To move the conversation forward, good manners would entail that you acknowledge that your question was answered. You are putting people off by doing so.
Sorry - shoulf read for not doing so.
I did acknowledge that you answered the question, technically.
If you want to move on, then move on. Either with this conversation, or another.
“I did acknowledge that you answered the question, technically”
With a “these are not the numbers i am looking for”
We can end it here thanks.
Cool
We have the same sort of situation in France. French law forbids the civil service to send back in their country isolated minor. Parents organize the sending of them. the result is that the system is unable to cope with them. Minors sleep in street and are in danger, or are used by gangs. Girls coming is organized by pimps.Roughly 41 000 minors are hosted for an annual cost of 5 Milliards of euros ( 5 000 000 000 : a little more in $) . they were 10 000 in 2015.
Yes, good example. The West is hamstrung by our own liberalism.
500 kids in a 32 person cageSounds similar to life in a Latin American household.
So then companies would be obligated to hire anyone that applies?How can you make it illegal to be unemployed if there are no guaranteed employment opportunities?
Anybody who meets criteria for employment would have to be hired by law. If they turn out to be crappy workers they could be fired, but they would have to look for new employment.
“41 000 minors are hosted”
Minors from where?
@thatoneguy What is wrong with a society in which everyone’s basic needs are fulfilled and they can pursue what they are really interested in doing with their lives, instead of attempting to just barely survive, like U.S. society has now? Seems like a far better way of doing things to me than your plan. No one likes to struggle to survive either and your plan means people would have to struggle in order to live.
Anybody who meets criteria for employment would have to be hired by law. If they turn out to be crappy workers they could be fired, but they would have to look for new employment.By whom? Companies that need employees already hire those meeting the criteria. Are you going to force companies to hire people they don't need? Instead I suggest that currently employed laborers are paid a decent minimum living wage. This increases the numbers of skilled workers, job stability and a loyal workforce.
It has been proven that if you pay the existing workforce a decent living wage so that employed people are able to purchase more goods, the economy thrives and new jobs will open to all that want to work.
The problem is that employers like high unemployment. High unemployment depresses wages and increases profits without needing expansion. Worker productivity has risen by leaps and bounds while wages have stagnated.
Productivity in the US is soaring, but wages aren’t keeping up …
In data collected by the Economic Policy Institute, the growth in productivity has more than doubled that of hourly compensation for U.S. workers since 1948. With net productivity in the country growing by roughly 253 percent in the last seven decades, hourly compensation has increased by just 116 percent.Nov 10, 2020https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2020/11/productivity-workforce-america-united-states-wages-stagnate/#
Where they come from, why, and how they are treated continues to be a fluid complex situation. The good news, many people are aware and pressure is on for change. The bad news, like everything, many people don’t look beyond the headlines and continue to blame whole countries for it.
https://europe.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/Paper-ChildImmigrationDetentionintheEU-EN.pdf
What is wrong with a society in which everyone’s basic needs are fulfilled and they can pursue what they are really interested in doing with their lives, instead of attempting to just barely survive, like U.S. society has now? Seems like a far better way of doing things to me than your plan. No one likes to struggle to survive either and your plan means people would have to struggle in order to live.If you believe that having to work equals struggling to survive, then there is no point in trying to convince you otherwise.
If you believe that having to work equals struggling to survive, then there is no point in trying to convince you otherwise.
Minimum wage doesn’t pay for an apartment like it use to years ago. One either has to have a roommate or spouse to help pay the rent or work two jobs unable to enjoy their home and they still can’t pay for what they need. So yes, it is a struggle and the struggle is real.
If you believe that having to work equals struggling to survive, then there is no point in trying to convince you otherwise. -- oneguyThis is a strange approach. "Work" covers a wide variety of activities and an even wider variety of how that work is rewarded. The same work in two different countries or two different times in history could be either enjoyable or slavery. There is no equivalence here, rather a statement on something that is happening.
Do you think people in America today are struggling to survive while working?
Minimum wage doesn’t pay for an apartment like it use to years ago. One either has to have a roommate or spouse to help pay the rent or work two jobs unable to enjoy their home and they still can’t pay for what they need. So yes, it is a struggle and the struggle is real.I know minimum wage doesn't go far today but not everybody is working a minimum wage job. Being forced to work doesn't mean you get minimum wage.
This is a strange approach. “Work” covers a wide variety of activities and an even wider variety of how that work is rewarded. The same work in two different countries or two different times in history could be either enjoyable or slavery. There is no equivalence here, rather a statement on something that is happening.Do you think people in America today are struggling to survive while working?
Mriana seemed to be implying that work itself is inhumane and people ought to be given money to live on while doing nothing in return.
Very few Americans are struggling to survive, though many struggle to live a middle class life.
Mriana seemed to be implying that work itself is inhumane and people ought to be given money to live on while doing nothing in return.Very few Americans are struggling to survive, though many struggle to live a middle class life.
That’s not what I’m implying. What I’m saying is, when minimum wage was first established, one person working could pay for an apartment, buy food, pay utilities, and still have a little left over. Minimum wage was not raised as it was supposed to have been and didn’t keep up with inflation, so now, people are struggling to survive, unless they are rich. The middle class is disappearing. It seems to me you take a Repug view of things, where large corporation should get it all and the general public gets nothing. On the other hand, a society that provides it’s people with their basic needs (housing, clean food and water, medical, and education) would be a better society so that people can pursue what they want in life and better themselves. This is not to say they do nothing, quite the contrary. Instead of working at a job they despise, they do something they actually enjoy or prefer to do, but you can’t stand that idea.
I know minimum wage doesn’t go far today but not everybody is working a minimum wage job.
More people than not are working minimum wage jobs, including those who successfully completed a bachelor degree. Most minimum wage jobs are menial redundant work and rarely fulfilling. It’s just a job to help pay bills and with such jobs, more than one person in the family has to work to cover the bills. Often, two people working are generally both doing menial redundant labour, with no health care benefits and they are just barely making it with non-fulfilling jobs. Menial redundant work is never fulfilling, especially for those who have an education and don’t tell me those who have college degrees are not in minimum wage jobs. Many are now days and have been since the last recession, which I dare say was actually a depression, but the government doesn’t want to admit it, as it bailed out banks and auto industries, instead of helping its citizens. I think this time around the government has done a better job of helping its citizens and doing less of assisting greedy corporations, thereby supporting Capitalism less. Capitalism is also a poor way to run a government, but the U.S. has been running a Capitalistic government for years now. High time that we stop running things via Capitalism and start becoming more of a democratic socialist society, not to be confused with Communism.
Very few Americans are struggling to survive, though many struggle to live a middle class life. -- oneguyDepends on what you mean by "survive". Some people seem to want to turn America into something that looks more like the TV show Survival. To me, choosing between eating and having medicine seems like a struggle.
High time that we stop running things via Capitalism and start becoming more of a democratic socialist society, not to be confused with Communism.The only ones who are confused are they who do not understand that "a democratic socialist society" is in fact communism.
... a society that provides it’s people with their basic needs (housing, clean food and water, medical, and education) would be a better society so that people can pursue what they want in life and better themselves.We went there, did that, and produced several generations of "project people." One way to find them now is to look for blue lights in the parking lots, especially easy at night. And now, idiots like the new Senator from Georgia want us to pay "reparations." Keeping people as pets does them no good service.