"Get a job!" - Page 2

Hootie · #16 10-08-2002, 02:59 PM

This isn't a personal attack, but if I were out of a job and needed something to pay bills/support myself I wouldn't be too proud to work flipping burgers or serving beer. But that's just me.

Hootie

carnation · #17 10-08-2002, 03:45 PM

Too true, Hootie, I've been there.

Just as I was finishing my Ph.D. in extension horticulture, Jimmy Carter cut out almost every job in my field. It was horrible. I had to finish up and work where I could. That led me here where I met my husband and had my great family, but that's another story.

Still, I had to go back to school and totally retrain in Spanish and even teach in high schools for awhile until I could reestablish my credentials. Nobody ever, ever thinks their whole field could be practically destroyed with the stroke of a pen...well, it can and it has been.

KarenC725 · #18 10-08-2002, 05:12 PM

The problem is that a lot of times the "lower" jobs won't hire you since they know you are just taking a job and would leave them at the drop of a hat. I can't go be an executive assistant since they see 3 years of public relations work on my resume. They know that if something better comes along, I'd be gone.

DeltAlum · #19 10-08-2002, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by lifesaver
If the dude is that worried about supporting his family, he could always get a job at Costco or something. That would cover the bills. Wouldnt be able to save for juniors college plan, but wouldnt have to worry about the repo man. Hey, I lost my job last year and took a crappy job to stay afloat. Sometimes ya gotta do what ya gotta do.

It ain't that easy.

I lost a six figure job at age 53 after a "corporate merger."

I was out of work for a year, and then found a job that paid half as much.

In the interim, I applied to grocery stores and every place else you can think of.

They take one look at the experience, age, former salary, etc. and simply won't even bother talking.

By the way, age discrimination is alive and well if my experience is any judge.

Kevin · #20 10-08-2002, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by doubleblue&gold

Because it is usually the previous administration's policies that get us there! When are people going to realize it's CONGRESS---not the president---that does this to us? Vote out your congressmen and senators if you don't like what's happening. And ask them why they screw with Social Security when their own retirement is set for life with no decreases and comes from a different fund!

In this case I'd say if there's any fault to be had it lies within the SEC... Of course Congress underfunded it -- probably responding to campaign contributions of companies that have kept our economy on the decline due to their corrupt accounting practices.

There's plenty of blame to go around but you're right, the pres doesn't have a hell of a lot to do with this one.

Jeff OTMG · #21 10-08-2002, 11:48 PM

This is interesting. I was out of work in my field since April. I started a new job one week ago. I had only not gotten a job after having an interview ONCE in my entire life, but in the last 6 months I had 5 jobs get yanked after the interview for one reason or another.

Whose fault is it? Well, me for not having a marketable skill I would say. Just because you decide to do something for a living and do it for 25 years, as I have, doesn't mean that anyone owes you a job. It is the potential employees' responsibility to stay on top of his/her own skill set, don't try to blame it on anyone.

As far as the state of the economy. The economy started to falter around April of 2000, while Clinton was still President, but, as others have pointed out, the President has little direct effect on the economy. One 'little' thing that happened that had a major negative impact on the economy was a couple of planes were flown into some buildings on 9/11 last year. That was where the major market fall was that we have had little recovery from. In that respect we can blame Clinton. We were offered bin Laden on a platter on at least one occaision and Clinton's indecisiveness and inaction caused bin Laden to remain at large. Since bin Laden was responsible for the terrorist attacks, the terrorist attacks resulted in a falling market, and a falling market is an indication of a faltering economy, since Clinton did not take action against bin Laden, one could say that Clinton was responsible for the falling market that resulted from the terrorist attacks.

If anyone can show that any action that Bush took and how it resulted in a falling market after he took office on Jan 20 last year and prior to 9/11 I would like to hear it.

The1calledTKE · #22 10-08-2002, 11:54 PM

His tax cut that was suppose to help the economy back fired everyone saved their money and it put the goverment into a deficit again after many years of surplus.

UF_PikePC98 · #23 10-08-2002, 11:54 PM

Work? What's that?

DeltaSigStan · #24 10-09-2002, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Rudey
I just find it incredibly interesting to watch people who haven't got a single clue about Economics or public finance just throw all the blame on Bush.

-Rudey
--It's like watching 19 year olds with their Birkenstocks (their alternative to a PhD) flaunting their supposed understanding of foreign policy and global trade when they "protest".

We've had two straight days of protests on campus, both led by Mecha and that racist pig Ron Gochez (they were the ones responsible for removing our mascot). Their basic reasons that we should NOT go to war are A. War is bad and B. It's not our business.

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight............

Kevlar281 · #25 10-09-2002, 01:09 AM

It really baffles me that immediately after Sept. 11th people assumed the government had prior knowledge to the attacks and questioned why they didn’t prevent it. Well why is it now that we have been informed of possible risks many feel we shouldn’t attack?

Kevin · #26 10-09-2002, 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zntke711
His tax cut that was suppose to help the economy back fired everyone saved their money and it put the goverment into a deficit again after many years of surplus.

You're actually complaining about a tax cut?!? It didn't succeed as largely as he had hoped because Democrats blocked the majority of the tax cut weakening the measure by quite a bit. I think it goes without saying that we need tax reform when the top 1% of income earners carry more than 50% of the tax burden.

The1calledTKE · #27 10-09-2002, 09:46 AM

I will complain when it hurts the economy and puts the goverment back in more debt. But most people are concerned about their money and getting more. The only reason he gave the tax cut was to improve the economy when the people spend their money but it back fired when they didn't and saved it. Bush was smart in the sense he knew it would make him more popular.

Kevin · #28 10-09-2002, 10:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by zntke711
I will complain when it hurts the economy and puts the goverment back in more debt. But most people are concerned about their money and getting more. The only reason he gave the tax cut was to improve the economy when the people spend their money but it back fired when they didn't and saved it. Bush was smart in the sense he knew it would make him more popular.

Actually government debt to a degree HELPS the economy believe it or not. I'm trying to remember back to my economics classes to remember why that is... But can't. Someone help me out here

Business majors?

Optimist Prime · #29 10-11-2002, 02:26 AM

I would rather pay high taxes and have health care and roads to drive on than few extra dollars and then wreck my car and die because my HMO sucks.

Optimist Prime · #30 10-11-2002, 02:27 AM

Attack Iraq because dictatorships are evil, not because you have a small penis complex because people talked trash about daddy.