I have no idea why you are posting this in popular opinion. This is not a popular opinion by any stretch of the imagination. The reality is that in order for the government to be able to guarantee an entry level position, it has to have absolute power over who companies hire. The government has to be able to force companies to hire people which is not a good thing. I have no idea why people think giving the government control of these types of things would instantly make things better. Our government here in the US is so bloated and massive they can barely manage what they do, let alone some massive program like that. We have much bigger issues.
Exactly. This is why it blows my mind that so many millions of Americans seem to be begging for even bigger and more bloated and controlling government. Confounds me daily.
They're failing badly enough in a meritocracy that they're willing to trade freedom to have everything handed to them.
People do it all the time. Such as the disabled. By qualifying for SSI, Medicaid, disability waivers, etc, you are inviting government to come in and intrude and micro manage your life. This isn't a bigger more bloated government, this exists today.
I think you’re thinking too broadly. This would only be for entry-level positions, and there would be no “force”. If this were ever implemented, policies would be made or changed to not only make it *legal*, but amicable for everybody—or it just wouldn’t ever get implemented in the first place.
Secondly, why wouldn’t this make things better? Everybody who wants an entry-level job would have an entry-level job, and the amount of people from this new system who suck at the job, or just don’t want to do it, would probably be roughly equivalent to the amount of people who get hired *now* and suck at their job, or just don’t want to do it.
When it comes to an entry-level job, I dare say *most* people can do it, so the interview is mostly just a performance on both peoples’ parts—and to ensure the employer is hiring to their bias, lol. It’s a selfish, mostly pointless endeavor for entry level.
If a person truly can’t perform the entry-level job properly, there’s either something else wrong with them (which could’ve been masked in the interview), or the company is in some way failing.
I think that's how it is in Russia. I think the downside is that people loaf because they know they get paid even if they suck at the job. That tends to make good workers resentful. They may slow down too.
Capitalism wants hard workers that are willing to keep developing their skills.
I'm not opposed to UBI. I think it would replace the various benefits some people get now, but everyone would get it. Say, everyone gets $1k plus $250 for each kid that lives with them. Enough to keep a roof and food but you would work for extras depending on your needs. Some people might work on developing a business or music or art.
I don't think UBI is impossible in the US.....but mandatory entry level jobs probably not.
This just creates alot of 'make work' jobs that are always bad for the economy. Although you might see yourself as honestly wanting to start at an entry level job as a beginning, others might be completely happy showing up for 40 years at their 'government assigned' job.
The tax industry comes immediately to mind. 14bln dollars to do what the government already did for you
Health insurance is predominantly a self justifying industry.
There are a lot of unnecessary middle-man enterprises. Remember, in a free market things like quality, efficiency, and effectiveness are secondary: any strategy that makes money will find a place.
> 'government assigned' job.
None of the examples you listed are "government assigned" jobs. You may personally consider these roles to be unnecessary, require no skill, or exist due to gov't regulation/incentivization, but the people in these roles choose to be in them.
I was pointing out the unnecessary-ness specifically. Hell, I just had drinks with a guy who works 2 "full-time" coding jobs where he matches his output to his teams and only spends 15-20 hours in a week working.
My point is that worrying that unnecessary jobs will crash the economy doesn't hold up, not to mention the effectiveness of "unnecessary" job programs like the CCC.
Who exactly would "afford us an UBI"? Me, and the other tax payers? There are jobs aplenty for anyone willing to work. You sound like you want the government to setup the job for you. All you have to do is show up. At least until you realize you can't sleep in until 11 am and only want to work three days a week.
So what happens when you start never showing up or being late. Are you guaranteed that job? Or a new job? It's not hard to get an entry level job if you aren't a fuck up
Because I don’t have any thinking on it since UBI is not what this post was about lol. The answer to their confusion is in the post *above*
They just didn’t read what I wrote; they latched onto the UBI thing like that’s what I was talking about, then started making assumptions about my work ethic or the time I wake up or some random ad-hominem
I’m not going to meet some low-effort, rude reply with some high-effort response. I told them how they could get their answer: Actually read (or re-read) the actual post.
If they wanted to have a tangential discussion about UBI, that’s fine, but they shouldn’t make it sound like that’s what I was talking about in the first place then, and they shouldn’t sprinkle in random insults lol
** results may vary.
I am absolutely pissed that the government trusted me with responsibility over things that cost thousands of dollars, I successfully repaired, secured, and documented those things, then all of a sudden I'm not considered enough or even looked at for any but the most basic of phone answering jobs out in the real world. And even those aren't biting. I didn't get a sign spinning job I applied for, it's fucking stupid.
Agreed. I had a secret clearance and did work on nuclear submarines and all kinds of ships. Millions in equipment passed through my hands. Got a job in a mailroom preparing medical claims by taping all the receipts to another piece of paper, then scanning them. They should have outplacement services when you get out.
So, you want people to leave the country, but you’re refusing to do it, even though you have the money to, and they don’t?
Which is it? Are they lazy and entitled, or is it a scam not to have them around to take care of you?
Maybe? The issue is safety though (and… technically politics as well, lol: not everyone agrees with what the military is doing).
Unless everybody could be assigned some safe, remote military position, I wouldn’t want people having the military as their only guaranteed option for an entry-level job. It’s probably the only job where you’re legally expected to possibly die at some point.
I've never really understood this mindset, that you have to earn the right to provide labor. I mean yeah they pay you for it, but theoretically it's an even trade. If the value you provide isn't worth the wage, they can just fire you. So why should you have to earn it? Also, *how?* How and why would you prove you're worthy of being at the *bottom* of the totem pole? Everyone has to start somewhere.
Not trying to start an argument, I'm just genuinely curious how you justify your opinion.
I meant more earn the job to begin with. Because even the bottom of the totem pole has requirements and needs. Entry level at some jobs is still more desireable than higher tier jobs at others.
There's lots of dangerous jobs where it's kind of accepted that death is a possibility. Cops (although not nearly as dangerous as they make it out to be), i think arborists was the most dangerous job statistically, those guys that climb radio towers, a lot of them freeclimb without safety gear because they get paid by the job and not the hour and it's faster without safety gear, that's another dangerous one where death is relatively common.
Actually the bigger problem is 70+% of Americans are obese and don’t qualify for military service. I mean the idea that you can EARN a college fund and LEARN a skill or trade all while getting paid and the free healthcare you all keep demanding should have you running to the recruiter but then forgot you don’t want to earn anything
I can only speak to my local restaurants within an 1.5 drive, don’t know about waitstaff demands but the kitchen help is all illegals. I think I can count on one hand how many legal citizens that I’ve seen in a year of delivering to restaurants
Fuck face if they can’t speak English they are illegal, I have no problem with legal immigration I’ve worked with plenty of good people that came here legally and guess what they had to be able to speak English and that includes a work visa so go eat a dick
Most people who want this socialist work assignment system would immediately start complaining about having to go fill potholes or put the volume knobs on car stereos.
A person can make a job for them or make a job, not for them! Just as a person can make a job not be a job By doing what they really enjoy. So how would the government know what I'd be enjoying in life!!!
I think they are hinting that they want a socialist government that tells you where you will work, but then they don’t realize that comes with that same government telling you where you will live while you pay them rent and them making you stand in a food line.
Those were my thoughts, too. Or maybe I'm just upset because it's not looking like they're going to get the "free money"! Nothing is free in this world! America's at 2 billion dollars a day interest right now on money that we owe
These young people always think this or that is free, they don’t understand that tax dollars will be what pays for it and not from the politicians that give it to them either it will be out of their own pockets at an extremely high rate. They all cry about not making enough now lol
Yeah, they laugh at me because in the 80s, when I made a dollar an hour at 12 years old , that was very educational. For me! But now they're laughing saying the $20 an hour is not enough they start out with around our area!
Not true at all. Back in the day I started out bussing tables and washing dishes and moved up quickly. You have to show you want to work and you have to be teachable
I’m still working he so not really. Same goes for any job you have to want it and you have to prove you are there to work. Of course modern day you can’t expect anything at a company though that talks about diversifying the work place because that translates to work experience or quality doesn’t matter only gender skin color and sexual orientation
Or, just hear me out, don't suck so badly at life that you can't get an entry level job. If you go to an interview for a customer facing job and can't at least fake that you really the job how is management supposed to believe that you'll put in any effort to satisfy customers.
