Forum menu
whilst i agree with you busydog on the shirkers in society, i really don't know if it is actually a big problem. I look around and yes they do exist. But in the grand scheme of things i don't think there are actually that many.
In the same way there are people who actively avoid tax, at all levels of the job market, either by employing an accountant, being paid cash in hand, or some other method, some legal others not, but non of them are very moral IMO.
Call me cynical but you mention about the illegal aliens and no attempt being made to stop them coming over the border, but in the same way that immigration has been allowed into the UK, you may find it quietly ignored as it keeps the wages low.
as does mass unemployment.
When there is a shortage of labour then you can have a case on "shirkers" but when labour is in surplus someone has to be unemployed
There are stories of countries successfullly cracking down in immigration and then suddenly finding that there wasn't anyone to do the crappy jobs.
The element I am talking about could care less what the employment level .......
So you think that in the 50s and 60s when we had full employment it was because there were no lazy welfare-takers with no interest in even trying to work at all in the UK ? Human nature was quite different in those days ?
Then suddenly all that change and by the early 80s, ironically under a Tory government, millions suddenly became lazy and were no longer interested in even trying to work ? Human nature in fact changed.
Do you think that because there is 21.3% unemployment in Spain but only 4.3 in the Netherlands it means that the Spanish are four times more lazy and workshy than the Dutch ?
I guess that if you live in a country where you are told everyday how great your economic model is, and how any failings which might exist are purely down to the failings of individuals, then it's not surprising that you have come to the conclusions which you have. Or at least been told to come.
Yes in every sphere of human activity there will always be the ones who abuse the system and take the piss - in health, finance, policing, education, housing, transport, you name it ...... someone is abusing it. But unemployment has nothing to do with that. It is about the systematic failings of society.
whilst i agree with you busydog on the shirkers in society, i really don't know if it is actually a big problem. I look around and yes they do exist. But in the grand scheme of things i don't think there are actually that many.In the same way there are people who actively avoid tax, at all levels of the job market, either by employing an accountant, being paid cash in hand, or some other method, some legal others not, but non of them are very moral IMO.
Agree with that---I read somewhere that the US govt believes there is something like 400BB in uncollected taxes each year--mostly by people skating around the system--indeed not very moral.
Call me cynical but you mention about the illegal aliens and no attempt being made to stop them coming over the border, but in the same way that immigration has been allowed into the UK, you may find it quietly ignored as it keeps the wages low.
Here I think that the illegals have been ignored not just due to the fact that they keep the wages low---it didn't start that way. It became a reality because employers (mostly agricultural and service industries) couldn't get Americans to take the jobs, then they found out the illegals would not only take the jobs, but at a lesser salary and in that way the wage-cost did turn into a factor---of course now the employers don't want that to change.
What is frustrating a lot of people here (especially in the border states) is that the government (feds and state to varying degrees) want to give the illegals the benefits of citizenship without having to go through the process--which has the potential of adding the 12MM or so estimated to be here into the costs of healthcare and other social care programs----which is exacerbated by the fact that a lot of the illegals are returning the bulk of their earned wages to Mexico--and those being paid cash probably aren't exactly paying their share of taxes. One of our illustrious congressmen made a statement the other day that "the Republicans are trying to turn the illegal aliens into criminals"---maybe the meaning of the word illegal got changed.
I do believe that illegal and criminal aren't the same thing.
But a more intelligent solution is required than simply granting citizenship I feel. If they are coming to the US and working, then there's work for them. So make the effort to tax that work and you should be ahead.
When there is a shortage of labour then you can have a case on "shirkers" but when labour is in surplus someone has to be unemployed
it is true but tlets not pretend everyone on benefits would tke a job if offered or they are all trying to find work. Again trust me I work with them. I gave one guy some advice on how to improve his chances and how to find work but he declined as he thought he was doing ok with what he was currently doing..he last worked 21 years ago.
I often meet people who have never worked.i suspect we are talking about perhaps 5 % of the unemployed i deal with but i have a selective group of those most likely to find work. I am not sure what the true figure is in general and it is only a few geographical places. I assume this gives say 2- 10%??
