80% of people on Autism spectrum are unemployed?

Post Reply New Topic

Though I don't believe in religion, I sometimes find nondenominational religious groups to be entities which provide unconditional support and caring for people.

probably because it's part of their teachings and they feel it their duty. It's a shame most people only find the need to do the right thing if they can be lead to have beleif in a threat of eternal damnation.

Doesn't seem to be the case for most of them. They are taught to be kind to people and help those in need.

I see this discussion has strayed some distance from the original subject line. I have something to add, but I'm not willing to read all 7 pages of replies. I'm sorry if this is not cool, just skip my post if it offends you.

I was wondering the same thing, but I also wanted to say that the study populations almost certainly don't include lots of autistic people who are working but have never been diagnosed. So there is a selection bias in favor of more severely disabled cases, and these would naturally have a higher percentage of unemployment.

You have to remember its a wide spectrum. The lower functioning people have an even harder time finding work, imagine working if you were non-verbal. And there is still a lot of workplace discrimination I'm afraid.

No doubt that's true.

There's lots of discrimination.

It's because people aren't educated about the nature of Asperger's/autism. There's this assumption that an Aspergian might fly off the handle and shoot up the place. Human Resource departments everywhere are very leery of at least slight abnormality in people.

Quite, no one take me seriously at work because I don't dress anything up and say it how it is. Then what i warn them of happens, but still they don't take any notice of me.

Also worth noting:

Governments would rather put people on a pension than actually provide assistance at the workplace, especially when said assistance ends up costing more money anyway (like a personal nurse).

I could probably work if I had a personal nurse.

(It's easier just getting us out of the way and giving some pocket change to muddle through life and not be too much of a bother.)

Last edited by Dillogic on 30 Aug 2015, 11:03 am, edited 1 time in total.

the problem is that the employer chooses who to employ, and equality reulations aside when an employer has 10+ candidates available it's not like they can be accused of discrimination if they choose the, ahem most qualified person or the person they feel is best suited to the job.

Usually, government positions have a disability quota that they fill. Of course, it's usually "menial", but they do offer jobs to the disabled if they're functional enough without too much support. This is here in Oz, though.

They don't really fill them up that much either going by conversations I've had.

The only way to solve the problem is to mandate that all companies over a certain size have to employ people with dissabilities.

Seems fair, especially when they have "race" and "sex" based ones in certain places.

Those with disabilities need it the most out of everyone.

The solution is more welfare and basic income for people on the spectrum who can't get work, only then they will start making employing aspies a priority. 80% unemployment is a crisis, how are we all surviving? We probably will need a guaranteed basic income eventually with automation, what is going to happen when there is 75% unemployment because machines can do everything cheaper and more efficient than the individual worker? In theory everything would be cheaper since the costs of production would be less but I'm not sure I trust big business do you? Automation could free or enslave us depending on the steps we take to rectify it's problems.

the green party in the UK want to introduce a basic income for everyone to solve once and for all the mirad of benefits that all affect each other and get very complicated particularly for dissabled people.

People tend to oppose automation because they feel it will cost jobs and in our current backward society you have to have money to survive. When I suggested at work that we output sheet metal flat patterns from our CAD software for the metal shop to use instead of the metal shop supervisor having to manually create drawings of flat profiles from our folded drawings I was told by one collegue that I was risking someones job.

The reality is that having to work for money is an excuse for rish people to have more than they need and anyone not wanting to be their slave having their lifeline cut. indeed if money was no object and we could all live in a free and equal society we could work towards mechanization and quality of life.

I think this idea is pretty good, even if a bit radical. You hear different terms used for it though. I first found out about the idea when I had an idea for a "citizens income" in the shower (where all good ideas happen), and found that someone was already campaigning for such (http://www.citizensincome.org/), later finding that people also refer to the idea as a "basic income" or a "universal income".

One of the strengths in this is that it would make entrepreneurship much more practical to pursue, allowing us greater levels of innovation. I always feel a bit depressed when watching a biopic of some influential person that starts off showing them as an "underdog" who just happens to be studying at Oxford or Cambridge and come from a well to do (read rich) family. We waste soo much talent as a society by having unequal access to opportunity.

and our society is run by the rich. I'm rather interested in the outcome of our labour party leader election. There is one very popular and left wing candidate called Jeremy corbyn and 3 other candidates who are right wingers that would not be taken seriously in the right wing party as they are not nasty enough.