Pages:
Author

Topic: What does it take to get a job around here? - page 2. (Read 3253 times)

legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
December 08, 2011, 03:21:58 PM
#10
Its a straw man cartoon.  Among the major economies, the US has least red tape.

"A World Economic Forum survey that ranks countries on their overall economic competitiveness puts the United States fifth; the countries ahead of it, including Singapore and Finland, are tiny, with populations around 5 percent that of the United States. The World Bank publishes a report that looks at “Doing Business” across the globe. The United States ranks No. 4, again behind a handful of tiny countries. As is the case with the World Economic Forum, that ranking has not changed much over the years."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-economic-speech-shifts-the-focus-from-deficits/2011/12/07/gIQA0WHcdO_story.html?hpid=z3



Ironically, your cited resource is a strawman.

Now, if the point you wished to make was true, my point may be held as irrelevant but that is not the case. Regulation is very centralized in the United States, while little compared to competing nations, they are smaller. Redtape in those nations is not as potent over small decentralized populaces as compared to little regulation on a federal level over 300 million people. We are suffering due to a combination of factors which include our large populace and the rigid one-size-fits-all regulations that inhibit them; as little as they may appear to be.

So, one should not assume strong governments over small populaces should be held as idols to governance for larger populaces; they should not be revered. In fact, the discussion over regulations overall may not be relevant to the ends we wish to achieve.

What really needs to be discussed is how rules are applied to people and in what division: centralized or decentralized?

The resource is not a strawman.  It makes the point that the US is producing more graduates than ever yet its producing less science and engineering graduates than ever.  so unless there is a coming boom in the Women's Studies, Black History or Elizabethan Stitchwork industries, the US is committing economic suicide.

The problem isn't regulation - its motivation.  For some reason, not enough young Americans want to be techies.  As a European it baffles me when I see that people borrow sums like $100,000 for degrees in Puppetry and Drumming.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
December 08, 2011, 03:16:59 PM
#9
Its a straw man cartoon.  Among the major economies, the US has least red tape.

"A World Economic Forum survey that ranks countries on their overall economic competitiveness puts the United States fifth; the countries ahead of it, including Singapore and Finland, are tiny, with populations around 5 percent that of the United States. The World Bank publishes a report that looks at “Doing Business” across the globe. The United States ranks No. 4, again behind a handful of tiny countries. As is the case with the World Economic Forum, that ranking has not changed much over the years."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-economic-speech-shifts-the-focus-from-deficits/2011/12/07/gIQA0WHcdO_story.html?hpid=z3



Ironically, your cited resource is a strawman.

Now, if the point you wished to make was true, my point may be held as irrelevant but that is not the case. Regulation is very centralized in the United States, while little compared to competing nations, these states are smaller. Redtape in those nations is not as potent over small decentralized populaces as compared to relatively little regulation on a federal level over 300 million people. We are suffering due to a combination of factors which include our large populace and the rigid one-size-fits-all regulations that inhibit them; as little as they may appear to be.

So, one should not assume strong governments over small populaces should be held as idols to governance for larger populaces; they should not be revered. In fact, the discussion over regulations overall may not be relevant to the ends we wish to achieve.

What really needs to be discussed is how rules are applied to people and in what division: centralized or decentralized?
legendary
Activity: 1218
Merit: 1001
December 08, 2011, 03:09:07 PM
#8
Its a straw man cartoon.  Among the major economies, the US has least red tape.

"A World Economic Forum survey that ranks countries on their overall economic competitiveness puts the United States fifth; the countries ahead of it, including Singapore and Finland, are tiny, with populations around 5 percent that of the United States. The World Bank publishes a report that looks at “Doing Business” across the globe. The United States ranks No. 4, again behind a handful of tiny countries. As is the case with the World Economic Forum, that ranking has not changed much over the years."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-economic-speech-shifts-the-focus-from-deficits/2011/12/07/gIQA0WHcdO_story.html?hpid=z3

hero member
Activity: 588
Merit: 500
Coinabul - Gold Unbarred
December 08, 2011, 02:42:22 PM
#7
Alright, I am going to address the Keynesian vomit in here:

If breaking windows and having people fix them helps society, then why don't we bomb everything and rebuild it again? That will certainly create jobs.
Because that's when the terrorists win.
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
December 08, 2011, 02:37:10 PM
#6
Alright, I am going to address the Keynesian vomit in here:

If breaking windows and having people fix them helps society, then why don't we bomb everything and rebuild it again? That will certainly create jobs.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
December 08, 2011, 12:00:06 PM
#5
I would argue needless jobs are better than handouts.

Paying people to do useless work is worse than paying them to do nothing, because in the latter case, at least some of them are going to use their free time to work on their own projects (eg. rearing children, composing an opera, starting a web business) that will create at least some value for themselves and the economy as a whole.  

"Make work" schemes on the other hand, actively prevent people from creating value.

I don't understand how any rational person can support that, unless they subscribe to some kind of twisted Protestant morality that "Work for the sake of work is intrinsically good".

Except that people who have nothing to do, do nothing.
It's a trueism that if you want something done you should ask the busiest person in the office.
hero member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 502
December 08, 2011, 08:42:24 AM
#4
I would argue needless jobs are better than handouts.

Paying people to do useless work is worse than paying them to do nothing, because in the latter case, at least some of them are going to use their free time to work on their own projects (eg. rearing children, composing an opera, starting a web business) that will create at least some value for themselves and the economy as a whole.  

"Make work" schemes on the other hand, actively prevent people from creating value.

I don't understand how any rational person can support that, unless they subscribe to some kind of twisted Protestant morality that "Work for the sake of work is intrinsically good".
legendary
Activity: 1904
Merit: 1002
December 08, 2011, 05:36:59 AM
#3
Where I live, an employer is required to do keep records indefinitely, and to do paperwork not only for its current employees, but ALL previous employees in its entire history, if requested.

For example, I could request a reference letter or pension contribution confirmation from some summer job I did 30 years ago, and if that company doesn't reply within a month I could sue them!

That's why larger companies have whole HR departments just do deal with this kind of legacy paperwork.

No wonder everyone is sooo reluctant to hire.  Each extra employee will leave behind a small amount of bureaucratic "nuclear waste" that the company will never be able to get rid of.  It may be small per employee, but it accumulates over the decades.

When I point out this ridiculous situation in my social circle, I usually get the answer, "but it creates jobs for HR people!".  *facepalm*

I would argue needless jobs are better than handouts.
hero member
Activity: 1036
Merit: 502
December 08, 2011, 05:15:30 AM
#2
Where I live, an employer is required to do keep records indefinitely, and to do paperwork not only for its current employees, but ALL previous employees in its entire history, if requested.

For example, I could request a reference letter or pension contribution confirmation from some summer job I did 30 years ago, and if that company doesn't reply within a month I could sue them!

That's why larger companies have whole HR departments just do deal with this kind of legacy paperwork.

No wonder everyone is sooo reluctant to hire.  Each extra employee will leave behind a small amount of bureaucratic "nuclear waste" that the company will never be able to get rid of.  It may be small per employee, but it accumulates over the decades.

When I point out this ridiculous situation in my social circle, I usually get the answer, "but it creates jobs for HR people!".  *facepalm*
Pages:
Jump to: