Current welfare system ruining our economy

Not what you want to hear right? LOL

 

What about solving for the capital effects of capitalism's natural rate of unemployment by using socialism to bailout capitalism, like usual. It could be done on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

Exactly. The question is how to create more jobs in a world of globalization and increasing automation. This is not just a problem in the US but is occuring in almost all developed countries.

 

Negative population growth could help reduce the problem.

 

All I want to hear is the other side of a good debate.

 

I'm wary of socialism, but it's one of those concepts that means different things to different people, so give me some specifics of what you're talking about.

 

In the US, we have the concept of employment at will.

we also have a regime of unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

I am advocating for equal protection of the law regarding the legal concept of employment at will, and unemployment compensation that clears our poverty guidelines, on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

Like what?

Unemployment compensation for being unemployed is simple and less expensive than means tested welfare.

Why do you believe Persons would not prepare for a job if they could go to school for as long as they want?

 

i agree this contingency for welfare is coercive and conservative minded.

it amounts to if you don't work you don't eat, with the presumption of the worst of human kind that it is inherently lazy and vulnerable to the encouragement of the sin of idleness, without due process to prove otherwise.

a basic welfare income gives humanity the benefit of the doubt, without prejudice.

 

Stipend or allowance would be a more meaningful term.

When we have so many persons who are currently having difficulty repaying the cost of their college education and/or finding employment in the field they studied it would appear a simple cost benefit analysis answers your question.
How many jobs exist requiring greater than a high school education? And why not allow employers to hire and determine who would benefit them best with additional education, allowing the employers to pay for it with agreement that the employee will continue to work for that employer a predetermined length of time after completing the employer paid for education? Most companies have their own training programs as they have more specific needs that are not taught in colleges and universities. And best of all, people would then be working while obtaining more education, benefiting not only themselves, but their employers and society as well.

 

What if they could receive capital compensation for being unemployed in our at-will employment States?

Is is not the fault of Labor that structural forms of unemployment exist for the capital pursuit of profit, not for social expenses.

Labor simply having recourse to unemployment compensation whenever unemployment or underemployment can be claimed, must promote the general welfare of those Persons within any given State.

Thus, we could be promoting the general welfare by simply solving for simple poverty via Individual Liberty and on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

It could be accomplished at the rock bottom cost of a form of minimum wage that simply reserves Labor from that market, and at that rock bottom cost.

We could simply Government and lower our Tax burden through more efficient social safety netting.

 

the employer should never determine who they want to work for them, it is always the employee who should determine who they want to work for.

the capitalist should pay for a welfare safety net giving enough time for employees to make a good choice for their interests.

this benefits employers because people won't hate their jobs and bosses, and this benefits society because welfare would encourage people to work rather than discourage them from work.

 

How does that work when you need money, but there are no employers hiring what you have to offer.

 

you become the capitalist, and create the wealth you want to see.

 

with no money? capitalists usually use capital to work with.

 

there are venture capitalists who give out loans, try to get their attention if your idea is good.

 

If it were that simple, everyone would do it.

 

it appears that those who are unable to be employed or attract the attention of capitalists for loans to start a business, will need welfare payments for life from the government teat..

this could be unemployment compensation, a basic income, or any other term for welfare, and would create a positive multiplier effect on the economy as they sit idle gazing at their navel.

much of human advancement and evolution came from time spent on navel gazing, so maybe this is not such a bad sin.

art and other similar things will become big in such a welfare system.

 

Employers can only determine from the job applicants who they want to work for them. The final decision belongs to the employer.

Employers provide the unemployment compensation for those who become unemployed for no cause of their own.
Any welfare safety net should be left to the people and the States individually as they find necessary and fitting.

If only that were true.

 

They already do, it's called unemployment compensation. You seem to feel people who have never been employed should be entitled to some form of compensation simply for existing. They should not be.

 

As stated before, it is a supply and demand issue.

Unemployment entitles one to unemployment compensation while underemployment is something else. While I agree that government should promote the general welfare in ways that allow some to create jobs for those who need them I do not support government providing for the general welfare which only reduces the need to pursue employment.

Both of which already exist.

Are you suggesting lowering the minimum wage? That would likely entice more employers to hire.

We could simply Government and lower our Tax burden through more efficient social safety netting.[/QUOTE]

Removing the Federal government completely from any form of social safety netting would greatly increase the efficiency and allow State and local governments with the consent of their citizens to determine how their interests can best be served rationally and economically.

 

It is compensation for unemployment; not welfare. Structural forms of unemployment are not the fault of labor.

 

Yes, anyone who is unemployed is entitled to unemployment compensation in modern times if we are to actually solve for simple poverty by solving for the capital effects of capitalism's, natural rate of unemployment.

Why should Firms get a capital gains preference merely for existing but not creating Jobs Booms.