Job hunting

[robertwnielsen]

Man, and here I thought the U.S. government was the only one who fibbed (read: lied through its ass) about how wonderful their economy is.

And, you're right about statistical information--I see that enough, with politics being one of my "obsessions," here--both Republicans and Democrats try to spin and twist statistics (which, in the case of unemployment numbers, aren't even right, because of how they ignore those who've given up looking) to advance their particular political agendas and causes. That Benjamin Disraeli was a smart guy, wasn't he??

 

[Peter A.]

Perhaps they should look into averages of hours of work per week/month on the workforce, and realistically look how many people actually do not qualify for a fulltime job, and perhaps even look into reasons why. Yes, it requires a lot of work

Yes, a lot of work that could be carried out by those who are currently unemployed for whatever reason. They would be doing a useful job, keeping themselves busy during the day, and not be dependent upon unemployment benefits. The government, or whoever it would be that would actually employ them, would gain valuable information in return. A win-win situation as they say

Yes, I'm probably really socialist, and perhaps even communist here... but wouldn't it be fairer (for lack of a better word; since life in general isn't fair... but neither is having that freak accident where you end up under the bus ) to at least spread out employment and jobexperience more. Heck, if we want people to have equal jobexperience to get somewhere on the jobmarket, I might even suggest cutting everyones shift back with a few hours and spread it out evenly on the unemployed... and compensate everyone a bit out of the benefits that are being paid in full on unemployed people.

You're just like me then I also firmly believe that a nation's economy should be, at least to some extent, regulated and controlled by the government. De-regulation, a panacea we were all led to believe would solve problems like unemployment, have clearly not worked, and in my mind a 'deregulated economy' is equivalent to a 'deregulated traffic management system' (i.e. let's allow motorists to drive however they like, let us do away with road rules, and do so because, after all, everyone should be 'free' to do as they please in a free, democratic society). It makes about as much sense.

 

[Peter A.]

Robert, it looks as though the entire world is being deceived about this. My own personal opinion, based upon what I have thus far been able to uncover, is that Australia is as broke as Spain and Greece. We keep getting new taxes (ex. CO2 tax - the very air we breath is being taxed, lol), the ones we have are constantly being raised, the cost of living is now the highest in the world (ex. real estate in Melbourne is more expensive than in New York, Tokyo or Singapore), and all of this revenue is going... where? I have no idea, but my guess would be that, as a nation, we are living beyond our means and it will just be a matter of time before the whole rotten system implodes.

 

[King_Oni]

Yes, a lot of work that could be carried out by those who are currently unemployed for whatever reason. They would be doing a useful job, keeping themselves busy during the day, and not be dependent upon unemployment benefits. The government, or whoever it would be that would actually employ them, would gain valuable information in return. A win-win situation as they say

Oh... over here they turn it even more interesting... They'd employ these people and tell them to cooperate in order to retain the rights to benefits even. And as such will still rely on benefits. I'm quite sure that the workings under the hood in terms of law are that benefits are a way of "cheaper labor" and less taxes for said companies, since it's government funded to start with.

A while ago at social services I informally applied for a position there. My contact there told me that they were understaffed and that causes processing of documents to delay a lot and people being on waiting lists. I asked them if I could get a job there then... just give me a quiet desk/office and the basic training to know what's important for said task. I got told "we don't have money to employ people". Because apparently, now we're past the point that we can't pay for potential employees' education... now we're already stating we can't pay for that hour a day lost in training by an experienced staff member.... what's next... bring your own money to work here?

You're just like me then I also firmly believe that a nation's economy should be, at least to some extent, regulated and controlled by the government. De-regulation, a panacea we were all led to believe would solve problems like unemployment, have clearly not worked, and in my mind a 'deregulated economy' is equivalent to a 'deregulated traffic management system' (i.e. let's allow motorists to drive however they like, let us do away with road rules, and do so because, after all, everyone should be 'free' to do as they please in a free, democratic society). It makes about as much sense.

Heh... here a perhaps bothersome thought I had, and has caused a lot of "controversy" when talking to therapists about jobs and employment.

The fact that I'm pushed to earn my own money apparently isn't enough. We also have to include rules on how I make my money... who says I couldn't run a grade A methlab? So clearly it's not just earning you money, it's also how you earn it.

Perhaps it's an extreme view, but imposing limitations on certain things just doesn't work for all individuals. It shouldn't mean some can do away with rules, but perhaps rules, regulations and as such limitations should be considered more carefully instead of the way they are done now.

 

[Peter A.]

who says I couldn't run a grade A methlab?

Is that something you would actually want to do?

 

[King_Oni]

Is that something you would actually want to do?

Not neccesarily; but it just goes to show that there's plenty of vices that are against the law, all while, if regulated, could actually create jobs.

But then again, I'm from the Netherlands, which is considered as a pretty liberal country in terms of (some) drugs, and most likely some other vices. Last thing I heard, the government has actually been thinking if they should grow marijuana themselves to keep it regulated a bit more like that. If they'd do that, it would create some jobs. Not to mention a good quality control to have grade A drugs on the market, instead of some shabby backdoor product.

I actually wouldn't mind seeing harddrugs on the free market and all legal and regulated. Tax it and have the best drugs on the market. Most likely it reduces hospitalisations due to poluted drugs. So I guess in a sense there's government money to be had from it as well as extra jobs. And it probably shrinks black market trade.

Let's skip the debate on how drugs might be bad and all, for sake of keeping the thread on-topic