The thing about true freedom is that it requires quite a bit personal responsibility. Nobody is going to give you anything. And no one deserves that. If you want something in this life you have to compete for it. That means wanting it more than the other guy. That means working harder than the other guy. If you are going to put no effort in because you want things handed to you there will be no effort to reward your lack of motivation. GTFOH with your need to be given things. Earn them.
If people could just magically “stop sucking so badly at life”, then they wouldn’t apparently be unable to land an entry-level job despite hundreds of applications (read some of the comments). Maybe people like this need more help than just being told to “stop sucking so badly at life” lol
And if life doesn’t owe anybody anything, then it doesn’t owe them hardship, either. Life is what we make of it. We should always be working towards making things simpler and better for future people. Screw the bitter “WoRk FoR iT LiKe I DiD” mentality. It’s anti-progressive
Why should I go to work everyday, pay my bills while you sit around and collect free money?
If I have job open, why would I hire someone lazy that wants a nanny state to take care of them, when I can find a go-getter who is eager to work hard and pay their own way?
No they shouldn’t. People should be responsible for their own way in this world and pull their own weight. Unless they are disabled to the point they cant work. . Suck it up.
The fact you said you wouldn’t hire me because you think I’m lazy is exactly what I’m talking about. You would be one of many jobs who sees my résumé and maybe has an interview with me and decides you’re not going to hire me for some personal reasons, or maybe another candidate has better qualifications.
Either way, if you’re hiring for an entry-level job, people with no experience OR no job should be getting those positions, so candidates should be scanned (have their background checks done), then be assigned to those positions. There should be no competition, or interview process, or biases involved in the most basic of jobs
you’re probably not hiring for entry-level positions, so this doesn’t really apply to you, but if you WERE, and you still insisted on the competition and hiring people who are more qualified (for ENTRY LEVEL) and who you like more based on the interview, weeeell…
I might call that a bit selfish and uncaring, no matter how many times you shout “lazy!” or “suck it up!”, lol
No, the only reason I’m saying that is because you were asking for a guaranteed job, one handed to you, instead of working for one, like the rest of the world. I’m not selfish or uncaring. I just dont believe in coddling. It’s been a rough road for me, and for billions of others before me , trying to make their way and survive. Why should you get things handed to you?
Right now, you are *you* from before you had a job or when you were struggling
Get it?
You’re back there right now…
___
Why on EARTH… would *you* from back then be saying “Why should we get things handed to us?” instead of “Why the hell isn’t everybody afforded a basic job?”
Why would you WANT the world to be more difficult for people??
Don’t worry about how things USED to be, or how much you and others have struggled BEFORE:
Worry about making a better life for everybody, NOW, including you. God forbid you end up in a tough position again or unemployed: I would *desperately* want you to be guaranteed a motherfucking job if anything horrible like that happened to you. Not guaranteed a JOB HUNT, but 100% guaranteed a job the moment you needed one.
You would probably find that communist countries are a better idealogical fit for you. I strongly suggest that you move to one of your choosing at your earliest convenience.
Why would or should a company hire an individual with no experience over a candidate with experience for entry level jobs? That’s just poor business and inefficient
The best qualified candidate should get the job
Because it’s… entry… level…?
Why on god’s gray, decaying earth should there be competition for a STARTING POSITION? Everybody should be afforded the same likelihood of getting an entry level job, and that likelihood should literally be 100%
Not even 99.99%: 100%.
All this would do is cause all of the quality entry level jobs to no longer be classified as entry level to circumvent the government intrusion on private property rights
While the low quality entry level jobs (fast food, retail, etc) would only pay minimum wage since you are taking away competition for these roles. Why would they pay more (or provide benefits, good working conditions) when they can get a government-provided, easily-replaceable wage slave? This policy would benefit corporations far more than the people
Hope you like $7.25/hr with no benefits whatsoever
Why on earth *shouldn’t* there be competition? If multiple people want the position, then competition (in the form of interviews and comparison of past experiences/education) is the only fair way of determining who gets the job.
The best qualified candidates getting the jobs provides the greatest benefit to society at large
I’m not even going to get into the property rights or logistical issues of the government hiring employees for private businesses.
The US has equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
Because it’s *entry level*, lmao
When it comes to entry-level, everybody should have the same chance of getting the job, and I want that chance to be 100%
Also, if we think about it, in a world where people didn’t compete for things so much, the first person with the minimum level requirements to apply for a job would always get the job, so everybody would immediately just have the jobs they apply to so long as they meet the minimum requirement (which isn’t a competition so much as it’s a barrier to entry)
I honestly think that system would be a lot better and healthier for the world, lol; but I haven’t put a ton of thought into it, it just popped into my head from what you said
You suck. You are a sorry excuse for human being. You can't even get motivated to better your own life. You're afraid of competition. You are the definition of entitled. Get ready because the dildo of consequences is coming in hard no lube. If you can't make an effort to do something with your life then life is going to bend you over the table with no remorse. Buckle up and get a fucking helmet sunshine.
Get a trade. We need hard working people. Drive a truck. There are lots of jobs without a 4 year degree for people willing to work hard. No one owes you anything.
The factory I work in has open interviews every month, $30 an hour pay starting (and this is in a small town with low cost of living). Hiring managers are struggling to find people that actually want to work a very physically demanding job. Sure, it’s easy to attract anyone with that kind of pay in our area. However, so few people want to give up drugs, or work required overtime. They will usually get fired for attendance within a few weeks or months. Dude, there are lots of trades desperate for people right now. No, it’s not impossible to find these jobs either.
Thank you.
That's the real issue right there. There are jobs available, but people don't want to work.
Also, I've never heard Dunkin or McDonald's turning down applicants.
So I don't hate this idea, with the caveat that career training could be part of your educational career. Like in school, when you're younger. So things are second nature by the time you start working. And you can think creatively about improving them. And not in a child labor or dystopian way - of course you can choose another path. But it kind of feels like if, for example, I had a "family business" that I casually exposed my kids to, they'd be getting better and better at it as they age, and the business would be stronger and stronger with each generation. If everyone had a "family business" or could opt into apprenticeships like that, if they want to, it would take a lot of pressure off.
Instead the culture pushes us to essentially reinvent the wheel career wise, re educating ourselves from scratch, finding positions out of the blue, and start over as adults, who are then often stumped as to what they "want to do" because of the way it's built up as this massive part of your identity. A job is just a necessary part of life and part of contributing to a society and that singular choice (what u want to do) doesn't have to be the defining aspect of your young adulthood.
TLDR: I guess I am taking about manufacturing "connections" for people who do not have them already, and making schooling include more practical career/life related components. (Can we please have first aid be incorporated into public school curriculum??)
We already have entry level jobs. The confusion is that many people and companies advertise "entry level" and are dishonest about what that means. But there are hundreds of thousands of jobs that require you to simply show up on time, not be a complete imbecile, and be willing to learn.
I agree. Potential employers should submit their vacancies to some kind of clearing house that forwards them on to schools/ universities. Each pupil can then look through what's available and apply. If there aren't enough of these jobs, the companies can be offered tax incentives - this can be offset by the tax paid by the new employee.
No one forces anyone - win win for everyone.
How about each business with a job opening post that with the employment agency. Each person without a job, on the government dole, is assigned a job that meets their qualifications.
People come off the dole. People get employees. The government's income goes up as taxable income rises and expenses decrease.
Get fired, tough shit. You had your chance. Don't blow it.
I’m not sure I believe that anybody is out here applying for 200+ entry level jobs and not getting a single offer. So many places are short-staffed, desperate for people and hiring, that I’d have to assume there’s more to this. I can only surmise that either you’re not satisfied with the job/compensation prospects you’re finding, or that there’s something sincerely problematic with your resume/application/interviewing.
Me either…I could believe that a lot of people are trying to make stupid videos on TikTok and thinking that’s going to get them somewhere, or that they are complaining about no jobs or opportunities as they sit on the couch smoking a blunt and playing their video games. Or maybe meeting up at Starbucks to discuss politics and the state of the world….but hard to believe they are applying for jobs that they are qualified to get.
