grief in my life (seems I get it anyway however )
I meant the media, I meant the talking heads.. If that's not good enough for you than I don't know what to say...
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe." Damanshot
Quote: High paying union jobs are gone - or at least going quickly. See, the problem with unions is, as much as they WERE needed, they aren't now. They only serve to raise the price of the product they produce. And with our real jobs headed/gone to mexico and china.........for cheaper goods - hey, we're screwed.
arch...so your finally admitting...yes the USA does need those millions of manufacturing jobs that were outsourced to slave labor countries...thank you!
I blame Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2 for the economy we have today...but especially Clinton and Bush 2...and if Obama does not do something to stop the outsourcing of manufacturing jobs, he will be added to this list.
Arch..but when the outsourcing began, did you applaud?
When this all began, you were probably just beginning college and had no clue about the ramification of what our Gov. was planning for America.
There were many within the working class that were concerned though as was one prominent, forward thinking politician...
arch...the Unions you hate and Ross Perot were 100% right about NAFTA and American trade agreements.
You and many on this board get a pass because you were just boys at that time and had no forward looking vision about what was going to happen in this country.
Today, everyone can see what has happened...
Arch, to your credit, now you seem to grasp the danger ahead if the United States middle and working class continue to lose their good paying jobs.
arch...if your customers lose their job to a slave labor market outside the USA, it's going to come back to hurt your business. If you lose just few customers, your probably going to be able to endure that loss.
But what happens, when Americans look around and see their neighbors losing their jobs due to slave labor wages in China, Mexico or India...they become more conservative with their money and that hurts your business.
Now, couple the worst recession in America's history, massive layoffs and the outsourcing issue facing working class Americans...
arch, your business and 95% of business in this country is affected with many going under.
Workers can't find jobs...
What we are finding out is, we sure could use those millions of manufacturing jobs lost during Bush 2 years...
...and if Obama does not have the guts to do something about the outsourcing of the middle classes jobs, it will continue.
The future is bleak for the middle class in America.
This generation will not do better than their fathers...
...the decline of America's middle class is happening and will continue, if nothing is done.
Those who care to respond...do not respond by laying blame...there is enough blame to go around...GOP and DEM...but Ross Perot was a man ahead of his time...and someone honest enough to speak the truth.
Mac - I'd say YOU are the one coming around, not me.
You have a few more corners to turn though, and the first one is the "what do we do about it" corner. See, your plan of action will only cause more problems. And, long term, much more pain, and make no mistake about it, or, as O would say "let me be clear" - the pain is coming and the longer we put it off, the worse it will be.
You and many on this board get a pass because you were just boys at that time and had no forward looking vision about what was going to happen in this country.
I was young (early 20's) when NAFTA was enacted, even then I didn't see it as a good thing.
Quote: What we are finding out is, we sure could use those millions of manufacturing jobs lost during Bush 2 years...
...and if Obama does not have the guts to do something about the outsourcing of the middle classes jobs, it will continue.
The future is bleak for the middle class in America.
This generation will not do better than their fathers...
...the decline of America's middle class is happening and will continue, if nothing is done.
Those who care to respond...do not respond by laying blame...there is enough blame to go around...GOP and DEM...but Ross Perot was a man ahead of his time...and someone honest enough to speak the truth.
If Obama and his administration can come up with a solution, I'm all for it, as would probably anyone on this board.
What you don't seem to want to except is that we all want a better America, we just have a different concept of what that "better America" is. But I'm pretty sure we all agree that losing those manufacturing jobs is a huge problem, and I'm not sure that there is one person on here that ever thought it was a good idea.
You confuse the belief that a company has a right to manage it's own business and make a profit, with the idea that we all approve of them shipping jobs elsewhere. But in reality what we want is businesses that get to run their own business, but have incentives to bring jobs back here to the US. And stop the foolish policies that almost force companies to ship jobs elsewhere just so they can maintain their company.
I find it hard to believe all the jobs lost were out of greed for profits. While profits is a factor, there is a cost involved with doing business, and a price point at which your product will sell on the market. There needs to be enough in between the 2 to maintain your business and build enough capital to grow, expand and evolve with the market.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
![[Linked Image from i.imgur.com]](http://i.imgur.com/FUKyw.png)
) 
)