Employers not hiring the unemployed!

[trade2live]

There is affirmative action for minorities and quotas for women.
I would force large employers to hire a quota of unemployed people and long term unemployed people.

 

[bigarrow]

Quote from joshuabelanger:

It is very unfair on the side of those people who are unemployed. They do need jobs as well. It doesn't mean that if these people don't have any steady work, they are not capable for working on the company. They should give chances for these people.

You can give them a chance if you want as for me I'll continue doing what works. It's taken me years to get my business where it is easy and fun and profitable and I dont have to work long hours and I take lots of time off, with new and inexperienced workers and subcontractors I can't do that.

 

[Sandybestdog]

Quote from failed_trad3r:
It doesnt even make sense I agree. Because... drumroll... taxes are lower than they used to be and so are regulations. And the rich have quadrupled their average income in 40 years, it doesn't seem like they got held back by regulations and taxes?

Exactly. Total government revenue as a % of GDP is at very low levels already. High taxes is not the problem. I paid more taxes this year and last than I ever have. Right now I am buying a house, not worried about how much I'm paying in taxes. Why? Cause I'm also making more money than I ever have. Taxes are the least of my concern. At least for now anyways.

The regulation line is a classic Republican one liner. Just like how the Democrats always use the "special interests and corporations controlling Washington" and "cutting tax loop holes" line. Nobody ever explains exactly which regulation or tax loop hole they want to get rid of. I had a very small business in the local mall a few years ago. Let me see, I had to get a business license. Cost $75 I think and took about an hour. I had to get a sales tax license. I think I did all that online and even paid it automatically. Hardly took any time. Had to buy a small insurance policy. Cost a couple hundred and maybe took a half an hour. I can't think of any other regulations I had to go through. Didn't seem too much to ask to me. I'm all ears though.

 

[LeeD]

Quote from Sandybestdog:

Nobody ever explains exactly which regulation or tax loop hole they want to get rid of. I had a very small business in the local mall a few years ago. Let me see, I had to get a business license. Cost $75 I think and took about an hour. I had to get a sales tax license. I think I did all that online and even paid it automatically. Hardly took any time. Had to buy a small insurance policy. Cost a couple hundred and maybe took a half an hour. I can't think of any other regulations I had to go through. Didn't seem too much to ask to me. I'm all ears though.

My guess is they are talking of:
1) Qualifications required to perform particular jobs. It's bizzare but to write a High Frequency Trading platform with Direct Market Access you don't need any specific qualifications but to paint someone's house you need to be certified. So do you if you want to do babysitting more than a few hours per week.
2) What needs to be done in order to hire an employee. With a contractor you just need a contract and you pay what's in the contract. With an employee you may need to check their right to work in the country, get their social security number, issue payslips, pay employer's social security withholding tax (which is payed on top of gross salary/wage), deduct employee's personal income tax etc...

 

[zdreg]

Quote from LeeD:

My guess is they are talking of:
1) Qualifications required to perform particular jobs. It's bizzare but to write a High Frequency Trading platform with Direct Market Access you don't need any specific qualifications but to paint someone's house you need to be certified. So do you if you want to do babysitting more than a few hours per week.
2) What needs to be done in order to hire an employee. With a contractor you just need a contract and you pay what's in the contract. With an employee you may need to check their right to work in the country, get their social security number, issue payslips, pay employer's social security withholding tax (which is payed on top of gross salary/wage), deduct employee's personal income tax etc...

that is correct. you are shifting the burden on to the contractor ie temp agency. there will be an expense for shifting.it may or may not be worth the extra expense. if u do it with an individual who does not pay his taxes the government will reclassify him as your employee. the government in america would like to classify everybody in america as an employee not as an independent contractor to make it easier to collect taxes.
not as easy as u make it sound

as to pt. 1 above it is not bizarre at all. professional painters have been around for a long time and look to restrict the entry of new painters. they contribute to friendly legislators who claim to protect the public against unscrupulous painters by creating requirements and licensing.

 

[flipside21]

with an individual who does not pay his taxes the government will reclassify him as your employee. the government in america would like to classify everybody in america as an employee not as an independent contractor to make it easier to collect taxes.

There are a number of businesses that have independent contractors that the government wants to reclassify as employees. Nail salons, construction, and strip clubs come to mind. A major reclassification of hundreds of independent contractors to employees would bankrupt any business. Really the potential liability out there is such that any of those businesses have a huge off balance sheet liability that makes the business have negative worth, such as toxic land that EPA requires millions of dollars in clean up expenses.

 

[ReEmployAmerica]

I hate to be a spammer, but at the same time, this is totally on target. We just created the first job search website that will ban all ads that discriminate against the unemployed - AND - we encourage companies to hire the unemployed by giving them a spotlight. We just "opened our doors" today and we're working on press & social media & all the stuff you have to do -- but I thought you guys might be interested in knowing that at least someone is trying to do something until Legislation is passed banning these ads on a Federal level!

 

[S2007S]

I know a lot of people who have jobs and maybe work 4-5 hours out of the 8 or so hours they are suppose to, they are either taking a cigarette break, texting or updating their facebook status, trust me I hear the stories about what goes on behind people and their personal little cubicles! Some of these workers are 10X lazier than the guy who is actually looking for a job right this second.

 

[S2007S]

Quote from siafx:

I've hired both types too. My experience was the opposite of yours. Couch guy is usually burdened with rest-fatigue and a large sense of entitlement.

Would disagree with that, I see people in the workforce today still anticipating their pay raises as if they are of value to the company that can go out and probably hire someone for 1/2 the damn wages. This country needs a wake up call, anyone can be replaced at anytime whether its a guy who has been out of work for 18 months or a college graduate just entering the workforce!

Here is an example, I know someone who is working PR for a pharmaceutical company, well every year they give her a salary increase, I believe this is her 4th or 5th year there and every year she gets a $10,000 increase in wages, I said to her you are extremely lucky to see those type of wage increases in today's economy, I believe now she is making around 65-70k a year, I told her they could probably hire someone just as good as you for $20-$30k cheaper, fresh out of college. She also believes the $10,000 wage increase every year is going to stick, I said I don't think it will, you will either be let go by then and replaced or they will give the normal 2-3% increase in wage to match inflation!

 

[zdreg]

Quote from peilthetraveler:

They were signing up to stop taxes on the internet and I dont remember what the other two were for, but I know it was for something good.

Usually these people try to get so many hundred thousands of signatures just to get it on the ballot so we can vote on it when voting season comes along. So signing is no big deal...because it doesnt pass until the people vote.

"So signing is no big deal...because it doesnt pass until the people vote.'

it is a big deal.

I have heard and don't like that argument to sign to give it a chance.
if I don't believe it, it doesn't receive my signature. this fairness argument is fallacious. get enough people who believe in it to sign.

as to the other two they can't be so great because you would not receive that seemly high payment if the proposals were non- controversial. the devil is in the details.