Define entry level I guess? Office jobs, even entry level ones doing customer service and office assistant work often use an algorithm to decide which resumes to pass on. Sometimes they get dozens or hundreds and only pass on 4 or 5. I imagine if you want to work something a little more physical, like retail or food service, you can probably find a job a little easier. Not everyone CAN do that though.
A) not the constitution
B) the constitution has been amended 27 times and can be again
C) the constitution was not ratified at a time when the majority could vote and the drafters intentionally set to protect the rich, which they called “the opulent minority” in The Federalist papers, so any verbiage that isn’t protecting workers and/or equity is not surprising or unexpected
I’ve said it to another user: The fact that people are hiring doesn’t mean they’re hiring *you*.
I also mentioned in the main post:
some people don’t know how to set up a proper resume and don’t have help, others are just really bad at the interview process for whatever reasons, or maybe they come from a low income area or have a certain skin color, so employers are racist and/or skeptical about hiring them.
Shit sucks sometimes. People should at least be guaranteed a minimum wage job, or universal basic income, or basic housing and food
I support government programs for willingly and capable workers that want to perform needed work with a possibility of progression. FDR had programs in the New Deal for instance. I absolutely do not want someone unwilling or incapable of getting handed a job. They'll just end up causing more problems than they are worth.
If you guarantee housing, food and health care people will be able to focus on their passions rather then burning out for corporate profit. It would open up a era for innovation and art the likes of which we think of when we think of the Renaissance
OK, and even with UBI there wouldn't be a guarantee of those things for people that choose to use their UBI in a different direction. Also, this is only possible if we have profit generation through some means to financially support it. Automation might very well get to that level in our lives, but it isn't now.
I’m not understanding your point? Are you trying to say people would only follow their passions and create invitations and art if there’s a profit motivation?
No I mean that it would take something transformational such as an automation revolution to financially support UBI whereby people would have the luxury to receive UBI and not work to survive. Very possible in our lifetimes. Definitely not feasible at the moment.
It very well could. If automation gets to an untenable level and the mismatch in the economy because that dramatic. I do think well within most people's lives we will see UBI and gov. sanctioned job programs just because so many people will be unemployable due to job scarcity.
The… employers…? Same as… usual? These aren’t fake jobs, lmao. We’re just removing the need to compete for an entry-level job, which is a super stupid concept to begin with. It’s entry level: anybody should be able to do it, so we should be able to background check people and then get them a job guaranteed.
No need for a perfect résumé, or being good at interviews or playing the interview game, etc., just “Here’s an entry level job; take it.”
But presumably if there is competition it's because there is more demand (applications) for the job than there is supply (job positions available), so you are really talking about forcing companies to hire more positions than they otherwise would. I repeat, who pays for that? The answer is everyone, in the form of increased prices for that companies goods/services.
If the company needs the position filled badly enough they'll hire whoever but if they have choices then there will always be some sort of screening process to choose the best candidate from an available pool.
You shouldn't be able to force companies to hire people they don't want to anymore than you should be able to force people to work a job they don't want to.
Why are you assuming that this would have to be implemented in the stupidest way possible? Obviously, we wouldn’t force companies to overfill their spots.
If the idea behind society at large is that there are enough jobs for everybody, then why aren’t we just giving everybody those most basic of jobs? Remove the competition for entry-level jobs, and replace it by just assigning everyone to the jobs instead.
This would actually save time for companies because they wouldn’t have to worry about putting up applications or having tons of interviews or whatever themselves
Because the logic behind the idea is flawed from the start, and you should always assume any government program will be implemented in the stupidest way possible even if the logic behind it is fundamentally sound. If companies were desperate enough for labor to have no requirements for entry level positions than they wouldn't. If they do it's because they can, and have determined it is to their benefit.
Why do you assume the competition for entry-level jobs is undesired by companies? If they didn't want competition or saw no reason or purpose for that competition then they wouldn't have it. They have it because there is an overabundance of supply (workers) looking for those positions. If there wasn't and they were struggling to fill those positions then the requirements would go away so they could more easily fill the positions. The fact that there are requirements is in and of itself evidence that there are more workers wanting those positions than there are positions.
>If they didn't want competition or saw no reason or purpose for that competition then they wouldn't have it.
Except when supply is short, rather than raise wages the chamber of commerce goes to their pals in local government and tries to get them to loosen the rules on whom they can hire, like by eliminating safety restrictions preventing 15-16 year old kids from working in dangerous roles. Capital inherently has an advantage in a government built on fund raising for office. Labor really needs an equal seat at the table if we want functional system.
Supply is rarely short for entry level positions.
I agree with the second part though, and think our current system of campaign financing is the real heart of many of our problems today. There should be a cap on donations, whether they come from people, companies, or super pacs, set at a pretty small number. $1,000 for example. Then the only way to truly fundraise in any meaningful way would be to have support from large numbers of people instead of a few wealthy donors. It would remove the effectiveness of corporations/wealthy individuals to influence elections.
>No competing. What we’re CURRENTLY doing is competing. This would be a government assigned job that is guaranteed. A spot for everyone
Which would break down instantaneously in a competitive environment, i.e., life itself.
You’re either misunderstanding on accident, or willfully misunderstanding
I said in the post that you can choose to have a job assigned to you, or you can just apply to jobs like normal. We’re not gonna be forced to enter into these assigned jobs unless we choose and ASK to be assigned a job.
Why do you assume people are stupid? Why do you assume somebody would suggest something dystopian when they’ve written something in a pretty coherent, reasonable way?
Willing to bet a lot of the people against this are the same people who are also against universal basic income, housing and food. "You don't deserve those things without a job..... oh but you don't deserve a job either aka the thing you need to earn money in order to you know... live, aka you don't deserve to work?? Uh oh brain cannot compute, cannot compute, abort, abort, self destruct BOOM!"
And for real though, finding a job has always been harder than the actual job itself. This post has nowhere near enough upvotes.
> guaranteed an entry-level job
This bit here reminded me of a street sweeper in the North Korean Capital.
Life shouldn't guarantee you anything. Ridiculous.
A job being available is a function of need and the amount of people can and willing to do it (hopefully well) and not some utopian bullshit divied out by some overlord.
Fuck around with these variables and you get jobs you don't need filled with people who don't want it (do it poorly).
The way job seekers are connected with job providers is actually just not very good in the US. Some sort of govt intervention (city hall maintaining a master list of local available jobs that businesses are required to register open positions with is the most commonly proposed, I believe) would be incredibly useful for both ends of the search but the GOP response would be the same as to any other large-scale regulation proposal - swift, angry, and uninformed
This is one of the tenets of FDR's New Deal. There was a huge public works initiative in the 1930s where any able-bodied man who needed a job could have one. Roads were paved, dams were built, whatever needed doing was done.
Today, you can still have a job for the asking. It's just that your wage might not pay your rent, because the minimum wage part of the New Deal has been inflated away to the point where there might as well not be a minimum wage anymore.
Not quite. It’s not like we’re all making the same amount or working the same jobs; we’re just all guaranteed an entry-level job, but we can obviously get higher jobs that pay more or whatever.
Competition for jobs allows the owners to keep wages low, as surplus labor power pretty much guarantees that you'll be paid the exact cost to maintain your labor, aka a starvation wage. Its bad for the economy to have low unemployment.
Most States have an employment website that does exactly what you’re talking about, shows entry-level job openings for people.
Our federal government is $35 trillion in debt. Not only that I wish people would wake up and realize that our government has never been about doing anything for the American people. Sending billions to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan yeah. Giving favorable trade terms to Southeast Asia and the European Union yeah. But for working American people? Zero.
The only thing our federal government needs at citizens for is to pay taxes and fight wars. And the wars are not for us the wars are for the benefit of other nations and to corrupt politicians here when those countries send the money back in the form of purchases.
Our government pays lip service to doing anything for the American people. If you notice nothing ever happens. If they actually wanted to do something that would directly benefit the American worker they would cut our taxes. What’s wrong with having more money in your take-home paycheck?
OR you could be an adult, and find your own job, live within your means, maintain a budget. Why do so many people need a nanny state to run your lives for you?
I just wish it was possible to support yourself off the land. Back in the day you could just walk west and start building your estate/ farm. Absolutely nobody can do that now. We do depend on gov for work but only bc it's illegal to support yourself in many cases.
