3 ms·
Yes its better not to pay them at all because it sends a strong economic signal of "go do something else you're not wanted here". Far better they get a new car
by VLM 10y ago
Yes its better not to pay them at all because it sends a strong economic signal of "go do something else you're not wanted here".
Far better they get a new career and become net sources of tax money rather than net sinks.
At the macro level you have a totally different problem if there's 320 million people and only 90 million jobs, well...
There is no logical reason retraining or breaking into a market naturally requires receipt of food stamps. If there were a healthy demand, pay would be healthy.
- humanrebar 10y agoThere is healthy demand for lower risk employees. It's a big ask for an employer to sink $50k into an unknown employee. If we want people to make bets on the inexperienced and untrained, we need to lower the stakes. $40k/year is a big bet. Telling people to just find another industry is well and good, but what industry will pay a 55 year old underemployed person full salary and benefits just in case they're a tragically misunderstood diamond in the rough. And this is a real problem. The employment rate is in the basement. There are structural issues that need addressed.