Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Companies spend on equipment, not workers

Page 2 of 2 [ 22 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Previous topic | Next topic

aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,933

10 Jun 2011, 10:42 pm

pandabear wrote:
The jobs really aren't needed any longer. In the future, fewer and fewer people will be required to work in order to produce all that we need.

So, what to do about it? Just let people kill themselves with stress?

A better solution ought to present itself, other than the standard "Duh...we need to raise the retirement age!"


As has been done before, I imagine when things get bad enough and the "D" word comes up again, there will be a massive stimulus plan to rebuild the infrastructure of the country and generate additional jobs. And chances are more money will be borrowed as long as no one is willing to pay for it.

Quote:
“We already have the lowest total taxes (excise and gas consumption) of any country in the industrialized world, but not all of those funds flow into road and infrastructure improvements. We have to learn that we can’t continue to have everything and pay for nothing,” said Roth.


http://www.areadevelopment.com/StudiesResearchPapers/6-10-2011/infrastructure-strategic-priority-US-competitiveness-0000998.shtm



psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

10 Jun 2011, 10:57 pm

pandabear wrote:
But, if we really don't need the jobs, then we really don't need them.

The best solution would be earlier retirement, so that the older workers can get out of the way and enjoy themselves for a bit before they kick the bucket.

That would make sense if unemployment were uniform.

In fact, unemployment is low at the top and bottom ends of the skill spectrum, and high in between. The economy does need more high skilled and low skilled workers, but those aren't the kind of workers it has.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

12 Jun 2011, 8:37 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
Nope, it is cheaper for them to just dump their employees onto medicare and pay the fine, rather than deal with the nightmare of red tape. Fact of the matter is that Obamascam is making a lot of employers unwilling to really hire on part-time work either.


:roll: More Glenn Beck rubbish? :roll:



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

12 Jun 2011, 9:09 pm

pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Nope, it is cheaper for them to just dump their employees onto medicare and pay the fine, rather than deal with the nightmare of red tape. Fact of the matter is that Obamascam is making a lot of employers unwilling to really hire on part-time work either.


:roll: More Glenn Beck rubbish? :roll:


It is simple facts, you know this Obamacare affects part time workers as well.



pandabear
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Aug 2007
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,402

12 Jun 2011, 9:24 pm

Inuyasha wrote:
pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Nope, it is cheaper for them to just dump their employees onto medicare and pay the fine, rather than deal with the nightmare of red tape. Fact of the matter is that Obamascam is making a lot of employers unwilling to really hire on part-time work either.


:roll: More Glenn Beck rubbish? :roll:


It is simple facts, you know this Obamacare affects part time workers as well.


Well, good.



psychohist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,623
Location: Somerville, MA, USA

12 Jun 2011, 9:41 pm

pandabear wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
It is simple facts, you know this Obamacare affects part time workers as well.

Well, good.

Good that it puts them out of work?