Both sides here have a point imho but I would never take a big stick to "welfare shirkers" unless we have full employment as it serves no purposes.
When there is a shortage of labour then you can have a case on "shirkers" but when labour is in surplus someone has to be unemployed
True up to a point, however the group I am referring to were sitting on their butts collecting welfare when the job market was booming. Of course the argument can be made they didn't have the skillset needed,which is true for many---but a lot of them sure as hell weren't makikng an effort to do anything to change that.
I do believe that illegal and criminal aren't the same thing.
Have to disagree on that---if you are in violaton of the law in this country, then you are, in fact, a criminal (whether they ever get prosecuted or not, for a lot of reasons is another story)
however the group I am referring to were sitting on their butts collecting welfare when the job market was booming
How big is that group then?
but a lot of them sure as hell weren't makikng an effort to do anything to change that
Maybe they didn't know how to change it? Were they getting good help and support?
Have to disagree on that---if you are in violaton of the law in this country, then you are, in fact, a criminal
I thought there were felonies and misdemeanours, one of which attracted a criminal record and one didn't?
EDIT: seems not, they are both crimes.
However in the UK it's illegal to break the speed limit, but you don't get a criminal record for it so you could arguably be described as not a criminal.
re immigartion we have the same thing with eastern european workers here.Personally I would have a look at the employers who want to pay people as little as possible and on worse terms than the local population.
you can never blame people for economic migration - where would you live? where you are or Mexico, uk or eastern europe?- but employers are the ones employing them and breaking the law.
Both sides here have a point imho but I would never take a big stick to "welfare shirkers" unless we have full employment as it serves no purposes.
Yeah, but even with full employment, a big stick isn't going to get results from some part of the shirkers---they have always been with us and always will.
Guys--it's been fun, but have to sign off and get my focus back to work--it's so easy to get caught up on these threads.
Yeah.. I was thinking your username was becoming nicely ironic there 🙂
Keep busy busydog.
NB
but even with full employment
With full employment, unsurprisingly, you don't get any unemployed. But when was the last time there was full employment in the US ? In the UK it was probably the early seventies.
@ernie_lynch
Can't stay away--had to make one last check.
I don't think the US has ever had full employment. Even when the unemployment rate was almost nil, there are always a certain number of people not working (either intentionally or unintentionally) or working off-the-radar to avoid taxes or in positions of nefarious intent--can you say growers of good weed.
yes you can say growers of good weed but can i be the judge of whether it is good 😉
We may always have ****less individuals but we need to do what is right not get at the tiny minority whilst hurting other genuine folk in the process
Or in other words, better to give to too many people than to too few as molgrips notes earlier.
I think the judgement process would require a panel to fully make an assessment 😆
ernie_lynch - MemberBut when was the last time there was full employment in the US ? In the UK it was probably the early seventies.
hundreds of thousands unemployed then. Not full employment.
the "workshy" re a product of mass unemployment - its one way of keeping some self esteem
hundreds of thousands unemployed then. Not full employment.
OK go back to the late 60s then. In a labour market of several millions, you will get some people not working - between jobs, school leavers waiting for their first job/training, etc. But we have had what is defined as 'full employment'.
Of course today nothing terrifies the neo-conservatives (as opposed to the old fashion social-democratic Tories) more than full employment. It tends to make the workforce rather bolshie and pushes up wages. Hence unemployment is used as a very effective tool to discipline the workforce, and why it always goes up under modern day Tory governments. Who then of course blame people for either being lazy, or not accepting a wage cut/worse conditions.
Never thought I'd say this 😉 but that is an interesting point, ernie 🙂
[url= http://www.canfieldbrothers.com/the-chris-canfield-fund ]http://www.canfieldbrothers.com/the-chris-canfield-fund[/url]
(shamelessly lifted from a proper thread about him on the other side, made me think of this thread.) Didn't see a Dan Atherton fund/appeal last year. 😕