Ending poverty, especially extreme poverty

  • Thread starter Thread starter Robert_Sock
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not those who are labeled discouraged workers. People do get laid off and never find another job again. Age discrimination is rampant in tech, doesn’t matter the skillset.

It also assumes that there are jobs in those fields - with other companies laying off people, that’s not happening either.
I am not ignorant of the issue; but there are more hiring now than there are companies laying off. Unemployment figures according to the governement are at 4.7%; yes, I know how they arrive at the figures and the real nyumbers are higher. Maybe it is time to learn something new. I did that.
And also assumes nobody is discriminating against people for being out of work. There are recruiters who hype “passive candidates” (who have jobs) as “the best of the best” - when in reality, they’re just lucky to be employed and haven’t been laid off yet.
Oh please. The vast majority of those employed are not going to be unemployed shortly.
What about what really happens in the job market? Someone gets laid off. They go back to school and retool, learn new skills. Then they apply and get rejected for not having experience in the new field. So, what did they do wrong?
What about all who do that and are hired? Your glass is (more than) half empty.
We lost millions of middle class level jobs and above - high paying jobs. In the “wreckovery” we have gained back half of those jobs, and the other half are poor paying jobs that don’t give people the chance to move up.

What do you think happened to those who used to be middle class and couldn’t find a middle class job? They’re either doing these low paying jobs despite having great skill sets because jobs at their level do not exist, or they’re discouraged workers.

So, don’t go around acting like the workers are to blame for things, when in reality, the workers bear the disproportionate share of responsibility but no share in the rewards.
If their attitudes have gone into the toilet, I have not flushed. As someone said: “If you think you can, or you think you can’t, you are right.”

While you are at it, what about those with middle class jobs who had more expensive houses than they needed; who then took out cash through re-mortgaging their property (with many doing that more than once) and then lost both job and house in the crash? I am supposed to be a bleeding heart for their total lack of common sense? The US is notorious for being among the poorest of savers.

I have chosen to not be a victim. Those who see themselves as victims will prove their thought patterns. You want to sing the blues to me, well, the head ain’t listening. My dad had a severe stroke when I was in the 6th grade, and my mother, who graduated from high school in a class of 5 - she and four other students - figured out pretty quickly that she was no longer going to be a stay-at-home mom. She had several jobs, none of which were a whole lot above minimum wage until she found clerk work for a company which sold mattresses.

Yet I and my 3 younger siblings continued on through Catholic grade and high school, and all four of us graduated from college (3 of them went through state college); three of us have received advanced degrees. And we all, as kids, had multiple jobs. Our money went to the common needs of clothing ans tuition.

In short, we all busted our (backsides). No one was a quitter; no one was a victim, and no one had anything handed to us.

We all have had to scramble at various times; all of us have had to learn new skills at various points in our adult lives.

Yes, people have been handed the short end of the stick. Some make it, and some don’t; and of those who don’t, attitude and willingness to hustle seems to be a large part of the matter. So also are choices along the way, while they are employed.

Right now we are getting reports of people in a city where the minimum wage has been raised to $15/hour asking their employer to cut back their hours - why? Because they will lose their government subsidies. Frankly, if I was tgheir employer, I would tell them they were hired for a full time job; and if they were not willing to work full time, I would gladly find someone to replace them, That request is too often indicative of an employee who shows up, puts in the minimum necessary to not be sent packing, then goes home and (complains) about how unfair life is. I have less than no patience with that attitude.

Frankly, if I were completely on the outs job wise, I would look for an entry level job and let the interviewer know that I wanted the job because I intended to move up the chain of command, and I was bringing a “canbd do” attitude to work.

One of my son-in-laws has a degree in manufacturing engineering, and when he graduated, he couldn’t even buiy an interview. He finally was flown down to Texas tgo interview with Lockheed Martin (which tells me that his schooling record and related issues caught someone’s eye). Bottom line, Lockheed did not get the contract, and he did not get hired. He is now a prison guard in the state prison system, has made temporary sergeant, will make sergeant, and is already setting a goal to be a lieutenant. That may not have much to do with his schooling, but he has a “can-do” attitude. He has never whined about how unfair life is. He simply hitched up his pants and got on with it.
 
Hello?

Bill Gates’s personal holdings plus the shares controlled by the foundation he controls = the largest shareholder.

