Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Proposes Adding ‘Unemployed’ to Protected Status
New York Times ^ | September 26, 2011 | ROBERT PEAR

Posted on 09/26/2011 11:29:43 AM PDT by reaganaut1

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-164 next last
To: reaganaut1

He must be thinking about his next job.


21 posted on 09/26/2011 11:45:16 AM PDT by Huskrrrr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Relatively few long-term unemployed have been diligently and energetically seeking employment during the whole time. Most have gone on “funemployment” for a while, and afterward, or perhaps when the benefits were drying up, decided to seriously pursue a new position.

This is just my opinion, as formed from numerous news stories. YMMV.


22 posted on 09/26/2011 11:45:35 AM PDT by MortMan (What disease did cured ham used to have?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WOBBLY BOB

lmfao


23 posted on 09/26/2011 11:45:53 AM PDT by AAABEST (Et lux in tenebris lucet: et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: lowbridge

What a joke Maobama is.


24 posted on 09/26/2011 11:46:43 AM PDT by GlockThe Vote (The Obama Adminstration: The flash mob who wonÂ’t leave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
native-born, employed, non-obese, non-union, straight, White males

Damn. Good thing I'm fat then.

25 posted on 09/26/2011 11:46:52 AM PDT by RockinRight (If everyone wants to ride in the wagon, then who is pulling it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
The reason businesses like to hire people who are already employed is the same reason women like to date men already in a relationship.

Should Uncle 0bamao make THAT illegal discrimination also?

26 posted on 09/26/2011 11:47:42 AM PDT by allmendream (Tea Party did not send the GOP to D.C. to negotiate the terms of our surrender to socialism.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: digger48

Oh there you go again. Ruining my fantasy.


27 posted on 09/26/2011 11:48:42 AM PDT by mc5cents
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
This is asinine. Businesses simply will not admit that a person's being unemployed is the reason an applicant wasn't hired. Also, businesses simply will stop posting “unemployed need not apply”. (I always thought it was stupid for companies to write that because it begged someone to shout, “discrimination!”)

Now that Obama et al are labeling unemployed people as potential victims, the unemployed are further stigmatized. Way to go, Obama!

28 posted on 09/26/2011 11:48:55 AM PDT by utahagen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GoodDay
As a number of economists have shown, when unemployment benefits are extended, someone who has lost a job -- e.g., an engineer -- is further incentivized to remain unemployed until he has found another engineering job.

Let's think this one through for a moment. An AVERAGE engineer makes around 70-90K/yr, or $1,350-$1,750/week before taxes. You are stating, as fact - that he is going to feed his family, make his house payment, provide medical care, pay his utilties, make his car payments on $346/week (maximum unemployment in many states)?

I think you are horribily mistaken - what he will do is lose his house, lose his car, lose his retirement and savings and declare bankdruptcy and hopefully not lose his marriage and self-respect. Anyway you look at it; his life's savings, his retirement, his 401K is gone and likely will never come back in any meaningful way.

Now, a person making ~$20K/yr is in a much better position to economize and survive off welfare benefits.

29 posted on 09/26/2011 11:51:01 AM PDT by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: mc5cents

I remember on a WOF show long time ago, a guy won a ‘Trip to San Francisco’......He was from San Francisco...........


30 posted on 09/26/2011 11:53:04 AM PDT by Red Badger ("Treason doth never prosper.... What's the reason? Why if it prosper, none dare call it treason.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

31 posted on 09/26/2011 11:53:14 AM PDT by workerbee (We're not scared, Maobama -- we're pissed off!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
"...Civil Rights Act outlaws employment practices that have “a disparate impact on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin,”

The Civil Right Act over looks the need to be qualified for the job first. Instead Washington, D.C. and government buildings across the nation are filled with un-qualified people who are there because of the color of their skin and little else.

With Obama's back door amnesty program taking jobs from returning veterans, some with disability problems, the jobs market is crowded and there will be more retired Military this next year needing jobs. Is unemployment becoming the new entitlement?

32 posted on 09/26/2011 11:53:24 AM PDT by yoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MindBender26
"The only people in America that do NOT belong to an Obama “Protected Class” are native-born, employed, non-obese, non-union, straight, White males."

Well done. Add tall. ;-)


33 posted on 09/26/2011 11:54:20 AM PDT by familyop (Rand fabricated "Galt." She wouldn't like a real engineer or his technician friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: GoodDay

Interesting point.

Another part of the problem, however, is pay: If an engineer making $84,000 a year is laid off and then gets $523 a week in UE benefits, and can only find jobs paying $9.40 an hour, he’s better off not taking the job.

Now, the problem of high paying jobs being harder to get over time is a seperate issue, but as far as the UE benefits issue is concerned, the above scenario keeps a lot of people on the dole.


34 posted on 09/26/2011 11:54:28 AM PDT by RockinRight (If everyone wants to ride in the wagon, then who is pulling it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1
This should be called "The Permanent Proletariat Act"

If you aren't employed, you better find a job FAST if this thing gets legs or you will NEVER work again.

It's also going to promote massive lies and cheating of the employment process.

Sole proprietorships and megacorps will be the final types of businesses left.

35 posted on 09/26/2011 11:56:17 AM PDT by Centurion2000 (Watch what people DO, not what they say.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Unfortunately, refusing to hire or even just interview someone who has been out of work for an extended period of time, in the economy, is as stupid, short sighted and ignorant as is refusing to do so because of their color or religion, etc.


36 posted on 09/26/2011 11:57:10 AM PDT by dsthompson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

RE: Under the proposal, it would be “an unlawful employment practice” if a business with 15 or more employees refused to hire a person “because of the individual’s status as unemployed.”

_____________________________________________________________________________

Why did they choose the number 15? What’s the significance of this?


37 posted on 09/26/2011 11:58:41 AM PDT by SeekAndFind (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
How about levying a tax on tax free municipal bonds?

He had better not as that is about the only investment that I have that is in the black.

38 posted on 09/26/2011 11:59:20 AM PDT by crusty old prospector
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

Please tell me this is The Onion and not the NYT.


39 posted on 09/26/2011 11:59:48 AM PDT by OCCASparky (Steely-eyed killer of the deep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reaganaut1

The Democrats are attempting to create another class of voters who are permanently dependent upon government spending and will therefore reliably vote Democrat.


40 posted on 09/26/2011 12:00:53 PM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-164 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson