What does it take to get a job around here?

[the joint]

There are tons of jobs available, including so-called "dream-jobs."

If you have ambition, motivation, dedication, and persistence (and of course, skills), you can get a job without too much trouble.

Maybe if people didn't send tons of crap resumes to monster.com or other similar job posting sites and simply focused on preparing themselves for a position they truly desire, they would have more luck.

[1714772501]

1714772501

[1714772501]

1714772501

[1714772501]

1714772501

[Harvey]

You sound like Herman Cain blaming the victims of this destruction for their lack of success in the first place. The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met. There is no reason for anybody to be stagnant and we can only blame the destruction of the incentive to meet societal desires. If we want to see the destroyer, the parasite, we can look no further than our government.

As you are implying, all these workers are capable of producing. Resumes and bureaucracy should not be stopping them.

[the joint]

You sound like Herman Cain blaming the victims of this destruction for their lack of success in the first place. The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met. There is no reason for anybody to be stagnant and we can only blame the destruction of the incentive to meet societal desires. If we want to see the destroyer, the parasite, we can look no further than our government.

As you are implying, all these workers are capable of producing. Resumes and bureaucracy should not be stopping them.

That's a very blanket statement.  You seem to be making a utilitarian argument where the value of any individual is the same as the value of any other individual regardless of individual circumstance.  Is it in the best interest of everybody if, say, a crooked cop gets a job?

Also, blaming the government defers responsibility away from the individual.  Actually, the government can be argued to be the result of the sum of individual choices.  Welcome to democracy where mediocrity rules.

Also, the "poor" in america are probably in the top 25%-50% in the world economically.  The "poor" here have basic needs met (generally speaking). 

It's funny.  If I didn't attend school, occasionally listen to the news, or read about changes in law or social policy, I probably wouldn't even notice government-induced changes.

[Harvey]

You sound like Herman Cain blaming the victims of this destruction for their lack of success in the first place. The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met. There is no reason for anybody to be stagnant and we can only blame the destruction of the incentive to meet societal desires. If we want to see the destroyer, the parasite, we can look no further than our government.

As you are implying, all these workers are capable of producing. Resumes and bureaucracy should not be stopping them.

That's a very blanket statement.  You seem to be making a utilitarian argument where the value of any individual is the same as the value of any other individual regardless of individual circumstance.  Is it in the best interest of everybody if, say, a crooked cop gets a job?

Also, blaming the government defers responsibility away from the individual.  Actually, the government can be argued to be the result of the sum of individual choices.  Welcome to democracy where mediocrity rules.

Also, the "poor" in america are probably in the top 25%-50% in the world economically.  The "poor" here have basic needs met (generally speaking). 

It's funny.  If I didn't attend school, occasionally listen to the news, or read about changes in law or social policy, I probably wouldn't even notice government-induced changes.

Every individual has value to bring. I never said it was equal.

In addition, I never remembered I or anybody else voting for excess Federal control over our society. I don't remember saying our government is allowed to violate The Constitution.

[the joint]

You sound like Herman Cain blaming the victims of this destruction for their lack of success in the first place. The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met. There is no reason for anybody to be stagnant and we can only blame the destruction of the incentive to meet societal desires. If we want to see the destroyer, the parasite, we can look no further than our government.

As you are implying, all these workers are capable of producing. Resumes and bureaucracy should not be stopping them.

That's a very blanket statement.  You seem to be making a utilitarian argument where the value of any individual is the same as the value of any other individual regardless of individual circumstance.  Is it in the best interest of everybody if, say, a crooked cop gets a job?

Also, blaming the government defers responsibility away from the individual.  Actually, the government can be argued to be the result of the sum of individual choices.  Welcome to democracy where mediocrity rules.

Also, the "poor" in america are probably in the top 25%-50% in the world economically.  The "poor" here have basic needs met (generally speaking). 

It's funny.  If I didn't attend school, occasionally listen to the news, or read about changes in law or social policy, I probably wouldn't even notice government-induced changes.

Every individual has value to bring. I never said it was equal.

In addition, I never remembered I or anybody else voting for excess Federal control over our society. I don't remember saying our government is allowed to violate The Constitution.

True, but what if a person brings negative value?

Again, if I didn't stay informed to some degree, I'd probably be completely oblivious to the government violating the Constitution.

[Harvey]

You sound like Herman Cain blaming the victims of this destruction for their lack of success in the first place. The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met. There is no reason for anybody to be stagnant and we can only blame the destruction of the incentive to meet societal desires. If we want to see the destroyer, the parasite, we can look no further than our government.

As you are implying, all these workers are capable of producing. Resumes and bureaucracy should not be stopping them.

That's a very blanket statement.  You seem to be making a utilitarian argument where the value of any individual is the same as the value of any other individual regardless of individual circumstance.  Is it in the best interest of everybody if, say, a crooked cop gets a job?

Also, blaming the government defers responsibility away from the individual.  Actually, the government can be argued to be the result of the sum of individual choices.  Welcome to democracy where mediocrity rules.

Also, the "poor" in america are probably in the top 25%-50% in the world economically.  The "poor" here have basic needs met (generally speaking). 

It's funny.  If I didn't attend school, occasionally listen to the news, or read about changes in law or social policy, I probably wouldn't even notice government-induced changes.

Every individual has value to bring. I never said it was equal.

In addition, I never remembered I or anybody else voting for excess Federal control over our society. I don't remember saying our government is allowed to violate The Constitution.

True, but what if a person brings negative value?

From a macro-perspective, somebody will feel shorted and there will usually be violence.

[the joint]

It's the give and take of nature.  It's...natural.

I truly believe in karma (or, simply, cause and effect and not that whole "what goes around comes around" crap) and I think that there is a sort of universal justification for the unequal distribution of human suffering.

Isolating this context, I think that some people are just destined to have shitty times.

America is pretty damn awesome even despite the corruption and greed.  I guess it depends where you like to focus your attention.  I like to focus on the positive.  When I was in high school especially, I used to be anti-government, anti-big business, anti-capitalism, etc.  Then I realized that I like myself and I'm a product of the environment in which I grew up.  So, if I like myself, then I should probably appreciate the environment, too.

[Hawker]

Nice round about way of saying that he isn't selling enough.

He would be selling enough if it weren't for the state destroying wealth through their needless bureaucracy.

Wrong.  The article I linked in the WashPo shows clearly that the US has the lowest admin overhead of any major economy.

[Harvey]

http://danieljmitchell.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/job-creation-cartoon.jpg

Nice round about way of saying that he isn't selling enough.

He would be selling enough if it weren't for the state destroying wealth through their needless bureaucracy.

Wrong.  The article I linked in the WashPo shows clearly that the US has the lowest admin overhead of any major economy.

Heh, that doesn't refute my argument. Admin overhead is admin overhead. It's just more potent over larger populaces.

[johnyj]

The fact is every human being has value and it's in the best interest of everybody to have a job. Employers, in an efficient society, would have hired up all these people because their is a constant need for food, housing and other desires to be met.

Very positive attitude, I truly hope that is the case, then everything will be back on track after a while, we don't need to worry

But in my observation, in today's society, employers will keep reducing the amount of the employee due to the productivity improvement, and the need for food, housing and other desires are easily met by a mass scale production. Those who have the biggest market share can produce almost everything at the lowest cost (due to economy of scale), and hire only a handful amount of elite engineers and scientists to do the R&D, and outsource the production overseas