Unemployed need not apply

appeal to ignorance of the legal concept of employment at will regarding unemployment compensation.

unemployment compensation simply means less and lower paid new employees so there is no net advantage possible and no govt interest.

Do you have the IQ to understand?
 
Face it, when companies need employees, they hire. And who do they hire? People that are looking for a job!!!

If you want one of those jobs, get qualified, instead of looking at employment as an extension of welfare.
You didn't address my point. This is another thing conservatives and republicans will blame Obama for but you won't even address the fact corporations won't hire the unemployed. Just spin.
 
Republicans like to blame all the unemployed on Obama but they don't ask the corporations they serve to stop the practice of not hiring people who are out of work.

Corporations are being really picky. I think they like unemployment high. It keeps wages down. I remember an article years ago explaining that's what Greenspan said it was his responsibility to keep wages low they need unemployment to be high but not too high.
Companies act in a completely predictable fashion. You want to blame them for something that they are designed and meant to do.

That is idiotic.

Crate an atmosphere where unemployment is high and companies will be picky as well as drive wages down. Crate the opposite and they will not. Companies are not colluding to crate the circumstances they are in - those circumstances are created by a combination of technology, government/regulation and the economy at large.
And picky employers. We can't find a service techs. Kids out of college don't have experience. But it isn't rocket science.

PS. We just hired a guy and he is a vet.
 
And picky employers. We can't find a service techs. Kids out of college don't have experience. But it isn't rocket science.
.

corporations always have the option to train their own employees. IBM became the biggest and most profitable company in the world before schools had ever heard of computer science.
 
And picky employers. We can't find a service techs. Kids out of college don't have experience. But it isn't rocket science.
.

corporations always have the option to train their own employees. IBM became the biggest and most profitable company in the world before schools had ever heard of computer science.
Let's just be honest. We need to do again what Obama did in 2008. He gave companies a tax break if they hired anyone who'd been out of work for over so many months. I remember the GOP eliminated that tax break when they ended unemployment extensions.
 
appeal to ignorance of the legal concept of employment at will regarding unemployment compensation.

unemployment compensation simply means less and lower paid new employees so there is no net advantage possible and no govt interest.

Do you have the IQ to understand?
yes, dear; i understand the concept of full employment of resources; in this case, capital resources in our private sector markets.
 
capitalism failed in 1929.

100% stupid and liberal of course since there was little capitalism in 1929. You have learned that 129 times but lack the character to absorb it
your lack of a market based argument is telling, alleged capitalist.

Capitalism failed in 1929 and is still being carried by socialism's "hard work" ethic to this day.
 
Republicans like to blame all the unemployed on Obama but they don't ask the corporations they serve to stop the practice of not hiring people who are out of work.

Corporations are being really picky. I think they like unemployment high. It keeps wages down. I remember an article years ago explaining that's what Greenspan said it was his responsibility to keep wages low they need unemployment to be high but not too high.
Wages and employment are being kept down because employers are being strangled by the cost of Obamacare. Ever think of that?
false employment is being kept down by employers who falsely assume the aca will hurt their bottom line.
That's because it DOES hurt the bottom line
If my employees start to average more than 28hrs, besides the extra hourly cost, we're required to provide them with coverage.
How do these added expenses not effect the bottom line?

Remember, now, you can never complain about rising costs of goods and services.
That's the only way to recoup these losses
 
Republicans like to blame all the unemployed on Obama but they don't ask the corporations they serve to stop the practice of not hiring people who are out of work.

Corporations are being really picky. I think they like unemployment high. It keeps wages down. I remember an article years ago explaining that's what Greenspan said it was his responsibility to keep wages low they need unemployment to be high but not too high.
Wages and employment are being kept down because employers are being strangled by the cost of Obamacare. Ever think of that?
false employment is being kept down by employers who falsely assume the aca will hurt their bottom line.
That's because it DOES hurt the bottom line
If my employees start to average more than 28hrs, besides the extra hourly cost, we're required to provide them with coverage.
How do these added expenses not effect the bottom line?

Remember, now, you can never complain about rising costs of goods and services.
That's the only way to recoup these losses
Raise the cost. If you raise it too much we won't buy it.

And how about next year instead of giving the CEO $1 million bonus you give half to the workers. That's what union companies do.
 
Republicans like to blame all the unemployed on Obama but they don't ask the corporations they serve to stop the practice of not hiring people who are out of work.

Corporations are being really picky. I think they like unemployment high. It keeps wages down. I remember an article years ago explaining that's what Greenspan said it was his responsibility to keep wages low they need unemployment to be high but not too high.
Wages and employment are being kept down because employers are being strangled by the cost of Obamacare. Ever think of that?
false employment is being kept down by employers who falsely assume the aca will hurt their bottom line.
That's because it DOES hurt the bottom line
If my employees start to average more than 28hrs, besides the extra hourly cost, we're required to provide them with coverage.
How do these added expenses not effect the bottom line?

Remember, now, you can never complain about rising costs of goods and services.
That's the only way to recoup these losses
Raise the cost. If you raise it too much we won't buy it.

And how about next year instead of giving the CEO $1 million bonus you give half to the workers. That's what union companies do.

In my industry bonuses are profit-driven, so that's not a concern.

And, yes, you will buy it.
Not only will you buy it but you will plan your week and your holidays around it so you won't have to be bothered with cooking for your family.


Is it too late to ask for any evidence of the claims made in the OP?
 
Face it, when companies need employees, they hire. And who do they hire? People that are looking for a job!!!

If you want one of those jobs, get qualified, instead of looking at employment as an extension of welfare.
You didn't address my point. This is another thing conservatives and republicans will blame Obama for but you won't even address the fact corporations won't hire the unemployed. Just spin.
If it's such a fact you should have no problem proving your claim
 
And how about next year instead of giving the CEO $1 million bonus you give half to the workers. That's what union companies do.

and thats why most union jobs went to China!

See why we have to be 100% positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance and should be illegal in America?
 
And how about next year instead of giving the CEO $1 million bonus you give half to the workers. That's what union companies do.

and thats why most union jobs went to China!

See why we have to be 100% positive that liberalism is based in pure ignorance and should be illegal in America?
Turns out you are dead wrong. I just heard this on the radio. Ford isn't moving plants to Mexico because of unions. If Ford wants to ship a car to Europe from America they get a 10% tariff. Mexico has the most free trade agreements of any country. Something like 45 countries. If Mexico ships a car to Europe there are ZERO tariffs.

Now I know why union jobs are going to Mexico instead of Arkansas or Mississippi.
 

Forum List

Back
Top