PDA

View Full Version : Why Americans Won't Do Dirty Jobs



Qtec
07-31-2012, 08:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Skinning, gutting, and cutting up catfish is not easy or pleasant work. No one knows this better than Randy Rhodes, president of Harvest Select, which has a processing plant in impoverished Uniontown, Ala. For years, Rhodes has had trouble finding Americans willing to grab a knife and stand 10 or more hours a day in a cold, wet room for minimum wage and skimpy benefits.

Most of his employees are Guatemalan. Or they were, until Alabama enacted an immigration law in September that requires police to question people they suspect might be in the U.S. illegally and punish businesses that hire them. The law, known as HB56, is intended to scare off undocumented workers, and in that regard it’s been a success. It’s also driven away legal immigrants who feared being harassed.

Rhodes arrived at work on Sept. 29, the day the law went into effect, to discover many of his employees missing. Panicked, he drove an hour and a half north to Tuscaloosa, where many of the immigrants who worked for him lived. Rhodes, who doesn’t speak Spanish, struggled to get across how much he needed them. He urged his workers to come back. Only a handful did. “We couldn’t explain to them that some of the things they were scared of weren’t going to happen,” Rhodes says. “I wanted them to see that I was their friend, and that we were trying to do the right thing.”

His ex-employees joined an exodus of thousands of immigrant field hands, hotel housekeepers, dishwashers, chicken plant employees, and construction workers who have fled Alabama for other states. Like Rhodes, many employers who lost workers followed federal requirements—some even used the E-Verify system—and only found out their workers were illegal when they disappeared.

In their wake are thousands of vacant positions and hundreds of angry business owners staring at unpicked tomatoes, uncleaned fish, and unmade beds. “Somebody has to figure this out. The immigrants aren’t coming back to Alabama—they’re gone,” Rhodes says. “I have 158 jobs, and I need to give them to somebody.”

There’s no shortage of people he could give those jobs to. In Alabama, some 211,000 people are out of work. In rural Perry County, where Harvest Select is located, the unemployment rate is 18.2 percent, twice the national average. One of the big selling points of the immigration law was that it would free up jobs that Republican Governor Robert Bentley said immigrants had stolen from recession-battered Americans. Yet native Alabamians have not come running to fill these newly liberated positions. Many employers think the law is ludicrous and fought to stop it. Immigrants aren’t stealing anything from anyone, they say. Businesses turned to foreign labor only because they couldn’t find enough Americans to take the work they were offering.

At a moment when the country is relentless focused on unemployment, there are still jobs that often go unfilled. These are difficult, dirty, exhausting jobs that, for previous generations, were the first rickety step on the ladder to prosperity. They still are—just not for Americans. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">On a sunny October afternoon, Juan Castro leans over the back of a pickup truck parked in the middle of a field at Ellen Jenkins’s farm in northern Alabama. He sorts tomatoes rapidly into buckets by color and ripeness. Behind him his crew—his father, his cousin, and some friends—move expertly through the rows of plants that stretch out for acres in all directions, barely looking up as they pull the last tomatoes of the season off the tangled vines and place them in baskets. Since heading into the fields at 7 a.m., they haven’t stopped for more than the few seconds it takes to swig some water. They’ll work until 6 p.m., earning $2 for each 25-pound basket they fill. The men figure they’ll take home around $60 apiece. </div></div>

link (http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/why-americans-wont-do-dirty-jobs-11092011.html#p1)

Way to go Tea Party.

Q

cushioncrawler
07-31-2012, 08:55 PM
I agree with teaparty.
No job in theusofa shood be underpaid.
If the job duznt pay enuff then that industry shood go.
If buyers wont pay the right price then that industry shood go.
No job in theusofa shood be underpaid.
mac.

eg8r
08-01-2012, 07:18 AM
I agree, good job. Send the illegals home and force anyone getting handouts from the government to go work in these fields and do this work. I gaurantee you that most of those who could work would drop the lazy attitude and take a different job.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
08-01-2012, 09:24 AM
You, like most Americans probably, never did hear about that welfare reform and what it did, back when passed in freaking 1996???

