Guaranteed Basic Income
Comments
-
The economist John Kenneth Galbraith noted that "trickle-down economics" had been tried before in the United States in the 1890s under the name "horse and sparrow theory." He wrote,Mosster47 said:Wait, conservatives love trickle down economics, but when the process is sped up they don't like it?
Sharing the wealth is bad?
One of our manpower audit teams just finished an audit on why it is so hard to fill positions. Essentially you have people with no skills and it doesn't matter how great of a work ethic they have or how quick of a learner they are because they will never get an interview.
Then you have people with skills and they use you as a resume bullet and a way to get a pay raise in five years.
There is currently a massive number of jobs in the US that stay unfilled because they require skills and the government and private industry isn't interested in sinking the cost of training into someone that is going to leave in five years.
GBI would get more people off the couch because it would make a shit job less shitty and it would afford skilled labor positions to be filled because the pay could be less and offset the sunk cost of training.
"Mr. David Stockman has said that supply-side economics was merely a cover for the trickle-down approach to economic policy—what an older and less elegant generation called the horse-and-sparrow theory: 'If you feed the horse enough oats, some will pass through to the road for the sparrows.'"
They're sparrow minded people. -
Christ. Now we got collegedoogs little sister reporting theory from Econ class.
-
Someone should run his corpse through the wood chipper a second time to make sure the job is finished.doogie said:Christ. Now we got collegedoog
little sisterreporting theory from Econ class.
-
The only thing of value from this abortion of a thread.oregonblitzkrieg said:Gwad said:
Judging by your earlier post filled with low self esteem, you have just pretended to comprehend and are now highlighting the only thing you did understand.oregonblitzkrieg said:
The only good sentence you've poasted so far. Now DIE.Gwad said:I'd say what we have now is closer to communism as you never actually own your property due to taxes and levees. But with what we have now the wealth of the nation is funneled upward to make rich people richer.
Right-click > Save as -
#FryCookTuff2001400ex said:
J?TurdBuffer said:
And Millennials love to scapegoat and blame everyone else for their failings. Just like you did here. Classic. Perfection.Gwad said:
Ya Millenials were only raised by knuckle dragging baby boomers, i mean c'mon cut em some slack.TurdBuffer said:And people say Millennials are entitled. Can you believe it? It's such an unfair stereotype.
-
Maybe if college students took majors other than social justice BS we'd have workers instead of protesters.Mosster47 said:Wait, conservatives love trickle down economics, but when the process is sped up they don't like it?
Sharing the wealth is bad?
One of our manpower audit teams just finished an audit on why it is so hard to fill positions. Essentially you have people with no skills and it doesn't matter how great of a work ethic they have or how quick of a learner they are because they will never get an interview.
Then you have people with skills and they use you as a resume bullet and a way to get a pay raise in five years.
There is currently a massive number of jobs in the US that stay unfilled because they require skills and the government and private industry isn't interested in sinking the cost of training into someone that is going to leave in five years.
GBI would get more people off the couch because it would make a shit job less shitty and it would afford skilled labor positions to be filled because the pay could be less and offset the sunk cost of training. -
No, this is serious. It's a very real problem today.Southerndawg said:Mosster47 said:Wait, conservatives love trickle down economics, but when the process is sped up they don't like it?
Sharing the wealth is bad?
One of our manpower audit teams just finished an audit on why it is so hard to fill positions. Essentially you have people with no skills and it doesn't matter how great of a work ethic they have or how quick of a learner they are because they will never get an interview.
Then you have people with skills and they use you as a resume bullet and a way to get a pay raise in five years.
There is currently a massive number of jobs in the US that stay unfilled because they require skills and the government and private industry isn't interested in sinking the cost of training into someone that is going to leave in five years.
GBI would get more people off the couch because it would make a shit job less shitty and it would afford skilled labor positions to be filled because the pay could be less and offset the sunk cost of training.
I will use a real scenario; to be a Financial Manager for the government or private industry you need at least an undergrad in accounting or finance, but an MBA is preferred. You need to have FM Certifications, etc. and any amount of experience paid or unpaid is like gold.
How many businesses and agencies need these people? All of them. How many people have these qualifications? Not many. So, if or once you do receive all of this school/training and you have over five years experience any open FM job out there is yours. You can name your price and whoever bites finally has the vacancy filled.
The absolute reality is the job isn't all that hard to actually do, but it needs to be done, and it needs to be done correctly. You can't hire the housewife who went to college for journalism and hasn't worked in ten years because she has been home with the kids even though she seems really smart and has a great attitude.
With GBI agencies and companies could fill positions like those for a lower salary and would offset the cost of training that soccer mom who can absolutely do the job. -
Private companies can hire whoever the fuck they want irregardless of bull shit requirements.
I hire smart people and teach them -
I'm only here because i believe society is only as strong as its weakest links.doogie said:Christ. Now we got collegedoogs little sister reporting theory from Econ class.
-
I agree with much of what you're saying with regards to the dearth of skilled and qualified workers out there. But as Race pointed out, training is always required, it's just a matter of degree, which is a function of the skills and experience of the person hired and the complexity of the position they're hired into. Some of that is on the employer, some is, or should be on the employee, particularly if they are interested in investing in their own future.Mosster47 said:
No, this is serious. It's a very real problem today.Southerndawg said:Mosster47 said:Wait, conservatives love trickle down economics, but when the process is sped up they don't like it?
Sharing the wealth is bad?
One of our manpower audit teams just finished an audit on why it is so hard to fill positions. Essentially you have people with no skills and it doesn't matter how great of a work ethic they have or how quick of a learner they are because they will never get an interview.
Then you have people with skills and they use you as a resume bullet and a way to get a pay raise in five years.
There is currently a massive number of jobs in the US that stay unfilled because they require skills and the government and private industry isn't interested in sinking the cost of training into someone that is going to leave in five years.
GBI would get more people off the couch because it would make a shit job less shitty and it would afford skilled labor positions to be filled because the pay could be less and offset the sunk cost of training.
I will use a real scenario; to be a Financial Manager for the government or private industry you need at least an undergrad in accounting or finance, but an MBA is preferred. You need to have FM Certifications, etc. and any amount of experience paid or unpaid is like gold.
How many businesses and agencies need these people? All of them. How many people have these qualifications? Not many. So, if or once you do receive all of this school/training and you have over five years experience any open FM job out there is yours. You can name your price and whoever bites finally has the vacancy filled.
The absolute reality is the job isn't all that hard to actually do, but it needs to be done, and it needs to be done correctly. You can't hire the housewife who went to college for journalism and hasn't worked in ten years because she has been home with the kids even though she seems really smart and has a great attitude.
With GBI agencies and companies could fill positions like those for a lower salary and would offset the cost of training that soccer mom who can absolutely do the job.
Worker retention is an issue as well, but any sharp employer will rack and stack his employees, identify those he/she/heshe wants to keep for the long haul and use incentives to make it very difficult for them to leave. Natural pruning of the others isn't a bad thing, some turnover can actually be healthy as incoming folks, if carefully hired, can bring in fresh perspectives and competition that keeps your organization from becoming too stale or complacent. The key is keeping the turnover to an acceptable level and retaining those who are contributing the most to the success of your venture.
Where you go way off the reservation is in making the leap to UBI being the answer to these issues. It's not. At all.