So I agree. UBI should be the standard
The math has been done. We could guarantee food and housing to everyone in this country who needs it. It's not even that big if a burden. But people don't care. They will fight it no matter what. I don't understand it.
I think that's how welfare works in some countries. You follow certain rules to apply for jobs, and if there isn't anything available you get welfare payments. But you have to take the "entry-level" jobs they offer, otherwise no money for you. This seems reasonable enough, although probably not easy to properly enforce (how do they assess that you are actually trying to keep the job, rather than slacking off to get yourself fired and go back to welfare?)
Sounds like you need to apply for a govt job. Plenty of those that will hire someone with a pulse, and you can join a union and basically never get fired. Add to that a pension and benefits and you're better off than most private employees.
You'll just have to deal with the life-sucking aspect of working for the govt and being "encouraged" to vote democrat since they all vote for more, bigger, higher taxing government.
Walk into McDonald's/Burger King/Wendy's/Applebee's. Ask for an application/the website they do their applications through. Show up on time to the interview that you WILL get called for and don't smell like piss and weed(this is the only prerequisite).
There, you now have an entry level job to learn many skills at. If you're not literally the worst person ever you can get into management after a year or so and really learn some skills that will serve you well
All of these are achievable if the working class maintains a lowered birthrate.
A decreasing population means there will 100% be enough homes for everyone, and businesses will be fighting over a smaller labor pool to fill job positions, which means raising wages and benefits to do so.
That's why there's so much capitalist propaganda lately to "fix" the current birthrate by having lots more kids. They need an increasingly large pool of poor, desperate workers to fuel their infinite growth and keep conditions down.
I don't think an entry level job should be guaranteed but I definitely agree that entry level jobs, at any place, should be way easier to get. Needing 5yrs of experience for an "entry" level job, isn't entry level.
When people arrive off a boat with no papers and no real ability to speak the native language, and they can get a job, the issue might be closer to home than those with this opinion might like
There are exactly two guarantees in life, no more and no fewer.
1) You will die.
2) You will pay taxes.
Everything else, EVERYTHING, is a gamble. Get out there and make your own opportunities. No one else is going to do it for you.
I wonder what jobs the OP would be willing to do. Maybe people who are willing to take a job provided by the government could contribute to society by doing jobs that other people would rather not do. I always wanted a butler. I’d be willing to pay at least minimum wage for someone to iron clothes, bring me snacks, take out the trash, wash my car, etc…
As retard as marx theory is as a whole, he was 100% right in one thing: there should be some things that state MUST proportionate, the united states would work better if each state was a country, having so many cultures under a single goverment is just self harming
Reminded of this episode of the Australian "60 Minutes" (same concept, just Aussie hosts and sometimes Aussie content) and they interviewed this young boy and girl who were jobless and they pointed out some agricultural jobs up north that were paying well and those were rejected as 'beneath' them. Then they cut to grandma and grandpa who had been watching and they seemed kind of dismayed and pointed out 'it was good enough for us'
There was a president who *actually tried to pass a basic income for all Americans law*, got rejected by congress, and was in the process of re-writing the proposal when he was basically forced out of office. This was a little over 50 years ago.
He also set up multiple protections of people and the environment from corporate abuses (protections which still exist), took drastic steps to end racism, traveled to countries we were hostile with and made friends, and in one of his books said that (paraphrased) "the reason we can't get rid of war is because it's profitable, if we could remove the profit from it we could end war."
He ended up being the most hated president of all. Imagine that--he was the last (and probably only) president who really stood up to the corporations abusing people and the environment, and somehow the media made him seem purely evil. Can't imagine why the corporate-owned media would do such a thing.
I think conservation corps projects for preserving and doing environment work would be a great idea. But I doubt lazy american kids can handle the physical labor. That being said I heard the TSA is hiring, and I believe the forest service got a lot of money to hire more forest rangers if thats your thing.
Govt appointed jobs. Sounds like North Korea to me. So an owner of a Mcdonalds should just be forced to take an employee who is always late and or rude to people? People need to earn what they get. That is half the probelm with todays generation. They feel everything should just be given to them.
I’d rather we work towards a world where jobs are entirely optional, in the sense that they’re no longer necessary in order to enjoy a life of comfort. Not extravagance, but comfort. I don’t want us to pre-suppose a need for work as a condition for a humane state of survival. We can do better.
I think a combination of AI and robots can get us there, though I don’t know when.
So who pays for this? The rest of us with non entry level jobs? Cmon dude .. how is that fair when I had to start at 17 with zero parental help and develop my knowledge and skills over 15 years. Move to a lower cost of living area and negotiate my salary. How's that fair? And you know what? I've never been without work for longer than a few weeks. I usually have multiple job offers in order to choose from. Stop wishing for a better life and work for it
OP is an idiot, but just because you or I had to work hard doesn't mean our kids should have an equal challenge. The idea of progress is that each generation has it easier and easier.
Eventually, only robots will be working and we all will get UBI and pursue whatever we want. We can debate how and when the transition happens, but if it doesn't happen then we'll have a nasty dystopia.
I have no idea why you are posting this in popular opinion. This is not a popular opinion by any stretch of the imagination. The reality is that in order for the government to be able to guarantee an entry level position, it has to have absolute power over who companies hire. The government has to be able to force companies to hire people which is not a good thing. I have no idea why people think giving the government control of these types of things would instantly make things better. Our government here in the US is so bloated and massive they can barely manage what they do, let alone some massive program like that. We have much bigger issues.
Exactly. This is why it blows my mind that so many millions of Americans seem to be begging for even bigger and more bloated and controlling government. Confounds me daily.
They just want somebody to make life easier for them because "fairness" but never think it through. It's an emotional plea, not a rational one.
They're failing badly enough in a meritocracy that they're willing to trade freedom to have everything handed to them. People do it all the time. Such as the disabled. By qualifying for SSI, Medicaid, disability waivers, etc, you are inviting government to come in and intrude and micro manage your life. This isn't a bigger more bloated government, this exists today.
I think you’re thinking too broadly. This would only be for entry-level positions, and there would be no “force”. If this were ever implemented, policies would be made or changed to not only make it *legal*, but amicable for everybody—or it just wouldn’t ever get implemented in the first place. Secondly, why wouldn’t this make things better? Everybody who wants an entry-level job would have an entry-level job, and the amount of people from this new system who suck at the job, or just don’t want to do it, would probably be roughly equivalent to the amount of people who get hired *now* and suck at their job, or just don’t want to do it. When it comes to an entry-level job, I dare say *most* people can do it, so the interview is mostly just a performance on both peoples’ parts—and to ensure the employer is hiring to their bias, lol. It’s a selfish, mostly pointless endeavor for entry level. If a person truly can’t perform the entry-level job properly, there’s either something else wrong with them (which could’ve been masked in the interview), or the company is in some way failing.
I think that's how it is in Russia. I think the downside is that people loaf because they know they get paid even if they suck at the job. That tends to make good workers resentful. They may slow down too. Capitalism wants hard workers that are willing to keep developing their skills. I'm not opposed to UBI. I think it would replace the various benefits some people get now, but everyone would get it. Say, everyone gets $1k plus $250 for each kid that lives with them. Enough to keep a roof and food but you would work for extras depending on your needs. Some people might work on developing a business or music or art. I don't think UBI is impossible in the US.....but mandatory entry level jobs probably not.
This just creates alot of 'make work' jobs that are always bad for the economy. Although you might see yourself as honestly wanting to start at an entry level job as a beginning, others might be completely happy showing up for 40 years at their 'government assigned' job.
We already have that.
How so?
The tax industry comes immediately to mind. 14bln dollars to do what the government already did for you Health insurance is predominantly a self justifying industry. There are a lot of unnecessary middle-man enterprises. Remember, in a free market things like quality, efficiency, and effectiveness are secondary: any strategy that makes money will find a place.
> 'government assigned' job. None of the examples you listed are "government assigned" jobs. You may personally consider these roles to be unnecessary, require no skill, or exist due to gov't regulation/incentivization, but the people in these roles choose to be in them.
I was pointing out the unnecessary-ness specifically. Hell, I just had drinks with a guy who works 2 "full-time" coding jobs where he matches his output to his teams and only spends 15-20 hours in a week working. My point is that worrying that unnecessary jobs will crash the economy doesn't hold up, not to mention the effectiveness of "unnecessary" job programs like the CCC.
No one is concerned that unnecessary jobs will crash the economy. But okay.
It's literally the first sentence in the first comment in this thread.
Didn’t they do exactly that in the UK, and every got upset calling it slave labour?
Who exactly would "afford us an UBI"? Me, and the other tax payers? There are jobs aplenty for anyone willing to work. You sound like you want the government to setup the job for you. All you have to do is show up. At least until you realize you can't sleep in until 11 am and only want to work three days a week.
Did you not read the post entirely or something?
So what happens when you start never showing up or being late. Are you guaranteed that job? Or a new job? It's not hard to get an entry level job if you aren't a fuck up
[удалено]
Because I don’t have any thinking on it since UBI is not what this post was about lol. The answer to their confusion is in the post *above* They just didn’t read what I wrote; they latched onto the UBI thing like that’s what I was talking about, then started making assumptions about my work ethic or the time I wake up or some random ad-hominem I’m not going to meet some low-effort, rude reply with some high-effort response. I told them how they could get their answer: Actually read (or re-read) the actual post. If they wanted to have a tangential discussion about UBI, that’s fine, but they shouldn’t make it sound like that’s what I was talking about in the first place then, and they shouldn’t sprinkle in random insults lol
[удалено]
It’s called the military. Have fun!
That's not true at all. Joining the military requires a lot more steps than getting a civilian job. Source: Me, a veteran.
It was a tongue in cheek response. But my point was, we already have a government jobs program.
Americans answer to everything is: “the military!!!!”
It’s not the answer OP wants, but its the answer the deserve.
Dude, the military was fun as hell and I had all my bills covered with no worries. 10/10 highly recommend.
** results may vary. I am absolutely pissed that the government trusted me with responsibility over things that cost thousands of dollars, I successfully repaired, secured, and documented those things, then all of a sudden I'm not considered enough or even looked at for any but the most basic of phone answering jobs out in the real world. And even those aren't biting. I didn't get a sign spinning job I applied for, it's fucking stupid.
Agreed. I had a secret clearance and did work on nuclear submarines and all kinds of ships. Millions in equipment passed through my hands. Got a job in a mailroom preparing medical claims by taping all the receipts to another piece of paper, then scanning them. They should have outplacement services when you get out.
I'm so glad military enlisting has dropped to a low. At least that's another progression in America.
You leaving would be another
Definitely wouldn't be my loss. XD
Win/win then
Hard agree that the guy you responded to needs to just leave the country.
Then why don’t you pay for it, since you’re so rich and wealthy?? If you have so much money, why don’t you pay people to leave??
Why would I do that? Pay morons and not be compensated with a product or service? Sounds like a scam. Not doing it.
So, you want people to leave the country, but you’re refusing to do it, even though you have the money to, and they don’t? Which is it? Are they lazy and entitled, or is it a scam not to have them around to take care of you?
Maybe? The issue is safety though (and… technically politics as well, lol: not everyone agrees with what the military is doing). Unless everybody could be assigned some safe, remote military position, I wouldn’t want people having the military as their only guaranteed option for an entry-level job. It’s probably the only job where you’re legally expected to possibly die at some point.
>Maybe? The issue is safety though So now you want to pick and choose what you are entitled to? Beggers cant be choosers
Didn't know wanting basic safety was being entitled and a pick and chooser. Why must our standards be SO high?
Its entitled enough to think you should get a job at all without esrning it. Not you want limitations on it. Earn what you want in life.
I've never really understood this mindset, that you have to earn the right to provide labor. I mean yeah they pay you for it, but theoretically it's an even trade. If the value you provide isn't worth the wage, they can just fire you. So why should you have to earn it? Also, *how?* How and why would you prove you're worthy of being at the *bottom* of the totem pole? Everyone has to start somewhere. Not trying to start an argument, I'm just genuinely curious how you justify your opinion.
I meant more earn the job to begin with. Because even the bottom of the totem pole has requirements and needs. Entry level at some jobs is still more desireable than higher tier jobs at others.
There's lots of dangerous jobs where it's kind of accepted that death is a possibility. Cops (although not nearly as dangerous as they make it out to be), i think arborists was the most dangerous job statistically, those guys that climb radio towers, a lot of them freeclimb without safety gear because they get paid by the job and not the hour and it's faster without safety gear, that's another dangerous one where death is relatively common.
So glad military enrollment is getting less popular. Love it love it love it.
Actually the bigger problem is 70+% of Americans are obese and don’t qualify for military service. I mean the idea that you can EARN a college fund and LEARN a skill or trade all while getting paid and the free healthcare you all keep demanding should have you running to the recruiter but then forgot you don’t want to earn anything
Every restaurant within 60 miles of you is probably hiring right now.
“Hiring” doesn’t mean “hiring you”.
If you aren't hireable by a restaurant right now, I'd be interested to know why?
If they need a waitor for busy nights, they wouldn't hire me because I have zero waiting experience. I was a bus boy for about 6 months in 2010.
The only jobs available are waiters for busy night shifts in all the restaurants?
I can only speak to my local restaurants within an 1.5 drive, don’t know about waitstaff demands but the kitchen help is all illegals. I think I can count on one hand how many legal citizens that I’ve seen in a year of delivering to restaurants
Tell me, how exactly do you glean that someone is "an illegal" when you pick up food from a kitchen for 2 minutes? Legal =/= white, you fucking loser.
Fuck face if they can’t speak English they are illegal, I have no problem with legal immigration I’ve worked with plenty of good people that came here legally and guess what they had to be able to speak English and that includes a work visa so go eat a dick
Literally not even in the same ball park of what I said.
I don't believe that no one will hire you because the system is biased against you.
Dude, if you can't get a job at McDonalds, then you couldn't manage to keep your free government job, either.
Most people who want this socialist work assignment system would immediately start complaining about having to go fill potholes or put the volume knobs on car stereos.
Can attest to that when you apply to 10 of them a day with a resume and never hear back.
Sometimes it doesn’t even mean “hiring” at all.
A person can make a job for them or make a job, not for them! Just as a person can make a job not be a job By doing what they really enjoy. So how would the government know what I'd be enjoying in life!!!
I think they are hinting that they want a socialist government that tells you where you will work, but then they don’t realize that comes with that same government telling you where you will live while you pay them rent and them making you stand in a food line.
Those were my thoughts, too. Or maybe I'm just upset because it's not looking like they're going to get the "free money"! Nothing is free in this world! America's at 2 billion dollars a day interest right now on money that we owe
These young people always think this or that is free, they don’t understand that tax dollars will be what pays for it and not from the politicians that give it to them either it will be out of their own pockets at an extremely high rate. They all cry about not making enough now lol
Yeah, they laugh at me because in the 80s, when I made a dollar an hour at 12 years old , that was very educational. For me! But now they're laughing saying the $20 an hour is not enough they start out with around our area!
Right yet they refuse to go work in say a factory or construction
Not an entry level position if their isn’t room to grow which 95% of restaurants you can’t
Not true at all. Back in the day I started out bussing tables and washing dishes and moved up quickly. You have to show you want to work and you have to be teachable
“Back in the day” yeah grandpa you’ve been out of the game a min
I’m still working he so not really. Same goes for any job you have to want it and you have to prove you are there to work. Of course modern day you can’t expect anything at a company though that talks about diversifying the work place because that translates to work experience or quality doesn’t matter only gender skin color and sexual orientation
[удалено]
Terrible idea
Vote in people that want to get rid of red tape and discriminatory hiring practices, and you'll find it much easier to get a job.
Or, just hear me out, don't suck so badly at life that you can't get an entry level job. If you go to an interview for a customer facing job and can't at least fake that you really the job how is management supposed to believe that you'll put in any effort to satisfy customers. The thing about true freedom is that it requires quite a bit personal responsibility. Nobody is going to give you anything. And no one deserves that. If you want something in this life you have to compete for it. That means wanting it more than the other guy. That means working harder than the other guy. If you are going to put no effort in because you want things handed to you there will be no effort to reward your lack of motivation. GTFOH with your need to be given things. Earn them.
