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.
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.
Thank you very much! I appreciate your kind words and your contribution in Human Services.
I support reducing the Federal government by 97%, and leaving the private sector free to generate prosperity.
Prosperity is the creation, trade and enjoyment of surplus usable goods and services. Government, a parasite, is a brake on prosperity. Giving it more resources, funding or power is contrary to reason.
By all means, yes. The payout for a guarenteed job could be a little higher, because presumably the government would be reaping some benefits from the labor, be it daycare, cleaning, training, whatever. The work ethic must be preserved, or at least established.
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?
What jobs don't exist in the private sector?
No offense. But I have worked with a lot of government employees. And the pattern is that if you are guaranteed your job (which you are in the government bc frankly, it's too big to really monitor if you suck or not), you do a sh*tty job.
No offense. But I have worked with a lot of government employees. And the pattern is that if you are guaranteed your job (which you are in the government bc frankly, it's too big to really monitor if you suck or not), you do a sh*tty job.
Good afternoon,
I've actually explained both of your questions in previous posts. In my old position, these jobs were in government offices, nonprofit organizations, social service agencies, public hospitals, charities, churches, etc. They were doing primarily community service, data entry, answering phones, providing meals to seniors, janitorial, warehouse work for places like Goodwill, etc.
They chose the position and work site they wanted from a list of what was available. That reduced the likelihood of them hating the job, if anything, the vast majority of my clients LOVED the job and wanted to keep it permanently. These were people who had been on welfare and had not worked for years, even decades. I heard their life stories in my office as we worked on finding a site where they would enjoy working.
I didn't say these people were guaranteed their jobs, I suggested a three strikes and you're out policy in my plan. Also, the jobs would have a time limit, and is tied to training for a permanent position, maybe even a 2 year (or less) degree from a trade school. In my old position we had very few problems, and usually those were solved by a site visit or moving the employee once to another company. I believe we fired one person out of the thousands we helped after Katrina.
None of the initial work sites were private sector in the temporary job phase while training, but for permanent placement, of course they moved on to the private sector. If that's your definition of competing with the private sector, I'm fine with that because these people are moving into jobs and off public assistance.
Even if you were right, would you rather send people a check for doing no work, or get half the work by placing them in a job that they chose?
Please let me know if I answered your questions, if not, I'll try to explain the best I can.
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.
It looks good on the surface, however, there are several problems with making it work. To begin with, who would be eligible? Only those who qualify for unemployment check? Or everybody who is counted towards labor force? I would assume the labor force currently stands at about 155-160 million (about half of the population). This would include people who are employed in various capacities (that is, also including temps). If we assumed about 108 million were currently employed in some capacity, we're looking at the need to create 50 million jobs, about 50% more than currently exists! Where are these jobs going to come from?
Another major issue would be that those on unemployment, do not expect to be on UI forever. They need time and resources to continue pursuing their career as opposed to being forced into a government program that would get in the way.
Then if you set a 20K limit on income, it would amount to about $10/hour. If such opportunities existed, that would have to be the minimum wage everywhere?
It looks good on the surface, however, there are several problems with making it work. To begin with, who would be eligible? Only those who qualify for unemployment check? Or everybody who is counted towards labor force? I would assume the labor force currently stands at about 155-160 million (about half of the population). This would include people who are employed in various capacities (that is, also including temps). If we assumed about 108 million were currently employed in some capacity, we're looking at the need to create 50 million jobs, about 50% more than currently exists! Where are these jobs going to come from?
Another major issue would be that those on unemployment, do not expect to be on UI forever. They need time and resources to continue pursuing their career as opposed to being forced into a government program that would get in the way.
Then if you set a 20K limit on income, it would amount to about $10/hour. If such opportunities existed, that would have to be the minimum wage everywhere?
Thanks, those are good questions!
Eligibility would be based on the same current requirements for unemployment and welfare. Means tested, of course. If you have large savings, you have to use them to support yourself while finding a job before taking a temp job through the program. Priority should go to those with no money left to eat or support themselves.
In regards to time and resources of the recently unemployed, I said in an earlier post that they would have time to interview for other jobs, or time to train for a new career as part of the program. If finding a job in their current field is actually possible, I would assume they wouldn't work the temp job for long, maybe just a few weeks or months to keep the bills paid. I see this as a very in and out thing, kind of like day labor jobs but in an office, warehouse or whatever is available.
In regards to your job numbers, at a 9% unemployment rate and a workforce of 150 million, that is 13.5 million people who need jobs (actually 13.9 according to a quick check on bls.gov). An additional 1.8 million people receive cash welfare right now, so I'm now at 15.7 million. How did you come to 50 million jobs needed? Please give me your breakdown and we can work the calculations and possibilities from there.
If you want to focus on job losses, we've lost 8 million jobs since the recession, and there are 3 million current job openings according to the federal government: Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey Home Page. We simply need to train people to fit those 3 million jobs, and my program would cover the 5 million difference until the economy turned around. My program would probably bring the economy back faster since more consumers would have jobs and paychecks to put into the economy.
Either way, I would use the unemployment insurance pool's funds to cover the jobs for people who are on unemployment, and my $152 billion was based on giving a $20K/yr job to all 7.6 million families in poverty, even though I am sure 100% won't participate since they will either already have jobs at or near $20K or have other reasons to remain out of the workforce. Also, many may not stay in the temp job for a year if we train them for certain permanent positions that don't take that much time.
In regards to the $20K jobs, I just used that as a simplified number. I do want people to get a decent wage, but I don't want to flood the program with people who quit other jobs for a better wage with the government. I would much rather keep our jobs at or as close to minimum wage as possible so we're not competing with the private sector. If that means raising the minimum wage to $10/hr OR lowering my program to meet the current minimum wage, either is fine. I'd prefer meeting the current minimum if given a choice since raising the min wage kills jobs, but I would rather compromise at whatever citizens preferred.
If we used Obama's $800 billion stimulus for my program at $20k/job, we would have created 40 million jobs!
Last edited by Freedom123; 06-15-2011 at 03:30 PM..
To answer this question, we only to find need 2,500 jobs per county to meet the total 8 million jobs lost since the recession, as explained in the above post.
The average county population is 100,000 people. (310 million / 3,143 total US counties = 98,631 people per county)
8 million total jobs lost / 3143 total counties = 2,500 max jobs per county needed
I'm sure we can find those 2,500 jobs per county if we put notice out there. We need even less jobs per county if we use 5 million as a basis. (only 1,590 jobs per county needed)
If you give me your 50 million jobs resource I'll try to meet that, but until then I will base my figures on the 8 million jobs lost since the recession minus the 3 million current job openings last reported by the US Government.
The problem is the law does not REQUIRE the government to create those jobs, it only gives Congress the permission. Congress has passed the ball to the Federal Reverse to achieve the goal of low unemployment through monetary policy instead of working to directly create the pool of jobs during times of high unemployment.
I assume the misspelling of Federal Reserve is intentional.
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.
