The Permanently Unemployed

[paft]

From the New York Times:
Long-term joblessness - the kind that Ms. Barrington-Ward and about four million others are experiencing - is now one of the defining realities of the American work force

Comments

[telemann]

I've never understood why if you were unemployed for X amount of time (it seems six months is the magic number), you were ruled out of the game automatically.

In a nutshell?

[rick_day]

supply and demand, baby. So many to choose from, so many arbitrary ways to cull the list.

It ain't right, but it is what it is.

[brother_dour]

It ain't right, but it is what it is.

This brings to mind a thought: the Right only has so many answers to any issue. Shrug, hand-wave, tsk tsk, shoot down or eviscerate anything the other guys propose...and propose no ideas or solutions of their own.

And that is what OP was asking for: how would you propose to fix the problem she mentioned?

[gunslnger]

There are millions of solutions, one for each person in need of one. To propose a single one to apply to all of them instead is folly.

[paft]

It's amazing how tough-minded you guys are about other people's suffering.

[rick_day]

who is this "you guys" I just got arbitrarily lumped into?

If you don't like the message, don't shoot the messenger.

[geezer_also]

Dude, people like you, politicraticus, and even me to certain extent who actually have to hire and fire people are THE PROBLEM, I'm surprised that you haven't figured that out yet ;P

[luzribeiro]

Translation: I'm such an oppressed precious snowlake, someone please protect me from evil yelling liburlz!

I hire people too, what's your point?

[geezer_also]

Gee, I'm getting my very own stalker.
If you would have been following the conversation you wouldn't have to ask.

Seriously, if you were half as "clever" as you think you are you would be at least twice as clever as you actually are.

Now that I got that off my chest, we can go back to our normal relationship of you randomly sniping and me ignoring you.

[luzribeiro]

First line is a deflection.

Second and third one: a cop-out, and then another one.

Last line: a particularly hilarious cop-out.

Icon: gasping mustache guy (shooting for cutesy).

Result: nothing particularly substantive as a response.

Mission accomplished.

Indeed, you can go back to your normal whining about being persecuted by the whole world, and occasionally receiving pats on the back by similarly oppressed precious snowflakes.

[htpcl]

I get it, you're frustrated by the stalking. But does that warrant calling people stupid in response?

Step away from each other both of you, or you're both going to hurt yourselves pretty badly.

[htpcl]

OK, this is outright trolling now. Aimless, mean, dumb trolling for its own sake.

Since you already did have one remark recently, be advised that this is going to be your last one before receiving a more drastic measure.

[paft]

People who live in a lala land where no liberals have ever hired or fired people.

[paft]

"You guys" being you folks who can only promote your arguments by invoking a weird alternate reality in which no western industrialized country has managed to provide a more solid social safety net than the US for the poor, the sick, and the elderly, in which proponents of ACA and other programs are wild-eyed believers in immortality, in which contempt and disdain for the poor are not "emotions," but observing that it is undesirable for the poor to go hungry and/or die from treatable illnesses is being "emotional," in which one of the wealthiest nations on earth is so poor it must choose between caring for the elderly and vaccinating the young, even though less wealthy industrialized nations manage to do these things.

John Stewart recently did an excellent takedown of "you guys," and the hypocrisy behind you denouncing calls for basic human rights as "emotional" then switching to contempt as an argument.

JS: Can I get an argument against raising the minimum wage, but one that's deep fried in contempt, seasoned with disdain?

[sandwichwarrior]

...and what makes you think it's just other people's suffering.

[paft]

Watching the issue being discussed by wealthy commentators on Fox.