Joe Biden

[tdawg87]

2 minutes ago, Toby Flenderson said:

Did you know Sig Sauers are made in New Hampshire?

I see commercials for them regularly, or I guess I should say the "academy".

Not into that. Just show me how to go pew pew if someone is trying to molest my pristine virgin buttocks.

[Jason]

6 hours ago, cals said:

You lie.

You don’t think he has a pristine virgin butt?

[Redondo]

[tdawg87]

Branco is a genious.

[UndertheHalo]

On 5/6/2021 at 1:58 PM, mtangelsfan said:

LOL, you are clearly better off without mt 

It’s not true, i love you 

[Blarg]

It suddenly got weird.

[UndertheHalo]

Just now, Blarg said:

It suddenly got weird.

 Luv u 2 Blarg 

Edited May 8, 2021 by UndertheHalo

[Blarg]

Even weirder!

[UndertheHalo]

12 minutes ago, Blarg said:

Even weirder!

 

[Redondo]

Biden says Americans must accept a job or lose unemployment benefits after disappointing jobs report

President Biden on Monday pledged to enforce unemployment insurance laws so that no American can "game the system" to get paid not to work – but maintained that sweetened jobless benefits are not to blame for the lackluster April jobs report.

"We’re going to make it clear to anyone collecting unemployment who is offered a suitable job they must take the job or lose their unemployment benefits," Biden said during prepared remarks from the East Room.  

Biden said his administration is taking steps that will make it easier for employers to hire more workers, including accelerating aid for hard-hit child care providers, expanding states' reemployment services and beginning to distribute $350 billion in aid to state and local governments as part of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief law passed earlier this year.

But the president rejected a recent push by Republicans to end, or severely curtail, the $300-a-week unemployment benefit extension included in the American Rescue Plan. 

 

How are you going to enforce that Joe?

Why not agree with curtailing the $300 per week?

[gotbeer]

55 minutes ago, Redondo said:

Biden says Americans must accept a job or lose unemployment benefits after disappointing jobs report

President Biden on Monday pledged to enforce unemployment insurance laws so that no American can "game the system" to get paid not to work – but maintained that sweetened jobless benefits are not to blame for the lackluster April jobs report.

"We’re going to make it clear to anyone collecting unemployment who is offered a suitable job they must take the job or lose their unemployment benefits," Biden said during prepared remarks from the East Room.  

Biden said his administration is taking steps that will make it easier for employers to hire more workers, including accelerating aid for hard-hit child care providers, expanding states' reemployment services and beginning to distribute $350 billion in aid to state and local governments as part of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief law passed earlier this year.

But the president rejected a recent push by Republicans to end, or severely curtail, the $300-a-week unemployment benefit extension included in the American Rescue Plan. 

 

How are you going to enforce that Joe?

Why not agree with curtailing the $300 per week?

 

That's all right.  If they cut off unemployment, you could always go the homeless route and get more aid that way.

[gotbeer]

1 hour ago, Redondo said:

Biden says Americans must accept a job or lose unemployment benefits after disappointing jobs report

President Biden on Monday pledged to enforce unemployment insurance laws so that no American can "game the system" to get paid not to work – but maintained that sweetened jobless benefits are not to blame for the lackluster April jobs report.

"We’re going to make it clear to anyone collecting unemployment who is offered a suitable job they must take the job or lose their unemployment benefits," Biden said during prepared remarks from the East Room.  

Biden said his administration is taking steps that will make it easier for employers to hire more workers, including accelerating aid for hard-hit child care providers, expanding states' reemployment services and beginning to distribute $350 billion in aid to state and local governments as part of the $1.9 trillion coronavirus relief law passed earlier this year.

But the president rejected a recent push by Republicans to end, or severely curtail, the $300-a-week unemployment benefit extension included in the American Rescue Plan. 

 

How are you going to enforce that Joe?

Why not agree with curtailing the $300 per week?

Just to play devil's advocate, but how is this going to work?

You apply for a job.  You are offered a job for $15 an hour (minimum wage), no benefits, and part time.  Fuck that, no thanks.  Government, you were offered a job, you have to take it. 

In other words, for the first time, in probably decades, the employee has all the power.  Now the employers who have been screwing the employee are crying foul because it turns out that no one really wants to work at crappy paying, low wage, no benefit, part time jobs.  

Government thinks it's bad now.  Wait till hero pay mandates expire.  

 

[Don]

20 hours ago, gotbeer said:

Just to play devil's advocate, but how is this going to work?

You apply for a job.  You are offered a job for $15 an hour (minimum wage), no benefits, and part time.  Fuck that, no thanks.  Government, you were offered a job, you have to take it. 

In other words, for the first time, in probably decades, the employee has all the power.  Now the employers who have been screwing the employee are crying foul because it turns out that no one really wants to work at crappy paying, low wage, no benefit, part time jobs.  

Government thinks it's bad now.  Wait till hero pay mandates expire.  

 

I saw an ice cream shop out here post something on FB the other day about having to close on certain days because they were "extremely busy", but unable to find enough workers to handle the volume of customers every day of the week. It was just hilarious to me. They were basically admitting they'd rather close their doors a few days a week than pay people enough to convince them to work there. Sounded like a pretty shitty business model.

[Jason]

9 minutes ago, Don said:

I saw an ice cream shop out here post something on FB the other day about having to close on certain days because they were "extremely busy", but unable to find enough workers to handle the volume of customers every day of the week. It was just hilarious to me. They were basically admitting they'd rather close their doors a few days a week than pay people enough to convince them to work there. Sounded like a pretty shitty business model.