It is control over the shares that matter, not ownership of shares. Ballmer personally owns more than Bill Gates own shares. Same thing as Nadella. But Gates’ personal plus foundation shares are more than either.
Shareholders can vote for the Board of Directors. Beyond that they have almost no (name removed by moderator)ut whatsoever in the operations of the business.

How much stock Bill owns is irrelevant to the operations of the business, other than voting for directors. That is not to say that this has no meaning; but it is twice removed from operations. Your presumptions do not correspond with the reality of day-to-day operations,including hiring and firing.
 
I am not ignorant of the issue; but there are more hiring now than there are companies laying off. Unemployment figures according to the governement are at 4.7%; yes, I know how they arrive at the figures and the real nyumbers are higher. Maybe it is time to learn something new. I did that.
The 4.7 percent figure is a scam. It does not take into account discouraged workers who can’t find work. It does not take into account underemployed people.

2008 crash, millions of jobs lost. 100% were high paying jobs. In this “wreckovery” only half created were high paying jobs. What do you think happened to all those who were in high paying jobs, and add to that recent grads? That’s right, they’re flipping burgers making minimum wage. 4.7% is a scam.
Oh please. The vast majority of those employed are not going to be unemployed shortly.
Your comment does not address my comment about age discrimination and is irrelevant.

Merely being dismissive does not constitute rational debate.
What about all who do that and are hired? Your glass is (more than) half empty.
HOW when they have no experience?

They get rejected for not having experience? How do get around that catch-22 - no job, because of no experience, no experience because of no job. Especially when experience is only counted if one actually did the work and held the job title.
As someone said: “If you think you can, or you think you can’t, you are right.”
New age “law of attraction” being spouted here. May I recommend the Catholic faith instead?.
While you are at it, what about those with middle class jobs who had more expensive houses than they needed; who then took out cash through re-mortgaging their property (with many doing that more than once) and then lost both job and house in the crash? I am supposed to be a bleeding heart for their total lack of common sense? The US is notorious for being among the poorest of savers.
Yes, there are irresponsible people.

But take a look at bankruptcy statistics. Half of filings are those who had medical debts while having insurance. TyranniCare’s high deductibles/copays + bad luck = OOPS BANKRUPTCY.

Add to the fact that the cost of living for ordinary things keeps going up, while wages stagnated for over 15-20 years. People make due by borrowing, unfortunately, or else they lose everything.
In short, we all busted our (backsides).
And had luck.
Frankly, if I were completely on the outs job wise, I would look for an entry level job and let the interviewer know that I wanted the job because I intended to move up the chain of command, and I was bringing a “canbd do” attitude to work.
And if you don’t have experience, that “entry level job” you will not get because you’ll be rejected for not having experience. You won’t even have the chance to get the interview in the first place, and cover letter will be unread.

There are no entry level jobs that require no experience, except for sales.

Until you realize this in the job market, you have a very unrealistic view of the job market.
 
Shareholders can vote for the Board of Directors. Beyond that they have almost no (name removed by moderator)ut whatsoever in the operations of the business.

How much stock Bill owns is irrelevant to the operations of the business, other than voting for directors. That is not to say that this has no meaning; but it is twice removed from operations. Your presumptions do not correspond with the reality of day-to-day operations,including hiring and firing.
If you think Billy boy has zero (name removed by moderator)ut on Microsoft’s operations, that does not reflect reality.

M$ continues his way of thinking, so he has his clones in upper management.
 
Hello?

Bill Gates’s personal holdings plus the shares controlled by the foundation he controls = the largest shareholder.

It is control over the shares that matter, not ownership of shares. Ballmer personally owns more than Bill Gates own shares. Same thing as Nadella. But Gates’ personal plus foundation shares are more than either.
I found a current source, Steve divested his ownership and Gates in #5

Shares Holder
514,091,317 Vanguard Group, Inc. (The)
327,458,996 Capital World Investors
217,808,892 State Street Corporation
205,994,090 BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, N.A.
190,992,934 GATES WILLIAM H III
178,592,140 Price (T.Rowe) Associates Inc
 
Bill and Melinda Gates may be anti-religious in many respects, but when it comes to charity, they are Christ-like!
 
Bill and Melinda Gates may be anti-religious in many respects, but when it comes to charity, they are Christ-like!
No, they’re not.

Christ doesn’t lay off people here in the USA to fund charitable stuff overseas. Increasing poverty here to decrease it elsewhere is not Christ-like!
 
