Total Posts:25|Showing Posts:1-25
Jump to topic:

Should We Keep Retirees at Home?

Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2013 11:22:19 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
One of the many steps we can take to reduce the unemployment rate is stop the hiring of retirees and send home those who are currently employed. This way we can open many vacancies for those who are collecting unemployment checks. Surely, we will avoid many traffic accidents as a consequence as well.

I would like to know what you guys think about this idea.
imabench
Posts: 21,219
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2013 11:35:51 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:22:19 PM, Aned wrote:
One of the many steps we can take to reduce the unemployment rate is stop the hiring of retirees and send home those who are currently employed. This way we can open many vacancies for those who are collecting unemployment checks. Surely, we will avoid many traffic accidents as a consequence as well.

I would like to know what you guys think about this idea.

That is hands down, one of the dumbest ideas to fixing unemployment that ive ever heard.....
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"
Geogeer: "Nobody is dumb enough to become my protege."

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2013 11:38:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
What the hell? Fire a bunch of people to hire a bunch of other people?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Buddamoose
Posts: 19,448
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2013 11:39:37 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:38:17 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
What the hell? Fire a bunch of people to hire a bunch of other people?

Seems legit
"Reality is an illusion created due to a lack of alcohol"
-Airmax1227

"You were the moon all this time, and he was always there to make you shine."

"Was he the sun?"

"No honey, he was the darkness"

-Kazekirion
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/18/2013 11:44:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why should we allow some people, like retirees, to collect more than one paycheck while other people have no jobs?
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 12:01:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:44:59 PM, Aned wrote:
Why should we allow some people, like retirees, to collect more than one paycheck while other people have no jobs?

This isn't about unemployment then...
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 12:36:34 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:44:59 PM, Aned wrote:
Why should we allow some people, like retirees, to collect more than one paycheck while other people have no jobs?

Because clearly the retiree has proven that they are better at the job than this huge "other people", otherwise they wouldn't be were they are.

Employers can hire who they damn well please, how they damn well please, and when they damn well please.

Forcing the to not hire someone merely because they are already making money through another source is pure BS.

Using your logic, we should prevent people that already haves job from working another one, cause its "unfair" to those that don't have a job.

Life isn't fair. Get over it.

/rant
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 1:09:27 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Besides, by hiring retirees, employers are encourage to only hire part-timers, which affects many other employees who would like a full-time job.

A business that would have operated with 20 full-time workers, can simply hire 40 part-timers and mess many families up.
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 1:26:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/19/2013 1:09:27 AM, Aned wrote:
Besides, by hiring retirees, employers are encourage to only hire part-timers, which affects many other employees who would like a full-time job.

A business that would have operated with 20 full-time workers, can simply hire 40 part-timers and mess many families up.

So? That's their choice.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 4:32:21 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/19/2013 1:09:27 AM, Aned wrote:
Besides, by hiring retirees, employers are encourage to only hire part-timers, which affects many other employees who would like a full-time job.

A business that would have operated with 20 full-time workers, can simply hire 40 part-timers and mess many families up.

How do you figure?
I work in a restaurant, and the majority of the staff work between 10-20 hours, with a minority working 30+. There is no way every employee would be able to work 30 hours, as there aren't enough hours to go around. For example, on a Friday night, we have at least 12 people work, but on a Monday, there are only 7. The store NEEDS part-time workers because it needs more hands during only the busy times.

Also, more part-time workers decrease unemployment, because more people are working. So, this would be a good thing, in terms of your OP.

Also, in terms of your OP, to make the unemployment rate go down, we could also demand people stop looking for work. If they aren't looking for work, they are not considered part of the labor force, therefore, they are not unemployed (see: housewife).
My work here is, finally, done.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 6:40:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
Why dont we just let those who are unemployed not get paychecks, and let the retirees continue working? Why do you think retirees are inferior?
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 10:52:25 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You are partially right because there jobs out there. There are even immigrants with work visas employed in every sector. Just go and visit a hospital and you will see that at least 25 percent of the staff is from the Middle East on work visas. In California most of the agricultural workers come from Mexico. So, there are jobs.

What we should do is force people collecting unemployment to take whatever job is available, regardless of their professions. For example, a doctor who cannot find a job as a doctor will be forced to work in agriculture or anywhere else until he can find a job he likes better. if not, he will not be able to collect more unemployment checks.
tmar19652
Posts: 727
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 11:45:52 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/19/2013 10:52:25 AM, Aned wrote:
You are partially right because there jobs out there. There are even immigrants with work visas employed in every sector. Just go and visit a hospital and you will see that at least 25 percent of the staff is from the Middle East on work visas. In California most of the agricultural workers come from Mexico. So, there are jobs.

What we should do is force people collecting unemployment to take whatever job is available, regardless of their professions. For example, a doctor who cannot find a job as a doctor will be forced to work in agriculture or anywhere else until he can find a job he likes better. if not, he will not be able to collect more unemployment checks.

