Tom Delay: People Are Unemployed Because They Want To Be

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Kevin, what you don't seem to understand is that you are arguing from a false premise, and it is that false premise -- the blanket assertion that all unemployment is essentially the fault of the unemployed -- that I am challenging.

Where have I ever said that there should be no cut-off or advocated indefinite guaranteed mimimums? I haven't suggested either. I've merely said that dismissing the entire problem with "well, it's their own fault" is a cop-out. One rarely gets to the right solution if one doesn't at least attempt to understand the problem.

Simplistic thinking is never needed. Real problems require real thinking.

But if you're really concerned about the overall economy, maybe we should add "corporate welfare" to the discussion. Oh, wait, that's a complicated issue ill-served by simplistic sound bytes, too.

Clearly, you are assuming facts not in evidence, as I've never said society's role should be bigger, unless you mean bigger than nothing. I don't know what "my way" is, so I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know.

Frankly, I readily admit I don't know what the right answer is. But I do know that ignoring or dismissing the problem isn't the right answer. I know that refusing at least an attempt to understand the problem isn't the answer. And I know that every option, including doing little or nothing, can have unintended consequences, and that sometimes those unintended consequences turn out to be bigger problems than the original problem. Which is why critical thinking skills, not simplistic explanations, are called for.

And to be honest, it's why when I hear someone offer a response of essentially qu'ils mangent de la brioche, I assume they don't have any real clue what they're talking about or insights worth paying attention to.

^^^ German Chocolate please?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

[I]qu'ils mangent de la brioche[/I

Yay!

[Prettyface08]

Originally Posted by cheerfulgreek

Go ahead and comment. I hate dumb rednecks. I don't like the ghetto drug dealers either, but I'll bet you can take a drug dealer who lives in the ghetto, and put him or her at the top of a major corporation and he or she would be successful, and that's because numbers are numbers, you either get it or you don't. But the trailer trash wouldn't have a freaking clue. They're too dumb to even spell GED. Idiots!

Since when does drug dealer = ghetto? Not all drug dealers are 'ghetto'. Is it that you just don't like the Ghetto ones? Or is it that you consider anyone who sells drugs ghetto? Serious questions.

[PM_Mama00]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

He's working in his dad's firm.

Not that there's anything wrong with that -- not at all. But I've been around long enough to know that doesn't necessarily provide eternal job security.

Tyler Perry's The Family That Preys. BOOM!

[DaemonSeid]

Originally Posted by Prettyface08

Since when does drug dealer = ghetto? Not all drug dealers are 'ghetto'. Is it that you just don't like the Ghetto ones? Or is it that you consider anyone who sells drugs ghetto? Serious questions.

To be fair, she hates dumb rednecks...not all rednecks are dumb nor are all dumb people rednecks....right?

[Prettyface08]

Originally Posted by libramunoz

Yes, when the system was designed in 1935, it was designed as a system of relief for those that needed help. It was designed along with the SSA, the CCC, and Medicare/Medicaid. It was designed because of the fact that there was a major depression within the country, and FDR was trying his hardest to get people to eat within the country while being able to maintain some sense of dignity while being able to stimulate the economy.

The truth of the matter is that it almost didn't work and the country almost remained within a depressive state UNTIL America entered into WWII as of Dec. 1941. That's just a matter of fact.

However, what people DON'T look at is the fact that MOST people that get on AFDC, Welfare, Assistance, Aid, TANF, whatever a person wants to call it, they get OFF of it within 3 to 5 months. It's just a stated fact and this is something that people tend to overlook in quoting or stating that people that get on welfare, blah, blah, blah.

I'm sorry, I have read these comments on here and am virtually disgusted in what I am reading. Yes, it's just my opinion, and no I shouldn't take things personally, however, being currently unemployed, it becomes a slightly personal matter.

People tend to act like when you're unemployed, you want to be there. They act like you don't want to get up and go to work. They act like you cannot envy those who have a job and wish to God it was you going with them. But hell, the truth of the matter is, sometimes, it just ain't so.

I can say that I don't like being unemployed. I hate it above many things in my life. I can't say that I haven't tried to get a job. But I cannot make people hire me. I cannot go into an office and point a gun and say, "would you hire me, pppppllllleeeeeaaaassssee?" It just ain't gonna work.

It's not easy being in this poisition. Trust me. You get the "look" when people ask you what are you doing and you say, "well, I'm currently unemployed..." and you can say that I'm doing volunteer work with the Girl Scouts or for the church, and people inadvertenly (?) give you the "look." As if to say, "you lazy, trifling, blah, blah, blah."

But what people fail to look at is that you too are struggling with paying your bills, trying to find a job, trying to juggle temp jobs, hell, just trying to find a temp job. You too are wondering how are you going to have enough food, water, lights in order to survive until the next day. You too are wondering how are you gonna make it. You still struggle to survive. It's not a position that you WANT to be in, hell, sometimes, you just find yourself in it.

I can personally testify that having been out of a job for this long, I do long to have that 8 to 5, 12 to 6, hell even 7 to 11, I wouldn't care, it's a job and it helps to pay my bills. Maybe Delay needs to stop and see how long he would be able to last if he had to be unemployed and if he had no health insurance and if all he could be able to rely on is unemployment. Maybe he needs to try this for a few days and see if it's something that he could then understand and back off in saying that people who are unemployed just don't want to work.

I'm sorry it isn't about others coming into this country and working, it's not about being able to just jump up and start a business, it's not about it being a person that lives in the country or about a person that lives in a ghetto or barrio. It is about being able to survive when you are wondering if your lights are going to be on the next day, being able to survive when you don't know how to pay the water bill, being able to survive when you're hungry and being able to have the faith to be able to stay sane during your time of trial and tribulation.

Sorry about the rant, but this just seemed to strike a wrong nerve within me. O.k., back to slightly normal and jumping off the soapbox.

Great post. I agree.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Kevin, what you don't seem to understand is that you are arguing from a false premise, and it is that false premise -- the blanket assertion that all unemployment is essentially the fault of the unemployed -- that I am challenging.

Tom Delay made that assertion. I did not. I simply stated that welfare has to end at some point. These continued extensions of benefits are to the detriment of society... and yes, if an otherwise healthy individual runs out the clock on their benefits, I do think they ought to bear the burden of that and I do think they have to be somewhat complicit in their situation.

Where have I ever said that there should be no cut-off or advocated indefinite guaranteed mimimums? I haven't suggested either. I've merely said that dismissing the entire problem with "well, it's their own fault" is a cop-out. One rarely gets to the right solution if one doesn't at least attempt to understand the problem.

I think you're assuming facts not in evidence as well, counsel. I have stated over and over that at some point, the burden needs to shift away from society and back onto the individual. At some point, their plight is not my fault, nor should it be my problem. It seems we're in agreement there.

Simplistic thinking is never needed. Real problems require real thinking.

I don't think simplistic or real thinking is happening right now in Washington. At least nothing that is focused on cost/utility as it should be (unless the desired outcome is political capital).

But if you're really concerned about the overall economy, maybe we should add "corporate welfare" to the discussion. Oh, wait, that's a complicated issue ill-served by simplistic sound bytes, too.

In principal, I think that all transfers of wealth from public to private entities should be closely scrutinized. I think everyone outside Goldman-Sachs understands that in the long run, these sorts of relationships are arguably the precise reason for our current economic situation. (Fannie/Freddie anyone?)

Clearly, you are assuming facts not in evidence, as I've never said society's role should be bigger, unless you mean bigger than nothing. I don't know what "my way" is, so I'd appreciate it if you'd let me know.

Frankly, I readily admit I don't know what the right answer is. But I do know that ignoring or dismissing the problem isn't the right answer. I know that refusing at least an attempt to understand the problem isn't the answer. And I know that every option, including doing little or nothing, can have unintended consequences, and that sometimes those unintended consequences turn out to be bigger problems than the original problem. Which is why critical thinking skills, not simplistic explanations, are called for.

What I'm sure of is that the status quo is not only not working out very well, it's rewarding complacency and inefficiency. That don't cut it in my book.

And to be honest, it's why when I hear someone offer a response of essentially qu'ils mangent de la brioche, I assume they don't have any real clue what they're talking about or insights worth paying attention to.

And those advocating for the status quo or for more governmental help when we're already way, way past being able to pay for that help are not advocating useful solutions even if those solutions are arguably workable in the short term. Selling out our future to make marginal improvements in the present is absolutely not a sound way of managing any crisis. Passing out more free money like this and not actually doing anything to reconfigure our systematic issues is only setting us up for a much more dramatic and much more serious failure than those in the past.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bosaco

indian bum?

Indian with a feather or Indian with a dot?

[Prettyface08]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I can hardly come to any other conclusion though. If someone spends however many months on the dole as are currently allowed and has yet to find a job, when does the blame shift from the economy or somesuch other nebulous entity to the individual? Does it ever shift?