Nobody can receive cash assistance under Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) unless they are working. That's why, under these restrictions, even in these bad economic times, the number of Americans on TANF support is about 4.6 million. Out of more than 300 million Americans, that is barely over 1%. Even for those eligible to receive it who continue to work, they have strict lifetime cutoff limits. Once those limits are passed, no cash assistance, regardless of working or need, as in minor children in the household.

I'm always astounded to hear people claiming the lazy wallow around on welfare forever, when that hasn't been true for over 16 years now.

eg8r
08-01-2012, 12:35 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm always astounded to hear people claiming the lazy wallow around on welfare forever, when that hasn't been true for over 16 years now. </div></div>I am always astounded when I hear people that believe this BS. You tell us you believe in conspiracy theories but then sit there and honestly tell us that there is no way people are getting around this? What a joke. Would you mind going to look up the definition of "working" as defined in that act and come back and let us know if it appears to be pretty lenient or easily side stepped.

I know a couple of people, not many, that are choosing to stay on unemployment for weeks on end instead of getting a new job because they are making more money on UE than they would at the jobs that are available right now. They are taking the free money.

eg8r

Soflasnapper
08-01-2012, 01:43 PM
It's not easily sidestepped, which is why two Republican governors have petitioned the federal government for waivers of the job requirements to allow for job training or attending trade schools, etc., to count for the work requirement.

If it is so easy, why are only 4.8 million people on it, unable to slip by the requirements, even though their need is great?

How can forcing such a applying recipient to have a job be reasonable, in the face of such persisting large scale unemployment?

Welfare reform, like NAFTA, were bad policy choices by Clinton, only disguised by the sensational economy which prevented their full damage from being seen until later events, and a terrible economy, came into effect.

LWW
08-01-2012, 02:02 PM
Why is the left upset?

Do they think these businesses will all close?

cushioncrawler
08-01-2012, 04:21 PM
My meening woz that tomatoes etc shood hav a price that allows proper wages.
If no, then no tomatoes. Thats fair enuff.
And no importing of tomatoes.
In fakt no importing of anything that kan be made or grown in the usofa, untill nearnuff full employment.

With some scope for import quotas and import tarriffs.
mac.

Qtec
08-01-2012, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why is the left upset?

<span style="color: #3333FF">They are upset that GOP policies are causing American produce to rot at a time of massive drought across a wide area of the country.
</span>
Do they think these businesses will all close?
</div></div>

A lot have said they can take this but if its the same next year, then they have a major problem.

Q

Qtec
08-02-2012, 05:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Work Activities – Activities that count toward a State’s participation rates are (some restrictions may apply):

unsubsidized or subsidized employment
work experience
on-the-job training
job search and job readiness assistance – not to exceed 6 weeks in a 12-month period and no more than 4 consecutive weeks (but up to 12 weeks if a State meets certain conditions)
community service
vocational educational training – not to exceed 12 months
job skills training related to work
education directly related to employment
satisfactory secondary school attendance
providing child care services to individuals who are participating in community service. </div></div>

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">TANF is a block grant program to help move recipients into work and turn welfare into a program of temporary assistance </div></div>

It seems that to qualify, you have to be actively be doing something that will help you get a job.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know a couple of people, not many, that are choosing to stay on unemployment for weeks on end instead of getting a new job because they are making more money on UE than they would at the jobs that are available right now. They are taking the free money.

eg8r </div></div>

Unemployment insurance is something you pay for. Its not a hand out.
Its no surprise that you praise Romney for exploiting the system but when ordinary folks do it, who actually need the money, you sing a different tune.

Q

LWW
08-02-2012, 05:55 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why is the left upset?

<span style="color: #3333FF">They are upset that GOP policies are causing American produce to rot at a time of massive drought across a wide area of the country.
</span>
Do they think these businesses will all close?
</div></div>

A lot have said they can take this but if its the same next year, then they have a major problem.

