Unemployment. Honest debate.

[paintpooper]

Reasons for unemployment.

Outsourcing.

Mechanization of remedial tasks.

Money.

Just flat out not enough jobs?

When you have a machine that takes 100 jobs, what 100 jobs get created? See my point? With population still rising, is this not a significant issue to be addressed?

We are such a service industry and without people to pay or want those services won't that also cause decline in employment as well?

I just want clean honest debate on the causes and fixes for unemployment, as it seems to be the major issue in the US today. At least the major issue in the majority of the public's eyes.

[Minimalist]

Add in "Politics."

[The Grand Nudger]

Until we can stretch on the idea of "the common good" there won't be any easy fixes. We have plenty of infrastructure to replace and/or repair at the moment. I know that there is a plan in place, but it seems to be lacking in execution. We also have plenty of room for research associates and competent teachers/students.

Physical infrastructure and education, surely two areas where any amount of borrowing is likely to pay dividends. If we're going to borrow, why not borrow for these? If we're not going to borrow, why not cut fundings to other programs with the express intention and guarantee of those funds going into these two areas? Rather than searching for top down fixes to problems we could crowd-source (bottom-up) from our newly invigorated pool of academia, while leveraging the improvements to infrastructure to realize their innovations.. Wouldn't this foster the generation of wealth no matter how we went about it?

[Ace Otana]

Well over here in my town, shops and the like get an average of around 180 CV's(resumes) per week, that tells me there ain't enough work around. Industries have to make cuts because of the economy, people have less money on them as bills increase, and so less money on other things. Companies notice that it's items are going unsold and notice there are serious reductions on sale. Profits fall. Redundancies will reduce losses by reducing the company's bill to maintain it's services. Redundancies increase unemployment, increased unemployment means more people on the doll, more on the doll means the government has to pay out more. The government continues to bring in foreigners, foreigners go on doll, doll bill increases. The level of unemployed goes up further.
Something like that I fink.

[Minimalist]

Actually, companies are rolling in cash but would rather spend it to influence elections and bribe lawmakers than hire people.

Corporate profits have never been higher and tax rates on the rich/business cocksuckers have never been lower.

Still, they eliminate jobs and then have their republicolibertarianazi hacks "blame" Obama.

[The Grand Nudger]

Very classy new avatar btw Min, big fan.

[Ace Otana]

I've never liked or trusted the rich.

[Minimalist]

Very classy new avatar btw Min, big fan.

All hail, Min!


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Min_%28god%29.


(More than you'll ever need to know about the only god worth worshiping. )

[paintpooper]

I'm just blown away how people can't see the truth. But then again... I'm on an atheist forum, most people here seek truth, hence the reason for being here.

Our voting system needs to be changed. Electoral college eliminated. But really are politics the biggest issue? I don't think so. I think the hindrance of technology and adhering to old
ways of doing things are what is slowing us down.
Why 5 day work weeks?
Why 8 hours a day?

Example. All hypothetically but I think truth is in it.

It takes one man 1 hour to build 1 toy car.
It takes one machine 1 hour to build 10 toy cars.

If you were meeting production goals at 1 toy car an hour, once you implement machines, you have to scale back your whole operation.
It now only takes 1 machine to do the jobs of 10 men. So 10 men lose their jobs. Yet the production remains the same.

Take this theory and apply to all sorts of jobs and tasks, and you end up with a lot of people being replaced. YET all production remains the same. So does that not just generally mean... we the people just basically have to work less now... with the advancement of technology we as humans have to work less to provide us with the same quality of life.

Everyone that works 8 hours a day now only works 4, so one job turns into 2... Money issues aside because with this logic, yes all salaries would be 1/2. But I don't think money in general is out biggest issue because money is tangible.
Does this not make sense in a way? I don't want bashing just honest criticism or agreement.

[downbeatplumb]

So would the government top up the wages to a living standard?
I certainly could not survive on 1/2 of my wages without help.