If you think Billy boy has zero (name removed by moderator)ut on Microsoft’s operations, that does not reflect reality.

M$ continues his way of thinking, so he has his clones in upper management.
Oh! I am truly shocked! To think that a successful company would go through a change in management and have new managers who saw what had made the company successful to that point, and proceed to follow the pattern of success…

What did you expect - that the new managers would actively try to sink the ship?

This is an interesting thread: we have an individual who has never lived in Stalin’s gulags, or survived Mao’s purges, nor, for that matter, the purges and the jailing of Catholics in North Vietnam (okay - he is an atheist, so he might have at least had some cover in those Communist countries); and we have idealists who appear to think that human nature has suddenly evolved, and greed and anger are no longer among the capital sins Man can partake in.

My recollection is that the Gospels tell us “The poor you shall always have with you”. That does not give us an out for working with the poor, and trying to alleviate their misery. But it is a fairy tale world that will ever give us no one living in abject poverty.

I have financially and time-wise supported a program which was trying to teach basic business principles to natives in a foreign country. The country has a rich asset in an agricultural product, but the product is bought almost entirely by jobbers from India and Vietnam. The jobbers come in well before harvest and use rice as a large down payment on the crop, and often cheat the farmers on the payments following harvest.

Our attempt was to teach local processing and packaging (as well as related business practices) and sell the finished product (which economically was a tremendous gain in value) to the international market.

The program eventually broke down. The women would come to classes; the men would come unless there was fruit or animals to harvest (the poor population were hunter-gatherers) and the program eventually broke down for several reasons: failure to a sufficiently large enough group to be able to provide a finished product in sufficient quantities to be able to engage the international market (this was not that the classes were expensive - they were free); further breakdown of the government and economic chaos in the country, so bad that the local police were not paid wages and resorted to multiple roadblocks to collect a “toll fee” such that travel was near impossible over any length. There was armed rebellion starting in the mid 50’s into the 70’s to kick out the colonial government. Once that was accomplished, the “colonialists” (meaning anyone and everyone from the southern European country) up and left, and the country went from poor to one of the lowest GDP per capita in the world; with one of the lowest Human Development Indexes on earth. There has been a 2 year civil war in tghe late 90’s, along with multiple military coups, and a period of revolutionary council running the country.

the net result is that starting with the revolution in the mid 50’s, it has been a variation of “to the rear, march” and a gradual running the country into the ground.

And this is only one country. It is borderline hysterical to listen to people tell me that we are going to eliminate poverty, The result of socialism run amok in this country is to take a country barely scraping along, and pull the bottom out from it, leading to free fall.

And while armed socialists have had their day (and have served as a perfect example of “all animals are equal, but some are more equal than others”), capitalism is not likely to make much inroad either. People have to see what capitalism can do, and then want the results. If you can’t even get them in to training, it is a forgone conclusion that they are not going to be starting up successful businesses. They will continue to sell their products for a pittance of its true market value, and continue to be cheated on those sales.
 
Oh! I am truly shocked! To think that a successful company would go through a change in management and have new managers who saw what had made the company successful to that point, and proceed to follow the pattern of success…
The pattern of success is to make good decisions, hire more people because they’re being successful. Not make bad decisions and punish other people for the bad decisions they made.

Upper management is supposed to be accountable and responsible for their actions. Laying off people shows this is not the case. Upper management makes mistakes and then punish those rank and file people who carried out their orders by putting them in poverty.

Ridiculous.

Stop making excuses for upper management and their bad mistakes.

Bill Gates hates the first world and thinks the only way to help people in the third world is by impoverishing people in the first world.

You will notice they are NOT laying off anyone in the third world. Only the first world.
 
The pattern of success is to make good decisions, hire more people because they’re being successful. Not make bad decisions and punish other people for the bad decisions they made.

Upper management is supposed to be accountable and responsible for their actions. Laying off people shows this is not the case. Upper management makes mistakes and then punish those rank and file people who carried out their orders by putting them in poverty.

Ridiculous.

Stop making excuses for upper management and their bad mistakes.

Bill Gates hates the first world and thinks the only way to help people in the third world is by impoverishing people in the first world.

You will notice they are NOT laying off anyone in the third world. Only the first world.
;This is descending to the point of ridiculousness, and not worthy of a response.

Have a great day and a blessed Christmas.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top