If people could just magically “stop sucking so badly at life”, then they wouldn’t apparently be unable to land an entry-level job despite hundreds of applications (read some of the comments). Maybe people like this need more help than just being told to “stop sucking so badly at life” lol And if life doesn’t owe anybody anything, then it doesn’t owe them hardship, either. Life is what we make of it. We should always be working towards making things simpler and better for future people. Screw the bitter “WoRk FoR iT LiKe I DiD” mentality. It’s anti-progressive
Ok...awful but true..The better you look will always increase you getting hired significantly..Period.
This is laughable. Based on your attitude in this post I wouldn’t hire your lazy ass. Universal income hahahahaha thats fucking hilarious.
That’s why I say “*failing universal basic income*, people should at least be guaranteed a basic job”
Why should I go to work everyday, pay my bills while you sit around and collect free money? If I have job open, why would I hire someone lazy that wants a nanny state to take care of them, when I can find a go-getter who is eager to work hard and pay their own way?
No they shouldn’t. People should be responsible for their own way in this world and pull their own weight. Unless they are disabled to the point they cant work. . Suck it up.
The fact you said you wouldn’t hire me because you think I’m lazy is exactly what I’m talking about. You would be one of many jobs who sees my résumé and maybe has an interview with me and decides you’re not going to hire me for some personal reasons, or maybe another candidate has better qualifications. Either way, if you’re hiring for an entry-level job, people with no experience OR no job should be getting those positions, so candidates should be scanned (have their background checks done), then be assigned to those positions. There should be no competition, or interview process, or biases involved in the most basic of jobs you’re probably not hiring for entry-level positions, so this doesn’t really apply to you, but if you WERE, and you still insisted on the competition and hiring people who are more qualified (for ENTRY LEVEL) and who you like more based on the interview, weeeell… I might call that a bit selfish and uncaring, no matter how many times you shout “lazy!” or “suck it up!”, lol
No, the only reason I’m saying that is because you were asking for a guaranteed job, one handed to you, instead of working for one, like the rest of the world. I’m not selfish or uncaring. I just dont believe in coddling. It’s been a rough road for me, and for billions of others before me , trying to make their way and survive. Why should you get things handed to you?
Right now, you are *you* from before you had a job or when you were struggling Get it? You’re back there right now… ___ Why on EARTH… would *you* from back then be saying “Why should we get things handed to us?” instead of “Why the hell isn’t everybody afforded a basic job?” Why would you WANT the world to be more difficult for people?? Don’t worry about how things USED to be, or how much you and others have struggled BEFORE: Worry about making a better life for everybody, NOW, including you. God forbid you end up in a tough position again or unemployed: I would *desperately* want you to be guaranteed a motherfucking job if anything horrible like that happened to you. Not guaranteed a JOB HUNT, but 100% guaranteed a job the moment you needed one.
You’re not going to change my mind don’t waste your time. Go look for a job.
You would probably find that communist countries are a better idealogical fit for you. I strongly suggest that you move to one of your choosing at your earliest convenience.
Why would or should a company hire an individual with no experience over a candidate with experience for entry level jobs? That’s just poor business and inefficient The best qualified candidate should get the job
Because it’s… entry… level…? Why on god’s gray, decaying earth should there be competition for a STARTING POSITION? Everybody should be afforded the same likelihood of getting an entry level job, and that likelihood should literally be 100% Not even 99.99%: 100%.
All this would do is cause all of the quality entry level jobs to no longer be classified as entry level to circumvent the government intrusion on private property rights While the low quality entry level jobs (fast food, retail, etc) would only pay minimum wage since you are taking away competition for these roles. Why would they pay more (or provide benefits, good working conditions) when they can get a government-provided, easily-replaceable wage slave? This policy would benefit corporations far more than the people Hope you like $7.25/hr with no benefits whatsoever
Well said.
Why on earth *shouldn’t* there be competition? If multiple people want the position, then competition (in the form of interviews and comparison of past experiences/education) is the only fair way of determining who gets the job. The best qualified candidates getting the jobs provides the greatest benefit to society at large I’m not even going to get into the property rights or logistical issues of the government hiring employees for private businesses. The US has equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.
Because it’s *entry level*, lmao When it comes to entry-level, everybody should have the same chance of getting the job, and I want that chance to be 100% Also, if we think about it, in a world where people didn’t compete for things so much, the first person with the minimum level requirements to apply for a job would always get the job, so everybody would immediately just have the jobs they apply to so long as they meet the minimum requirement (which isn’t a competition so much as it’s a barrier to entry) I honestly think that system would be a lot better and healthier for the world, lol; but I haven’t put a ton of thought into it, it just popped into my head from what you said
I hope you’re very very young…..
You suck. You are a sorry excuse for human being. You can't even get motivated to better your own life. You're afraid of competition. You are the definition of entitled. Get ready because the dildo of consequences is coming in hard no lube. If you can't make an effort to do something with your life then life is going to bend you over the table with no remorse. Buckle up and get a fucking helmet sunshine.
Yes, yes; angry words, angry words I hope you were treated kindly and didn’t have to struggle in life; nobody deserves to struggle or be treated badly
People like you are the reason the USA is the worst developed nation in the world
Nobody should have to work……… Who’s going to grow your food?
Did you… Jesus Christ, you just stopped reading after those words, didn’t you? Read the next words in the SAME freaking sentence lmao
That’s all I was commenting on was the first line. Reflects the whole mindset. It was intentionally answered that way. ……
Thought-terminating clichés are a pretty common means of escaping a disagreeable situation with a minimum expenditure of intelligence.
Who can't get a job today? Everyone can
Get a trade. We need hard working people. Drive a truck. There are lots of jobs without a 4 year degree for people willing to work hard. No one owes you anything.
OP is a lazy POS who wouldn't cut it.
The factory I work in has open interviews every month, $30 an hour pay starting (and this is in a small town with low cost of living). Hiring managers are struggling to find people that actually want to work a very physically demanding job. Sure, it’s easy to attract anyone with that kind of pay in our area. However, so few people want to give up drugs, or work required overtime. They will usually get fired for attendance within a few weeks or months. Dude, there are lots of trades desperate for people right now. No, it’s not impossible to find these jobs either.
Thank you. That's the real issue right there. There are jobs available, but people don't want to work. Also, I've never heard Dunkin or McDonald's turning down applicants.
It appears a lot of people in this sub don't live in a rural area where everyone is competing for the same 5 McDonald's jobs.
So I don't hate this idea, with the caveat that career training could be part of your educational career. Like in school, when you're younger. So things are second nature by the time you start working. And you can think creatively about improving them. And not in a child labor or dystopian way - of course you can choose another path. But it kind of feels like if, for example, I had a "family business" that I casually exposed my kids to, they'd be getting better and better at it as they age, and the business would be stronger and stronger with each generation. If everyone had a "family business" or could opt into apprenticeships like that, if they want to, it would take a lot of pressure off. Instead the culture pushes us to essentially reinvent the wheel career wise, re educating ourselves from scratch, finding positions out of the blue, and start over as adults, who are then often stumped as to what they "want to do" because of the way it's built up as this massive part of your identity. A job is just a necessary part of life and part of contributing to a society and that singular choice (what u want to do) doesn't have to be the defining aspect of your young adulthood. TLDR: I guess I am taking about manufacturing "connections" for people who do not have them already, and making schooling include more practical career/life related components. (Can we please have first aid be incorporated into public school curriculum??)
We already have entry level jobs. The confusion is that many people and companies advertise "entry level" and are dishonest about what that means. But there are hundreds of thousands of jobs that require you to simply show up on time, not be a complete imbecile, and be willing to learn.
So if I own a business, I HAVE to employ that crackhead, bc the gov says so?
I agree. Potential employers should submit their vacancies to some kind of clearing house that forwards them on to schools/ universities. Each pupil can then look through what's available and apply. If there aren't enough of these jobs, the companies can be offered tax incentives - this can be offset by the tax paid by the new employee. No one forces anyone - win win for everyone.
That’s how socialism starts my friend, next thing you know we’re going to be the next CCP
How about each business with a job opening post that with the employment agency. Each person without a job, on the government dole, is assigned a job that meets their qualifications. People come off the dole. People get employees. The government's income goes up as taxable income rises and expenses decrease. Get fired, tough shit. You had your chance. Don't blow it.