And let's just assume all of these "It's not their fault" premises ad arguendo. Why are their problems my problems? Why must I and other taxpayers continue to watch the money I spend in taxes go to solve their problems? Pay their bills? Bail them out? I don't think anyone could reasonably believe that the current federal fiscal irresponsibility can continue indefinitely. But I get to watch as my money is spent on this crap and then I, who will still be gainfully employed for the rest of my life, will get to bear a lot more than my fair share in paying it back. But I guess I shouldn't have a problem with that?

This is stupid. When you do your taxes, do you get a refund of all the money that you've paid out in taxes for the year? If not, why do you mind that it's being used to help people who are in need (I can agree that not everyone who receives assistance needs it for as long as they get it)? As libramunoz stated, you can't force someone to hire you. I comment all the time that companies post jobs (sometimes they stay open for months) but it seems like they never hire anyone. What are people supposed to do? Take to begging in the streets? I hope that you do stay employed for life because if you don't, I hope you'll be just as angry at your self for having to live off of our tax monies.

[Prettyface08]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

To be fair, she hates dumb rednecks...not all rednecks are dumb nor are all dumb people rednecks....right?

Right.

[Prettyface08]

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

You don't know what tomorrow will bring. Because of your situation you may believe that you will have your job 'forever' but you never know what may happen that *POW* you could be unable to work.

Kevin not everyone's life is like yours, people on GC have told you that time and time again and I don't think you get that. It's not everyone has the ability to find a job 'just like that' and it's not for a lack of trying. Like others on here, I have friends with multiple degrees who can't find work regardless of the income spectrum they are looking.

I also agree with AGDee, libramunoz and MC have said. It's not as 'easy' or 'simplistic' as you say...hell if you want to be a help, give libramunoz a hand, make yourself useful, start a job bank or something so that way you can at least feel like you've helped someone who needs it. It kills me also the people that complain that unemployed people are lazy but aren't doing anything to help them.


Kevin it really amazes me how you come out looking when you enter into these kinds of debates...and you keep coming back.

The bolded!

[33girl]

Originally Posted by bosaco

There are tons of jobs in health care

Ok, like all your n-word posts weren't offensive enough.

If I hear one more person say in ANY context "there are sooooo many jobs in health care" in any context I'm gonna fucking take them out with a tube sock full of wood screws.

The LAST thing we need in this country is people who are only working in health care because that's the only thing that is available. There are enough screwups going on as it is. I'm sick of people trying to push people into this shit field.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by bosaco

Top be honest, when I hear your people make excuses and I see illegals sneaking into the country and outperforming your people I assume you don't have any real clue.

My people?

Originally Posted by Kevin

Tom Delay made that assertion. I did not. I simply stated that welfare has to end at some point.

Kevin, I was responding to your statement in this thread -- "There are jobs out there and if that fails, there's entrepreneurship" -- admittedly through the filter of other comments you have made in the past, like

Originally Posted by Kevin

And as far as being unemployed, I don't see how it isn't the worker's fault? Or that it should be up to the employed to subsidize the unemployed. Poor savings/spending habits, choosing to work in a doomed industry, etc. These are all personal choices or at the very least, they are gambles that turned out poorly. That's part of life in a non planned economy.

If you're now saying that this statement doesn't represent your opinion, great.

I don't think simplistic or real thinking is happening right now in Washington. At least nothing that is focused on cost/utility as it should be (unless the desired outcome is political capital).

No thinking at all, huh.

[Little32]

Originally Posted by 33girl

Ok, like all your n-word posts weren't offensive enough.

If I hear one more person say in ANY context "there are sooooo many jobs in health care" in any context I'm gonna fucking take them out with a tube sock full of wood screws.

The LAST thing we need in this country is people who are only working in health care because that's the only thing that is available. There are enough screwups going on as it is. I'm sick of people trying to push people into this shit field.

I was wondering whether to even engage....

I have spent enough time around health care professionals in recent months to know that they are just as concerned about job security and availability as the rest of us. Belt-tightening is happening everywhere, even in the fields that have usually weathered the economic storms relatively unscathed.

And yes, absolutely, people do not need to go into healthcare unless it is a calling. Particularly not into positions that have them doing patient care. No one wins in that situation.

[33girl]

MC, how did that black one sneak in there?? Didn't the Wasp Housing Association require a photo to be included with the application?