Author Topic: Why Not Pay People to NOT Work (Read 3034 times)

miskie · « **on:** April 21, 2009, 03:36:17 PM »

You read that right. Stupidity linked here.

Quote from: Yavin4

Yavin4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-21-09 04:01 PM

Original message
Why Not Pay People to NOT Work

Yes, you read it correctly. The government should just pay people to NOT work. Here's my reasoning:

1. There has been negative Job Growth in the Private Sector. When you analyze the economic data for this decade, private sector job growth has declined, esp. when take out the job growth related to the credit/housing/consumption bubble.

2. Outsourcing of Manufacturing and IT jobs to low labor cost production nations will continue and strengthen even when the credit markets stabilize. The American worker cannot compete with $2/hr. labor. They just cannot.

3. The economy is still largely dependent on the U.S. consumer. Paying a percentage of the workforce to NOT work allows them to continue consuming which will save some jobs.

4. This program would be paid for by cutting defense spending, raising corporate taxes on mega corporations, and closing tax loopholes.

By paying a significant percentage of the U.S. workforce to stay home and NOT work, we will do more to stabilize and support the economy. We will be saving the jobs of the people who are dependent on consumer spending.

For a bunch of folks who feel that waterboarding is wrong, they certainly enjoy torture when it comes to logic.

ScubaGuy · « **Reply #1 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:42:49 PM »

Early bid for DUmmie of the year?

Mike220 · « **Reply #2 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:43:52 PM »

Umm, isn't that what we're doing now?

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #3 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:47:13 PM »

ECONOMICS 101: While inflation has many causes one of its primary exciters is too much currency chasing too few goods. In other words: if everyone were a millionaire a loaf of bread would cost $1,000. Poor people actually keep prices down as suppliers attempt to reach as broad a market spectrum as production costs will allow.

By paying people to not work:

A) the non-workers do not, by definition, produce thus lowering the number of goods available to be spent on the ever-increaasing cash supply.

B) the cash supply increases because cash is being fed into the system independent of productive output, i.e. paying non-producers

C) productivity will further decrease when people realize they can be paid for doing nothing. You will have to write a law that will dictate who is allowed to not work for a living and who must support them.

D) those who do remain productive will see their wages and profits evaporate as they pay for non-producers thus limiting their ability to act as consumers in particularly critical ways, i.e. investment, retooling, hiring etc.

JohnnyReb · « **Reply #4 on:** April 21, 2009, 03:50:02 PM »

Quote from: Mike220 on April 21, 2009, 03:43:52 PM

Umm, isn't that what we're doing now?

Hell man, we've been doing it for 50 years already......and the democrats will continue doing until they run out of everyone elses money.

Lord Undies · « **Reply #5 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:09:05 PM »

Quote

hedgehog (1000+ posts) Tue Apr-21-09 04:14 PM
Response to Original message
3. Me! Pick Me!

We have a volunteer.

jukin · « **Reply #6 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:25:11 PM »

Stupid like that must hurt.

Mike220 · « **Reply #7 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:31:39 PM »

Quote from: jukin on April 21, 2009, 04:25:11 PM

Stupid like that must hurt.

If only. See #1 in sigline.

Eupher · « **Reply #8 on:** April 21, 2009, 04:39:05 PM »

After one of my rare forays into DU, the only thing I can do is shake my head in utter disgust and marvel at the capacity of the human mind for idiocy.

Ralph Wiggum · « **Reply #9 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:16:51 PM »

Quote

Yavin4 (1000+ posts)
Tue Apr-21-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #1
2. When GM Collapses

it will flush thousands of workers into the work force at a bad time. These workers have little or no real job prospects, and they will only add to the misery.

Why not just pay them to stay home? That will take them out of the job market and decrease competition for jobs.

Basically, this DUmmy is acknowledging that his UAW union brethren are unqualified for work. Good job, we've all known that for years.

Happy Fun Ball · « **Reply #10 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:42:30 PM »

Quote from: Mr Snuggle Bunny on April 21, 2009, 03:47:13 PM

ECONOMICS 101: While inflation has many causes one of its primary exciters is too much currency chasing too few goods. In other words: if everyone were a millionaire a loaf of bread would cost $1,000. Poor people actually keep prices down as suppliers attempt to reach as broad a market spectrum as production costs will allow.

By paying people to not work:

A) the non-workers do not, by definition, produce thus lowering the number of goods available to be spent on the ever-increaasing cash supply.

B) the cash supply increases because cash is being fed into the system independent of productive output, i.e. paying non-producers

C) productivity will further decrease when people realize they can be paid for doing nothing. You will have to write a law that will dictate who is allowed to not work for a living and who must support them.

D) those who do remain productive will see their wages and profits evaporate as they pay for non-producers thus limiting their ability to act as consumers in particularly critical ways, i.e. investment, retooling, hiring etc.

E) high inflation will devalue the very money that the government spends, so it must spend more to compensate, thus causing even more inflation.

F) with nothing of substance to back up the dollar, the government just keeps printing and spending money like there's no tomorrow and further increasing inflation and the debt. The dollar (or just about any paper money) isn't technically actual money, but a banknote; a contract of future payment with something more substantial, and eventually that debt will have to be repaid. And more dollars simply won't cut it then.