+1 underemployment is still employment.
"Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first." -Ronald Reagan

"The notion of political correctness declares certain topics, certain ex<x>pressions even certain gestures off-limits. What began as a crusade for civility has soured into a cause of conflict and even censorship." -George H.W. Bush
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 2:57:55 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/19/2013 1:20:24 PM, Aned wrote:
Underemployment is exploitation.

If there is no demand for your qualified job, how are you being exploited by taking a different one?
My work here is, finally, done.
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 6:10:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:44:59 PM, Aned wrote:
Why should we allow some people, like retirees, to collect more than one paycheck while other people have no jobs?

Can't tell if trolling....or just really, really stupid.
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
DanT
Posts: 5,693
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/19/2013 6:55:02 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:22:19 PM, Aned wrote:
One of the many steps we can take to reduce the unemployment rate is stop the hiring of retirees and send home those who are currently employed. This way we can open many vacancies for those who are collecting unemployment checks. Surely, we will avoid many traffic accidents as a consequence as well.

I would like to know what you guys think about this idea.

In my experience the biggest road block to finding a job is the lack of job experience and or KSAs. The best way to reduce unemployment is to eliminate the unconstitutional regulations of wages and contracts. This would allow people to work for starting wages more reflective of their KSAs, an would eliminate the harmful regulations which deters and/or prohibits employers from hiring interns.

Furthermore, under the current tax code the more employees an employer hires the more taxes they have to pay; this deters employers from hiring employees. The cost of hiring an employee is not only how much they pay the employee, but also how much the employee costs them in taxes, and how much it cost to train them.
"Chemical weapons are no different than any other types of weapons."~Lordknukle
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 12:54:33 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
You are absolutely right. We cannot penalize employers for hiring new employees. By penalizing them, employers will be forced to circumvent government regulations, resulting in employees being exploited. What is the reason for having a minimum salary if people cannot even work eight hours a day?
YYW
Posts: 36,289
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 1:04:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/18/2013 11:38:17 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
What the hell? Fire a bunch of people to hire a bunch of other people?
Tsar of DDO
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 2:12:53 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/19/2013 6:55:02 PM, DanT wrote:
At 1/18/2013 11:22:19 PM, Aned wrote:
One of the many steps we can take to reduce the unemployment rate is stop the hiring of retirees and send home those who are currently employed. This way we can open many vacancies for those who are collecting unemployment checks. Surely, we will avoid many traffic accidents as a consequence as well.

I would like to know what you guys think about this idea.

In my experience the biggest road block to finding a job is the lack of job experience and or KSAs. The best way to reduce unemployment is to eliminate the unconstitutional regulations of wages and contracts. This would allow people to work for starting wages more reflective of their KSAs, an would eliminate the harmful regulations which deters and/or prohibits employers from hiring interns.

Furthermore, under the current tax code the more employees an employer hires the more taxes they have to pay; this deters employers from hiring employees. The cost of hiring an employee is not only how much they pay the employee, but also how much the employee costs them in taxes, and how much it cost to train them.

It depends, actually. The only tax I know of that would have an effect via number of employees would be unemployment taxes. By this, I mean the difference in tax liability on spending $X on labor between Y employees vs. some other number.

However, hiring part-time employees can offer tax benefits, too. Wal-Mart does this exceptionally well. There is a business tax credit that was designed to hire people who are otherwise "unhireable", such as those on welfare, the elderly, and the disabled. Wal-Mart uses the first two often, it seems.
My work here is, finally, done.
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 4:10:11 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
There are many people who have been working for Wal-Mart for more than five years and can't get a full time job there, qualified people, not the elderly or the disable. Wal-Mart does the part-time stuff to avoid paying benefits such as vacation, certain insurances, etc.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 4:32:06 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/20/2013 4:10:11 AM, Aned wrote:
There are many people who have been working for Wal-Mart for more than five years and can't get a full time job there, qualified people, not the elderly or the disable. Wal-Mart does the part-time stuff to avoid paying benefits such as vacation, certain insurances, etc.

Your point?
My point was specifically about taxes.
My work here is, finally, done.
Aned
Posts: 53
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/20/2013 7:05:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
": Your point?
My point was specifically about taxes."

About taxes you are right. That is why a huge community of small businesses have been destroyed by big boxes like Wal-Mart, and that is why nowadays is almost impossible to open a new business that is not part of a big chain.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2013 1:26:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/20/2013 7:05:21 PM, Aned wrote:
": Your point?
My point was specifically about taxes."

About taxes you are right. That is why a huge community of small businesses have been destroyed by big boxes like Wal-Mart, and that is why nowadays is almost impossible to open a new business that is not part of a big chain.

Retail, probably. Price is king and service doesn't really matter too much.

Service, hardly. A small business that provides a service is able to adapt quicker, have lower overhead, and give better service than a big chain. In 2007, seven of every nine businesses in America were small businesses with no employees.

8/9 of businesses had less than 5 employees.
http://www.census.gov...
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/21/2013 1:55:08 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
62.3% (3,575,240) had 0-4 employees in 2010, with an additional 22,110,628 non-employer firms.

I would hardly say small business is dead.
http://www.census.gov...
http://www.census.gov...
My work here is, finally, done.