Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As someone who leans libertarian, I would support this. What I think it would do is give people purpose and a sense of responsibility, and therefore they wouldn't be complacent and continue to live off of the government, and our tax money. I say let's do it! I am all for helping those that are less fortunate, as there are those out there that just can't catch a break, and I think those people would truly benefit from this type of system, giving them confidence and keeping their self esteem high (hey, being out of work sucks, I've been there). But as for those that are too lazy to work and want to continue to receive a free hand out... well... too bad! Guess ya don't get paid! We cannot continue to go down the current road of government handouts with nothing in return, whether it be to our citizens or our corporations with the bailouts!
How do you ensure these workers are putting in a full day and/or are give 100%? I can forsee a business run like the DMV where the employees could care less about doing a good job or providing good service because they are "protected" by their boss ..... the govt.
While I think there are many who would benefit from this, and welcome the opportunity, there is still the problem of what to do with the children of the recipients and the fact that many wouldn't even have the skill or intelligence to perform said work. Not on my body or my car anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hotair2
I am not against the idea in theory; however, daycare and transportation would have be issues. Solve those two problems and then I am on board.
Good afternoon,
I have already run a government program that was a replica of this idea after Hurricane Katrina. All of your concerns were covered. The majority of our clients were long term public housing / welfare recipients. Most of the jobs were nonprofit, entry level jobs and took no more than a few hours of training. We're talking social service helpers, data entry folks, answering phones, filing papers, warehouse work, etc. We simultaneously trained them for permanent jobs in the same field, or in-demand fields like nursing, blue collar work, and oil industry jobs.
We provided bus passes for those who needed it and had a van service in rural areas. We also paid for a large portion of child care, and they were required to use a Class A child care provider (highest ranked). Most people didn't even take advantage of the transportation or child care services, and these were the poorest of the poor from New Orleans. The majority still had access to cars or family members who gave them rides and / or kept the children at home.
In my plan, I would probably pay for a month's worth of bus pases to get them started and then they would have to cover their own. I'd probably still run a van service in rural areas for a low rider fee for month. I would caution against simply paying the full amount, because when people pay for a portion of a service they have a better appreciation for it.
For child care, that is only an issue for the first three years. After that point, there are already Headstart programs funded, and then the public school system. States already have child care assistance, I would probably increase funding for those and require the parents to pay a percentage.
The right does not care about such unimportant details, never have.
Casper
Casper,
This is not a left/right thread, I am looking for solutions that satisfy all ideologies, not the same old political party team sport fighting you guys do in other threads.
If you see holes in the idea, please feel free to share, I would love to address and debate them.
How is this any different than the argument against prisoners doing work...they undercut private sector prices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinm
Or these "McGovt jobs" competed directly with a private sector company providing the same service?
This is primarily nonprofit and government work, and the salaries are kept at $20,000 per year. How does that undercut the private sector when the jobs are in areas where the private sector doesn't exist?
I think the main problem with this is that not all unemployed workers are alike. Some comments here assume that 1) being unemployed means that you don't have currently have skills to compete in the workforce, and 2) that being unemployed means you have messed up somehow. Neither of those are necessarily true; it's just that the employer who the person was working for no longer needs those skills. I think sometimes people forget that the "unemployed" aren't just the "other" people who struggled to get a GED - they are also teachers, police officers, engineers, businesspeople, and yes - sometimes even health care workers.
Good afternoon,
You're right, but there's nothing wrong with a skilled person taking one of these jobs temporarily until they find something permanent or train for a new career with the program's help.
Once again, the goal is to put people to work instead of giving them a check.
How do you ensure these workers are putting in a full day and/or are give 100%? I can forsee a business run like the DMV where the employees could care less about doing a good job or providing good service because they are "protected" by their boss ..... the govt.
This was covered earlier in the thread.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom123
Good morning,
I prefer crappy work over handing people checks while sitting at home doing no work at all. Remember, these are low skill, entry level type positions. There can be a review process, and maybe some type of "three strikes and you're out" system for people who cause problems. You'd be surprised how many people would buck up if they don't have any government checks to fall back on if they blow their opportunity.
Would you rather send someone a check for doing zero work, or getting half the work out of them and sending them the same check?
I have already run a government program that was a replica of this idea after Hurricane Katrina. All of your concerns were covered. The majority of our clients were long term public housing / welfare recipients. Most of the jobs were nonprofit, entry level jobs and took no more than a few hours of training. We're talking social service helpers, data entry folks, answering phones, filing papers, warehouse work, etc. We simultaneously trained them for permanent jobs in the same field, or in-demand fields like nursing, blue collar work, and oil industry jobs.
We provided bus passes for those who needed it and had a van service in rural areas. We also paid for a large portion of child care, and they were required to use a Class A child care provider (highest ranked). Most people didn't even take advantage of the transportation or child care services, and these were the poorest of the poor from New Orleans. The majority still had access to cars or family members who gave them rides and / or kept the children at home.
In my plan, I would probably pay for a month's worth of bus pases to get them started and then they would have to cover their own. I'd probably still run a van service in rural areas for a low rider fee for month. I would caution against simply paying the full amount, because when people pay for a portion of a service they have a better appreciation for it.
For child care, that is only an issue for the first three years. After that point, there are already Headstart programs funded, and then the public school system. States already have child care assistance, I would probably increase funding for those and require the parents to pay a percentage.
What a truly refreshing thread. I admire you for the work you did in New Orleans. What a fine person you sound like.
I think your program sounds like a great idea. And having been initiated on a small scale in New Orleans it has already been given a trial run so many of the bugs have been worked out.
I have worked in the Human Services field in the past and your proposal was my fondest dream at the time. When someone is unemployed they lose a lot of their support system and a lot of self esteem. This program keeps them moving in a positive direction and keeps their mind working. If you could actually implement this for the approximate amount stated I would back it 100%. I would also vote you in to any public office you would chose to run for.
Thanks again for a well thought out thread, a nice change on the POC forum. It would be nice to have more threads of people sharing solutions rather than complaining about how things are going.
An unsurprisingly forgotten piece of ancient legislation.
The Full Employment and Balanced Growth Act[1] (known informally as the Humphrey–Hawkins Full Employment Act), is an act of legislation by the United States government. Humphrey
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