Q </div></div>

Yet you have made a hero of FDR who caused US produce to be burned during the dustbowl?

LWW
08-02-2012, 06:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unemployment insurance is something you pay for. Its not a hand out.

Q </div></div>

Really?

How much does it cost me?

Where do I go if I want to buy some?

How does someone opt out if they don't want it?

Where do you come up with this nonsense?

Qtec
08-02-2012, 07:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Federal-state joint programs

The idea of <span style='font-size: 17pt'>unemployment insurance</span> in the United States originated in Wisconsin in 1932.[27] In the United States, there are 50 state unemployment insurance programs plus one each in the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and United States Virgin Islands. Through the Social Security Act of 1935, the federal government of the United States effectively encouraged the individual states to adopt unemployment insurance plans.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program jointly financed through federal and state employer payroll taxes </span>(federal and state UI taxes).[28] Generally, employers must pay both state and federal unemployment taxes if:

(1) they pay wages to employees totaling $1,500 or more in any quarter of a calendar year; or,[28]
(2) they had at least one employee during any day of a week during 20 weeks in a calendar year, regardless of whether the weeks were consecutive. However, some state laws differ from the federal law.[28]

To facilitate this program, the U.S. Congress passed the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), which authorizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to collect an annual federal employer tax used to fund state workforce agencies. FUTA covers the costs of administering the Unemployment Insurance and Job Service programs in all states. In addition, FUTA pays one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provides for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits. As originally established, the states paid the federal government </div></div>

Q

eg8r
08-02-2012, 08:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It seems that to qualify, you have to be actively be doing something that will help you get a job.</div></div>Your interpretation seems a bit off from sofla's...[qutoe]Nobody can receive cash assistance under Temporary Aid for Needy Families (TANF) unless they are working.[/quote]LOL, it is always best for me to get out from the middle of a fight between differing interpretations from two lefties.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Unemployment insurance is something you pay for. Its not a hand out.</div></div>Nobody paid for the increase in time you are allowed to collect the free handout.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Its no surprise that you praise Romney for exploiting the system but when ordinary folks do it, who actually need the money, you sing a different tune.
</div></div>When did Romney start collecting unemployment?

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-02-2012, 09:01 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I'm always astounded to hear people claiming the lazy wallow around on welfare forever, when that hasn't been true for over 16 years now. </div></div>I am always astounded when I hear people that believe this BS. You tell us you believe in conspiracy theories but then sit there and honestly tell us that there is no way people are getting around this? What a joke. Would you mind going to look up the definition of "working" as defined in that act and come back and let us know if it appears to be pretty lenient or easily side stepped.

I know a couple of people, not many, that are choosing to stay on unemployment for weeks on end instead of getting a new job because they are making more money on UE than they would at the jobs that are available right now. They are taking the free money.

eg8r </div></div>

A drop in the bucket when compared to the waste and corruption in the defense industry, and it is an industrym The Military-Congressional Industrial Complex.

We spend more money on defense than any country, and yet we have people hungry!

Disgusting!

Taxing the wealthy instead of cutting their taxes, as Romney plans to do, and cutting out tax loopholes annd subsidies for the corporate polluters, and cutting way down on defense spending, would solve our deficits problems. Nitpicking over who is and isn't on unemployment, is a drop in the bucket comparitively.

Why should the usffering Middle Class Americans who have seen the millionaire oursourcers, just like Romney, send their jobs overseas, be forced to continue to pay more so that millionaires and billionaires can pay less?

Just like Ann Romney, who formed a foreign corporation for her Equestrian corporation, to avoid American taxes on her lavish Equestrian spa near L.A., and her lavish life style, taking advantage of tax loopholes, while she is abusing her animals, corporate pigs like the Romneys are the source of America's job losses, not the job seekers you love to blame for everything.