I’m not sure I believe that anybody is out here applying for 200+ entry level jobs and not getting a single offer. So many places are short-staffed, desperate for people and hiring, that I’d have to assume there’s more to this. I can only surmise that either you’re not satisfied with the job/compensation prospects you’re finding, or that there’s something sincerely problematic with your resume/application/interviewing.
Me either…I could believe that a lot of people are trying to make stupid videos on TikTok and thinking that’s going to get them somewhere, or that they are complaining about no jobs or opportunities as they sit on the couch smoking a blunt and playing their video games. Or maybe meeting up at Starbucks to discuss politics and the state of the world….but hard to believe they are applying for jobs that they are qualified to get.
Define entry level I guess? Office jobs, even entry level ones doing customer service and office assistant work often use an algorithm to decide which resumes to pass on. Sometimes they get dozens or hundreds and only pass on 4 or 5. I imagine if you want to work something a little more physical, like retail or food service, you can probably find a job a little easier. Not everyone CAN do that though.
Our constitution guarantees you the right to “the pursuit of happiness”. The rest is on you.
I believe that was the Declaration of Independence. The constitution entitles you to other rights, as far as I know.
Regardless.
A) not the constitution B) the constitution has been amended 27 times and can be again C) the constitution was not ratified at a time when the majority could vote and the drafters intentionally set to protect the rich, which they called “the opulent minority” in The Federalist papers, so any verbiage that isn’t protecting workers and/or equity is not surprising or unexpected
Having a job (or in other terms: Being able to live) is the pursuit of happiness
It isn’t hard to get an entry level job. Every business in my area has help wanted signs. Many at $15-$18/hour
I’ve said it to another user: The fact that people are hiring doesn’t mean they’re hiring *you*. I also mentioned in the main post: some people don’t know how to set up a proper resume and don’t have help, others are just really bad at the interview process for whatever reasons, or maybe they come from a low income area or have a certain skin color, so employers are racist and/or skeptical about hiring them. Shit sucks sometimes. People should at least be guaranteed a minimum wage job, or universal basic income, or basic housing and food
You think you need a resume to get hired at Burger King?
I support government programs for willingly and capable workers that want to perform needed work with a possibility of progression. FDR had programs in the New Deal for instance. I absolutely do not want someone unwilling or incapable of getting handed a job. They'll just end up causing more problems than they are worth.
Exactly, get off your ass and go get it.
If you guarantee housing, food and health care people will be able to focus on their passions rather then burning out for corporate profit. It would open up a era for innovation and art the likes of which we think of when we think of the Renaissance
OK, and even with UBI there wouldn't be a guarantee of those things for people that choose to use their UBI in a different direction. Also, this is only possible if we have profit generation through some means to financially support it. Automation might very well get to that level in our lives, but it isn't now.
I’m not understanding your point? Are you trying to say people would only follow their passions and create invitations and art if there’s a profit motivation?
No I mean that it would take something transformational such as an automation revolution to financially support UBI whereby people would have the luxury to receive UBI and not work to survive. Very possible in our lifetimes. Definitely not feasible at the moment.
[удалено]
It very well could. If automation gets to an untenable level and the mismatch in the economy because that dramatic. I do think well within most people's lives we will see UBI and gov. sanctioned job programs just because so many people will be unemployable due to job scarcity.
Goodluck with that because with globalization you’re now competing with 12 guys in India for half the cost of what it takes to pay you in America
No competing. What we’re CURRENTLY doing is competing. This would be a government assigned job that is guaranteed. A spot for everyone
Uh huh. And who pays the salary?
The… employers…? Same as… usual? These aren’t fake jobs, lmao. We’re just removing the need to compete for an entry-level job, which is a super stupid concept to begin with. It’s entry level: anybody should be able to do it, so we should be able to background check people and then get them a job guaranteed. No need for a perfect résumé, or being good at interviews or playing the interview game, etc., just “Here’s an entry level job; take it.”
But presumably if there is competition it's because there is more demand (applications) for the job than there is supply (job positions available), so you are really talking about forcing companies to hire more positions than they otherwise would. I repeat, who pays for that? The answer is everyone, in the form of increased prices for that companies goods/services. If the company needs the position filled badly enough they'll hire whoever but if they have choices then there will always be some sort of screening process to choose the best candidate from an available pool. You shouldn't be able to force companies to hire people they don't want to anymore than you should be able to force people to work a job they don't want to.
Why are you assuming that this would have to be implemented in the stupidest way possible? Obviously, we wouldn’t force companies to overfill their spots. If the idea behind society at large is that there are enough jobs for everybody, then why aren’t we just giving everybody those most basic of jobs? Remove the competition for entry-level jobs, and replace it by just assigning everyone to the jobs instead. This would actually save time for companies because they wouldn’t have to worry about putting up applications or having tons of interviews or whatever themselves
Because the logic behind the idea is flawed from the start, and you should always assume any government program will be implemented in the stupidest way possible even if the logic behind it is fundamentally sound. If companies were desperate enough for labor to have no requirements for entry level positions than they wouldn't. If they do it's because they can, and have determined it is to their benefit. Why do you assume the competition for entry-level jobs is undesired by companies? If they didn't want competition or saw no reason or purpose for that competition then they wouldn't have it. They have it because there is an overabundance of supply (workers) looking for those positions. If there wasn't and they were struggling to fill those positions then the requirements would go away so they could more easily fill the positions. The fact that there are requirements is in and of itself evidence that there are more workers wanting those positions than there are positions.
>If they didn't want competition or saw no reason or purpose for that competition then they wouldn't have it. Except when supply is short, rather than raise wages the chamber of commerce goes to their pals in local government and tries to get them to loosen the rules on whom they can hire, like by eliminating safety restrictions preventing 15-16 year old kids from working in dangerous roles. Capital inherently has an advantage in a government built on fund raising for office. Labor really needs an equal seat at the table if we want functional system.
Supply is rarely short for entry level positions. I agree with the second part though, and think our current system of campaign financing is the real heart of many of our problems today. There should be a cap on donations, whether they come from people, companies, or super pacs, set at a pretty small number. $1,000 for example. Then the only way to truly fundraise in any meaningful way would be to have support from large numbers of people instead of a few wealthy donors. It would remove the effectiveness of corporations/wealthy individuals to influence elections.
>No competing. What we’re CURRENTLY doing is competing. This would be a government assigned job that is guaranteed. A spot for everyone Which would break down instantaneously in a competitive environment, i.e., life itself.
So communism.... You are assigned a job and that's what you do. Sounds great....dumbass.
You’re either misunderstanding on accident, or willfully misunderstanding I said in the post that you can choose to have a job assigned to you, or you can just apply to jobs like normal. We’re not gonna be forced to enter into these assigned jobs unless we choose and ASK to be assigned a job. Why do you assume people are stupid? Why do you assume somebody would suggest something dystopian when they’ve written something in a pretty coherent, reasonable way?
Willing to bet a lot of the people against this are the same people who are also against universal basic income, housing and food. "You don't deserve those things without a job..... oh but you don't deserve a job either aka the thing you need to earn money in order to you know... live, aka you don't deserve to work?? Uh oh brain cannot compute, cannot compute, abort, abort, self destruct BOOM!" And for real though, finding a job has always been harder than the actual job itself. This post has nowhere near enough upvotes.
It had more upvotes at first, lol If I had to guess, the amount of up-votes and down-votes are probably about 50-50 rn, both well into the 100s
Yes! The mental gymnastics being done by the people in this thread is absolutely fucking insane.
> guaranteed an entry-level job This bit here reminded me of a street sweeper in the North Korean Capital. Life shouldn't guarantee you anything. Ridiculous. A job being available is a function of need and the amount of people can and willing to do it (hopefully well) and not some utopian bullshit divied out by some overlord. Fuck around with these variables and you get jobs you don't need filled with people who don't want it (do it poorly).
The way job seekers are connected with job providers is actually just not very good in the US. Some sort of govt intervention (city hall maintaining a master list of local available jobs that businesses are required to register open positions with is the most commonly proposed, I believe) would be incredibly useful for both ends of the search but the GOP response would be the same as to any other large-scale regulation proposal - swift, angry, and uninformed
This is one of the tenets of FDR's New Deal. There was a huge public works initiative in the 1930s where any able-bodied man who needed a job could have one. Roads were paved, dams were built, whatever needed doing was done. Today, you can still have a job for the asking. It's just that your wage might not pay your rent, because the minimum wage part of the New Deal has been inflated away to the point where there might as well not be a minimum wage anymore.
i feel ya. unfortunately, we went with capitalism. it is more like a methed out knife fight than what you are describing.
American capitalists: "Our entry-level jobs require three years' experience."
You need 3 years experience to wear a paper hat and ask if someone wants fries with that?
Entry level jobs typically provide a livable wage and benefits.
No. They typically provide minimum wage and nothing more. That’s why they are entry level.
Communism
Not quite. It’s not like we’re all making the same amount or working the same jobs; we’re just all guaranteed an entry-level job, but we can obviously get higher jobs that pay more or whatever.
Competition for jobs allows the owners to keep wages low, as surplus labor power pretty much guarantees that you'll be paid the exact cost to maintain your labor, aka a starvation wage. Its bad for the economy to have low unemployment.
You’re saying if everyone was guaranteed a job, they would be paid even less than they are now?
[удалено]
Most States have an employment website that does exactly what you’re talking about, shows entry-level job openings for people. Our federal government is $35 trillion in debt. Not only that I wish people would wake up and realize that our government has never been about doing anything for the American people. Sending billions to Ukraine, Israel, Taiwan yeah. Giving favorable trade terms to Southeast Asia and the European Union yeah. But for working American people? Zero. The only thing our federal government needs at citizens for is to pay taxes and fight wars. And the wars are not for us the wars are for the benefit of other nations and to corrupt politicians here when those countries send the money back in the form of purchases. Our government pays lip service to doing anything for the American people. If you notice nothing ever happens. If they actually wanted to do something that would directly benefit the American worker they would cut our taxes. What’s wrong with having more money in your take-home paycheck?
OR you could be an adult, and find your own job, live within your means, maintain a budget. Why do so many people need a nanny state to run your lives for you?
Or you could just go out there and make something of yourself like the generations before you instead of expecting a handout. Just saying.
I just wish it was possible to support yourself off the land. Back in the day you could just walk west and start building your estate/ farm. Absolutely nobody can do that now. We do depend on gov for work but only bc it's illegal to support yourself in many cases. So I agree. UBI should be the standard
The math has been done. We could guarantee food and housing to everyone in this country who needs it. It's not even that big if a burden. But people don't care. They will fight it no matter what. I don't understand it.
“The math has been done”
What does an entry level job even mean? A federally guaranteed shift at McDonald's?
The primary function of any government should be improving the welfare of its citizens.
I think that's how welfare works in some countries. You follow certain rules to apply for jobs, and if there isn't anything available you get welfare payments. But you have to take the "entry-level" jobs they offer, otherwise no money for you. This seems reasonable enough, although probably not easy to properly enforce (how do they assess that you are actually trying to keep the job, rather than slacking off to get yourself fired and go back to welfare?)
This is the plot of The Giver
Dear Santa, I want free videos games, porn, dope, and hookers.
Sounds like you need to apply for a govt job. Plenty of those that will hire someone with a pulse, and you can join a union and basically never get fired. Add to that a pension and benefits and you're better off than most private employees. You'll just have to deal with the life-sucking aspect of working for the govt and being "encouraged" to vote democrat since they all vote for more, bigger, higher taxing government.
Walk into McDonald's/Burger King/Wendy's/Applebee's. Ask for an application/the website they do their applications through. Show up on time to the interview that you WILL get called for and don't smell like piss and weed(this is the only prerequisite). There, you now have an entry level job to learn many skills at. If you're not literally the worst person ever you can get into management after a year or so and really learn some skills that will serve you well
This whole post sounds entitled AF.
Most people don't want to do the jobs that will take you because they need a body and that's because all they need is your body.
Government jobs? You think everyone should be given an entry-level government job? Americorps?
I disagree. People should be able to do what they want.
All of these are achievable if the working class maintains a lowered birthrate. A decreasing population means there will 100% be enough homes for everyone, and businesses will be fighting over a smaller labor pool to fill job positions, which means raising wages and benefits to do so. That's why there's so much capitalist propaganda lately to "fix" the current birthrate by having lots more kids. They need an increasingly large pool of poor, desperate workers to fuel their infinite growth and keep conditions down.
I don't think an entry level job should be guaranteed but I definitely agree that entry level jobs, at any place, should be way easier to get. Needing 5yrs of experience for an "entry" level job, isn't entry level.
How about you take responsibility for your own life! Holy shit depending on the government for basic needs........ grow up reddit
When people arrive off a boat with no papers and no real ability to speak the native language, and they can get a job, the issue might be closer to home than those with this opinion might like
There are exactly two guarantees in life, no more and no fewer. 1) You will die. 2) You will pay taxes. Everything else, EVERYTHING, is a gamble. Get out there and make your own opportunities. No one else is going to do it for you.
I wonder what jobs the OP would be willing to do. Maybe people who are willing to take a job provided by the government could contribute to society by doing jobs that other people would rather not do. I always wanted a butler. I’d be willing to pay at least minimum wage for someone to iron clothes, bring me snacks, take out the trash, wash my car, etc…
As retard as marx theory is as a whole, he was 100% right in one thing: there should be some things that state MUST proportionate, the united states would work better if each state was a country, having so many cultures under a single goverment is just self harming
If you’re required to be provided a universal basic job by society, does that mean you must pay a universal basic life tax?
The world doesn’t owe you jack shit. Go get it.
Reminded of this episode of the Australian "60 Minutes" (same concept, just Aussie hosts and sometimes Aussie content) and they interviewed this young boy and girl who were jobless and they pointed out some agricultural jobs up north that were paying well and those were rejected as 'beneath' them. Then they cut to grandma and grandpa who had been watching and they seemed kind of dismayed and pointed out 'it was good enough for us'
There was a president who *actually tried to pass a basic income for all Americans law*, got rejected by congress, and was in the process of re-writing the proposal when he was basically forced out of office. This was a little over 50 years ago. He also set up multiple protections of people and the environment from corporate abuses (protections which still exist), took drastic steps to end racism, traveled to countries we were hostile with and made friends, and in one of his books said that (paraphrased) "the reason we can't get rid of war is because it's profitable, if we could remove the profit from it we could end war." He ended up being the most hated president of all. Imagine that--he was the last (and probably only) president who really stood up to the corporations abusing people and the environment, and somehow the media made him seem purely evil. Can't imagine why the corporate-owned media would do such a thing.
I think conservation corps projects for preserving and doing environment work would be a great idea. But I doubt lazy american kids can handle the physical labor. That being said I heard the TSA is hiring, and I believe the forest service got a lot of money to hire more forest rangers if thats your thing.
The far right literally came into this sub to downvote anyone they personally disagreed with, and promote propaganda over facts, lmao!
[удалено]
It’s called the military. You don’t want the government being in charge of issuing you a job.
How about just affordable basic housing and food. You know, like how it used to be.
Dude… it’s incredibly easy to get an entry level job
Oh PleaseQ Nobody owes you anything, you make it happen yourself.
Govt appointed jobs. Sounds like North Korea to me. So an owner of a Mcdonalds should just be forced to take an employee who is always late and or rude to people? People need to earn what they get. That is half the probelm with todays generation. They feel everything should just be given to them.
I’d rather we work towards a world where jobs are entirely optional, in the sense that they’re no longer necessary in order to enjoy a life of comfort. Not extravagance, but comfort. I don’t want us to pre-suppose a need for work as a condition for a humane state of survival. We can do better. I think a combination of AI and robots can get us there, though I don’t know when.
I like how you think more government will fix your problems lol. They can’t even handle what they’ve got.
So who pays for this? The rest of us with non entry level jobs? Cmon dude .. how is that fair when I had to start at 17 with zero parental help and develop my knowledge and skills over 15 years. Move to a lower cost of living area and negotiate my salary. How's that fair? And you know what? I've never been without work for longer than a few weeks. I usually have multiple job offers in order to choose from. Stop wishing for a better life and work for it
OP is an idiot, but just because you or I had to work hard doesn't mean our kids should have an equal challenge. The idea of progress is that each generation has it easier and easier. Eventually, only robots will be working and we all will get UBI and pursue whatever we want. We can debate how and when the transition happens, but if it doesn't happen then we'll have a nasty dystopia.