I lived within walking distance of a Hostess bakery once upon a time, when Hostess had bakers. They used to smoke outside and pass out hot Hostess snack pies & Twinkies. Progress sucks. Pretty soon grocers will be walk through vending machines, and I'll have to pay to eat stuff ... ::
The guy that completely misunderstands the 14th amendment, and unemployment insurance is saying this?
The vending machine supermarkets are already a thing in Asia. They're a great novelty when you don't have to live with 'em full time. Speaking of old school bakeries .. another of their now illegal enterprises. They used to be happy to sell to you at 3am, when you were stumbling home from a night out and they were starting their working day. Hot carbs, perfect for the munchies or the oncoming hangover!
I lived within a few miles of the old rust belt steel mills. Just the aroma from that Hostess bakery improved the quality of life IMO. I honestly can't believe the bakers union bankrupted Hostess. I'm thinking automation in grocers is inevitable because labor is getting increasingly expensive.
Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that should be corrected for. Only the right wing, never gets it.
you whine about the cost of social services. stop whining and start asking, what is wrong with our current arrangement?
correcting for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. And, you are not that moral if you are complaining about the Poor.
yes, that is at the will of either party. you only want the already rich to get richer at the expense of the Poor.
employment is at the will of either party. whence any work requirement in an at-will employment State? or, does the right wing have no problem blaming the Poor for being Poor.
I don't think you understand the phrase "begging the question" either. I simply asked a straight forward question, repeatedly, that you have skipped around. You claim that someone is entitled to unemployment insurance, simply for being unemployed because we have "at-will employment" and that not giving people that insurance, simply because they decide not to work violates the 14th Amendment...so I ask...why can't Bill Gates who has decided not to work, get unemployment insurance, based on your logic? but it's a joy to see you back at it, I wish you would have taken some time to do a little research.
employment is at the will of either party not just the employer for unemployment compensation. that is what equal protection of the law is about.
Or, sometimes the poor are poor, because they refuse to work. Until counterfeiting becomes legal, you might give it a go.