Americans can't all be living off defense contracts, a real scam which is proven huge in waste, corruption and cronism, wasting billions every year.
G.

eg8r
08-02-2012, 09:36 AM
A lot of ranting that has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-02-2012, 09:50 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body">A lot of ranting that has nothing to do with what we are discussing.

eg8r </div></div>

To the contrary, this is what has nothing to do with the discussion.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I know a couple of people, not many, that are choosing to stay on unemployment for weeks on end instead of getting a new job because they are making more money on UE than they would at the jobs that are available right now. They are taking the free money.

eg8r

</div></div>

There is no 'Free money'.

Additionally, judgeing the system by a few personal friend, is far from anything resembling a broad assessment of the whole system.

G.

eg8r
08-02-2012, 10:07 AM
Actually it is free money. They don't have to work and are getting paid more money than if they did go back to work. Free money all the way.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-02-2012, 10:10 AM
No it isn't free money. They paid into it their entire working lives to insure that if they needed it, it would be there.



G.

eg8r
08-02-2012, 10:17 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No it isn't free money. They paid into it their entire working lives to insure that if they needed it, it would be there.</div></div>That was only for a specified amount of time. Congress has expanded that amount of time to 99 weeks, I think, which was never funded. Free money all the way.

eg8r

Gayle in MD
08-02-2012, 10:38 AM
Probably free for the two people you know! Relatives?

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/laugh.gif

Gayle in MD
08-02-2012, 11:21 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: eg8r</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">No it isn't free money. They paid into it their entire working lives to insure that if they needed it, it would be there.</div></div>That was only for a specified amount of time. Congress has expanded that amount of time to 99 weeks, I think, which was never funded. Free money all the way.

eg8r </div></div>

You never know what you're talking about!

G.

eg8r
08-02-2012, 11:51 AM
LOL, so says the hot air machine in MD.

eg8r

LWW
08-02-2012, 12:08 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> <div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Federal-state joint programs

The idea of <span style='font-size: 17pt'>unemployment insurance</span> in the United States originated in Wisconsin in 1932.[27] In the United States, there are 50 state unemployment insurance programs plus one each in the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and United States Virgin Islands. Through the Social Security Act of 1935, the federal government of the United States effectively encouraged the individual states to adopt unemployment insurance plans.

<span style='font-size: 17pt'>Unemployment insurance is a federal-state program jointly financed through federal and state employer payroll taxes </span>(federal and state UI taxes).[28] Generally, employers must pay both state andH federal unemployment taxes if:

(1) they pay wages to employees totaling $1,500 or more in any quarter of a calendar year; or,[28]
(2) they had at least one employee during any day of a week during 20 weeks in a calendar year, regardless of whether the weeks were consecutive. However, some state laws differ from the federal law.[28]

To facilitate this program, the U.S. Congress passed the Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), which authorizes the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to collect an annual federal employer tax used to fund state workforce agencies. FUTA covers the costs of administering the Unemployment Insurance and Job Service programs in all states. In addition, FUTA pays one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provides for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits. As originally established, the states paid the federal government </div></div>

Q </div></div>

Thanks ... it's a tax paidg by employers that neither employers nor employees have any ability to shop rates, increase/decrease coverage or opt out of.

So ... why did you lie and say it was insurance that workers paid for?

Soflasnapper
08-02-2012, 05:43 PM
It is the contention on the right that all taxes on companies are passed through, to consumers, or in this case, employees.

Yep. The employers' 'matching' FICA comes out of the pay scale of the workers, as does their FUTA and other employer related expenses, like workmen's comp.

LWW
08-02-2012, 08:05 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">It is the contention on the right that all taxes on companies are passed through, to consumers, or in this case, employees.

Yep. The employers' 'matching' FICA comes out of the pay scale of the workers, as does their FUTA and other employer related expenses, like workmen's comp.

</div></div>

OMFG ... even hen you get it you don't get it.

Yes, all taxes are passed through ... to the buyer of the end product or service.

Must I school you EVERY day?