Oh look, the Paper of Record has employed another typist to explain about bootstraps and whatnot, and give us the cold hard truth about why we are all losers who do not have jobs. Is it because of structural unemployment, or maybe something to do with
There may be some of that, among the larger corporations, but I&#039;m pretty sure that even the most rabidly Republican small-biz owners would be happy to add employees <i>if there was any fucking demand to justify it.</i>
In fact, we&#039;ve seen examples of Republican small business owners &quot;building&quot; their businesses and adding employees because of increasing demand -- provided by the fucking government.
<blockquote>And then, of course, as has been mentioned, it&#039;s pretty hard for an &quot;over-qualified&quot; person to obtain one of these minimum wage jobs. </blockquote>
QFT. Much harder than I ever would&#039;ve believed.
Well, no, because while it is legal to pay someone to work for less than the maximum unemployment benefit the law allows, if you do so, <em>their</em> maximum benefit will be less than the maximum possible - in particular, less than their wage at termination.
I know the worst for my wife when she was in this shitty job market recently was the realization that many of the job postings were never <em>intended</em> to be filled, they were just fishing for resumes, perhaps to blacklist people for having been unemployed too long, perhaps with the intention of building up a pool of potential applicants if they ever in the future actually <em>wanted</em> to hire someone, or perhaps just to sell off an email list, who knows?
The whole piece makes no sense at all, until you realize the author is a professor at the Chicago School of Economics, at which point it&#039;s entirely logical that it&#039;s all nonsense.
<blockquote> Much to the Prince&#039;s frustration, General Dannatt announced in May last year that it would be too risky, fearing the Prince and his comrades in the Household Cavalry would become top priority targets for insurgents.</blockquote> I used to have household cavalry, but converted them to household infantry in 1918, after World War I demonstrated that horse-mounted soldiers were useless in modern warfare.
Here&#039;s to Prince Harry! Leave him alone, you terrorist bastards! He never hurt anybody.* Nor did anybody else in his unit, since they spend all their time polishing his brass, shining his boots, preparing his afternoon tea, and protecting him. _____________________ *Except for all the Brits who pay the taxes to support his and his family&#039;s lifelong luxury vacations.
While I was reading that I kept expecting an unhappy ending like the police shot everyone or they were all fired and sent to Texas. Thanks for an uplifting story for a change.
They have as much charisma as Mitt Romney, so sure, why not?
Dropping like flies... or like bowling balls. Thud!
There may be some of that, among the larger corporations, but I&#039;m pretty sure that even the most rabidly Republican small-biz owners would be happy to add employees <i>if there was any fucking demand to justify it.</i>
In fact, we&#039;ve seen examples of Republican small business owners &quot;building&quot; their businesses and adding employees because of increasing demand -- provided by the fucking government.
Well, you will eventually get SS and Medicare out of it. *choke* *hahaha*
Actually, you might, but it&#039;s gonna take years of fighting these motherfuckers off.
Wasn&#039;t goose fat just outlawed in California?
<blockquote>And then, of course, as has been mentioned, it&#039;s pretty hard for an &quot;over-qualified&quot; person to obtain one of these minimum wage jobs. </blockquote>
QFT. Much harder than I ever would&#039;ve believed.
Well, no, because while it is legal to pay someone to work for less than the maximum unemployment benefit the law allows, if you do so, <em>their</em> maximum benefit will be less than the maximum possible - in particular, less than their wage at termination.
I know the worst for my wife when she was in this shitty job market recently was the realization that many of the job postings were never <em>intended</em> to be filled, they were just fishing for resumes, perhaps to blacklist people for having been unemployed too long, perhaps with the intention of building up a pool of potential applicants if they ever in the future actually <em>wanted</em> to hire someone, or perhaps just to sell off an email list, who knows?
Maybe it&#039;s because she wasn&#039;t high enough to forget?
Best thing I&#039;ve seen all day.
The whole piece makes no sense at all, until you realize the author is a professor at the Chicago School of Economics, at which point it&#039;s entirely logical that it&#039;s all nonsense.
Um, wut?
<blockquote> Much to the Prince&#039;s frustration, General Dannatt announced in May last year that it would be too risky, fearing the Prince and his comrades in the Household Cavalry would become top priority targets for insurgents.</blockquote> I used to have household cavalry, but converted them to household infantry in 1918, after World War I demonstrated that horse-mounted soldiers were useless in modern warfare.
Here&#039;s to Prince Harry! Leave him alone, you terrorist bastards! He never hurt anybody.* Nor did anybody else in his unit, since they spend all their time polishing his brass, shining his boots, preparing his afternoon tea, and protecting him. _____________________ *Except for all the Brits who pay the taxes to support his and his family&#039;s lifelong luxury vacations.
I&#039;m surprised to see him write something that&#039;s actually readable like this.
No, thank you :)
Really cool shot, almost looks like it&#039;s been tiled until you look really carefully.
While I was reading that I kept expecting an unhappy ending like the police shot everyone or they were all fired and sent to Texas. Thanks for an uplifting story for a change.