How much should someone be paid to scoop ice cream and put it on a cone? Anyone who turns down a job should be cut off from the relief aid. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Toby Flenderson

[Don]

Just now, Toby Flenderson said:

How much should someone make to scoop ice cream and put it on a cone? Anyone who turns down a job should be cut off from the relief aid. 

As much as it takes for them to agree to do it. And agreed about anyone turning down a job being cut off... but one would need to be offered a job first, probably by actively seeking one out. If you want to hire ice cream scoopers for $9/hr or whatever, and nobody wants to sign up, then you're obviously not incentivizing people enough. If that's because of an artificial parachute for individuals created by government, then that obviously needs to be corrected as well.

[Lhalo]

3 minutes ago, Don said:

As much as it takes for them to agree to do it. And agreed about anyone turning down a job being cut off... but one would need to be offered a job first, probably by actively seeking one out. If you want to hire ice cream scoopers for $9/hr or whatever, and nobody wants to sign up, then you're obviously not incentivizing people enough. If that's because of an artificial parachute for individuals created by government, then that obviously needs to be corrected as well.

Well this is what's happening. 

You laugh because a business can't afford to compete with government's handouts and keep their doors open? WTF?

[Jason]

5 minutes ago, Don said:

As much as it takes for them to agree to do it. And agreed about anyone turning down a job being cut off... but one would need to be offered a job first, probably by actively seeking one out. If you want to hire ice cream scoopers for $9/hr or whatever, and nobody wants to sign up, then you're obviously not incentivizing people enough. If that's because of an artificial parachute for individuals created by government, then that obviously needs to be corrected as well.

Gotcha. I misread what you wrote. We are in agreement on this.  

[gotbeer]

14 minutes ago, Toby Flenderson said:

How much should someone be paid to scoop ice cream and put it on a cone? Anyone who turns down a job should be cut off from the relief aid. 

If you are going to be forced to take a job.  Would you take a minimum wage (in the ice cream shop case, probably less than minimum wage since it's probably a service industry and makes you rely on tips for income), not full time, more than likely fluctuating hours, no benefit job.  Or only apply to jobs that are full time with benefits and steady hours?  Because most people do not want to work 4 jobs, just to make ends meet.

This if you turn down a job, you should be cut off from relief aid is going to backfire spectacularly.  Because people just won't apply for crappy jobs anymore.  Because the government has proven that these people are frontline or essential workers that are hero's that deserve.

[Don]

16 minutes ago, Lhalo said:

Well this is what's happening. 

You laugh because a business can't afford to compete with government's handouts and keep their doors open? WTF?

One, I think it's a giant leap to assume that everyone in the potential hiring pool for such jobs is actively on unemployment. Two, if your business model doesn't allow you to remain open despite high demand and sales volume, then you may need to rethink the business model.

[Jason]

27 minutes ago, gotbeer said:

If you are going to be forced to take a job.  Would you take a minimum wage (in the ice cream shop case, probably less than minimum wage since it's probably a service industry and makes you rely on tips for income), not full time, more than likely fluctuating hours, no benefit job.  Or only apply to jobs that are full time with benefits and steady hours?  Because most people do not want to work 4 jobs, just to make ends meet.

This if you turn down a job, you should be cut off from relief aid is going to backfire spectacularly.  Because people just won't apply for crappy jobs anymore.  Because the government has proven that these people are frontline or essential workers that are hero's that deserve.

I imagine most good paying jobs that people were laid off from are coming back with the pandemic coming to an end. I'm sure there are some that won't be but it's probably not a high number of them. I would assume that much of the layoffs were from service industry jobs (restaurants, movie theaters, etc..) that probably never paid great money before all of this happened. If someone was in a lower paying job, got laid off and then got the stimulus and additional federal aid to supplement their unemployment then they shouldn't be able to still receive the aid if there are comparable jobs out there and they decline to take them because unemployment pays more. 

Edited May 11, 2021 by Toby Flenderson

[Crampknees]

54 minutes ago, Toby Flenderson said:

How much should someone be paid to scoop ice cream and put it on a cone? Anyone who turns down a job should be cut off from the relief aid. 

Me personally to scoop ice cream, I need $50 per scoop and I need to be allowed to bring my cooler of beer to work. 

[St1ck]

3 minutes ago, Crampknees said:

Me personally to scoop ice cream, I need $50 per scoop and I need to be allowed to bring my cooler of beer to work. 

I used to date a chick that worked at Baskin Robbins. She gave me free sundaes and I gave her the banana split. 

[Jason]

1 minute ago, st1ckboy said:

I used to date a chick that worked at Baskin Robbins. She gave me free sundaes and I gave her the banana split. 

That's a legit deal right there

[Lou]

1 minute ago, st1ckboy said:

I used to date a chick that worked at Baskin Robbins. She gave me free sundaes and I gave her the banana split. 

But you were her 31st flavor. 

[Lou]

56 minutes ago, Don said:

As much as it takes for them to agree to do it. And agreed about anyone turning down a job being cut off... but one would need to be offered a job first, probably by actively seeking one out. If you want to hire ice cream scoopers for $9/hr or whatever, and nobody wants to sign up, then you're obviously not incentivizing people enough. If that's because of an artificial parachute for individuals created by government, then that obviously needs to be corrected as well.

Or maybe paying them more than $9/hr results provides no benefit to the owner.