Carl · « **Reply #11 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:43:05 PM »

Once again DUmmies do not disappoint in being the first to take from society rather then contribute to it.

Useless pieces of shit.

franksolich · « **Reply #12 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:50:54 PM »

Quote from: Carl on April 21, 2009, 05:43:05 PM

Once again DUmmies do not disappoint in being the first to take from society rather then contribute to it.

Useless pieces of shit.

Carl, sir, you're too nice in describing the primitives.

My opinion's even lower.

thundley4 · « **Reply #13 on:** April 21, 2009, 05:55:39 PM »

Quote from: Ralph Wiggum on April 21, 2009, 05:16:51 PM

Basically, this DUmmy is acknowledging that his UAW union brethren are unqualified for work. Good job, we've all known that for years.

the UAW admitted this several years ago when they got the car companies to agree to pay them for not working. This would be the perfect "job" for those UAW members.

The Village Idiot · « **Reply #14 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:18:52 PM »

Quote from: miskie on April 21, 2009, 03:36:17 PM

You read that right. Stupidity linked here.

For a bunch of folks who feel that waterboarding is wrong, they certainly enjoy torture when it comes to logic.

Logic should file a civil rights lawsuit against DU

The Village Idiot · « **Reply #15 on:** April 21, 2009, 06:24:03 PM »

Quote from: Lord Undies on April 21, 2009, 04:09:05 PM

We have a volunteer.

DU goes wild with happy just thinking about it!!

USA4ME · « **Reply #16 on:** April 21, 2009, 07:42:05 PM »

Quote from:

Yavin4

Why Not Pay People to NOT Work

Yes, you read it correctly. The government should just pay people to NOT work. Here's my reasoning:

1. There has been negative Job Growth in the Private Sector. When you analyze the economic data for this decade, private sector job growth has declined, esp. when take out the job growth related to the credit/housing/consumption bubble.

2. Outsourcing of Manufacturing and IT jobs to low labor cost production nations will continue and strengthen even when the credit markets stabilize. The American worker cannot compete with $2/hr. labor. They just cannot.

3. The economy is still largely dependent on the U.S. consumer. Paying a percentage of the workforce to NOT work allows them to continue consuming which will save some jobs.

4. This program would be paid for by cutting defense spending, raising corporate taxes on mega corporations, and closing tax loopholes.

By paying a significant percentage of the U.S. workforce to stay home and NOT work, we will do more to stabilize and support the economy. We will be saving the jobs of the people who are dependent on consumer spending.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=5505879&mesg_id=5505879

And the leemings fall right in line.

.

thundley4 · « **Reply #17 on:** April 21, 2009, 07:51:12 PM »

Dupe. The original is pinned at the top.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,27804.0.html

Radix · « **Reply #18 on:** April 21, 2009, 07:52:51 PM »

Terrific idea.

Rush hour traffic jams will be relieved, unemployment insurance will go down, promotions for those who do work will be less competitive, office politics will be minimized, more efficiency resulting from less water cooler time because workloads will be increased, employee discounts will be more lucrative, etc.....

USA4ME · « **Reply #19 on:** April 21, 2009, 08:11:12 PM »

Quote from: thundley4 on April 21, 2009, 07:51:12 PM

Dupe. The original is pinned at the top.

http://www.conservativecave.com/index.php/topic,27804.0.html

Oops! I try to be careful about dupes. Oh well, can't get it right all the time.

.

franksolich · « **Reply #20 on:** April 22, 2009, 05:04:11 AM »

Quote from: USA4ME on April 21, 2009, 08:11:12 PM

Oops! I try to be careful about dupes. Oh well, can't get it right all the time.

Nothing to worry about, sir.

Nobody's duplicated more threads than franksolich.

In fact, I can "boast" of having the first 4 threads ever duplicated on conservativecave, just after our new digs got underway.

crockspot · « **Reply #21 on:** April 23, 2009, 11:42:55 AM »

The OP's suggested policy is already in effect. Since I was laid off and went on unemployment, my checking account actually has a little more money in it than when I was working.

Consider me a man of leisure.

thundley4 · « **Reply #22 on:** April 23, 2009, 11:51:15 AM »

Quote from: crockspot on April 23, 2009, 11:42:55 AM

The OP's suggested policy is already in effect. Since I was laid off and went on unemployment, my checking account actually has a little more money in it than when I was working.

Consider me a man of leisure.

You can save on gas not having to drive to work and back.

Flame · « **Reply #23 on:** April 23, 2009, 01:07:03 PM »

Quote from: thundley4 on April 23, 2009, 11:51:15 AM

You can save on gas not having to drive to work and back.

think how we can save the planet, by just paying the people to just stay home instead of drive to work..all that gas not being burned!

Duke Nukum · « **Reply #24 on:** April 23, 2009, 05:15:53 PM »

Paying people not to work, isn't that what bailouts have been all about?

News:

Author Topic: Why Not Pay People to NOT Work (Read 3034 times)