Economists, please explain.
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
I see one of two explanations... 1) Some women are unemployed only because they can no longer afford day care for their kids... So by subsidizing it, you get the women to work, and increase the demand for child care workers at the same time. OR 2) The politicians don't know what they're talking about, so are falling back on the old "Think of the children!" argument.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
- Provide employment for Day Care Workers - good thing. 2) Get more short skirts into offices - good thing. 3) Um...
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
They do it do break up the family. Both the man and the women must work to make ends meat, or the women dumps the man because nobody wants to hire men anymore, further breaking up the family. The kids get their full government indoctrination.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
They do it do break up the family. Both the man and the women must work to make ends meat, or the women dumps the man because nobody wants to hire men anymore, further breaking up the family. The kids get their full government indoctrination.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
That could have gone in a much more X-rated direction.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels) -
That could have gone in a much more X-rated direction.
Proud to have finally moved to the A-Ark. Which one are you in?
Author of the Guardians Saga (Sci-Fi/Fantasy novels)I thought it was going to when I saw DD had replied to it...
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
-
They do it do break up the family. Both the man and the women must work to make ends meat, or the women dumps the man because nobody wants to hire men anymore, further breaking up the family. The kids get their full government indoctrination.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
There are times when I really wish that any government could be as organised as you make them out. Unfortunately, I have yet to see any government that could successfully run a bath, let alone plan a vast and subtle conspiracy to demoralise, denigrate and dominate citizens.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
Are part time workers cheaper in terms of employment conditions? If so then it could be an attempt to get more part time/flexible workers in the market (mothers temd to fill theese kinds of roles) thys freeing the economy from the emploters frmo the risk of taking on full time employes.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
-
Are part time workers cheaper in terms of employment conditions? If so then it could be an attempt to get more part time/flexible workers in the market (mothers temd to fill theese kinds of roles) thys freeing the economy from the emploters frmo the risk of taking on full time employes.
Morality is indistinguishable from social proscription
They are in the UK - for example part-timers are not eligible for overtime pay until they have worked the same number of hours as a full time employee would have. So you can employ two PT to cover the same hours (say 15 + 15) as a FT worker (say 30), but if they do extra hours, each PT can get basic wage until they have worked 30 hours - lots cheaper for the employer. There are others differences but they basically all add up to benefits for the company, not the worker.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
-
They do it do break up the family. Both the man and the women must work to make ends meat, or the women dumps the man because nobody wants to hire men anymore, further breaking up the family. The kids get their full government indoctrination.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
harold aptroot wrote:
But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care.
Silly. Just put the kids to work, too. Added benefit: manuals for cheap merchandise from the UK will not need translating into garbled English.
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
Bad day to ask the English that our government has today announced measures to sack/lay off/delete/expunge at least 500,000 publicly employed workers while at the same time introducing draconian measures to force the unemployed and the sick back into work. All in the name of creating more jobs.
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Personal Music Player[^]
-
There are times when I really wish that any government could be as organised as you make them out. Unfortunately, I have yet to see any government that could successfully run a bath, let alone plan a vast and subtle conspiracy to demoralise, denigrate and dominate citizens.
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
That is what you tell yourself to make you feel safer, but in reality the government controls just about every part of your life. They aren't stupid, If they were stupid they wouldn't be in power.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
That is what you tell yourself to make you feel safer, but in reality the government controls just about every part of your life. They aren't stupid, If they were stupid they wouldn't be in power.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
CaptainSeeSharp wrote:
If they were stupid they wouldn't be in power
Have you ever met a politician? Getting the shoes on the right feet is a major challenge!
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
-
That is what you tell yourself to make you feel safer, but in reality the government controls just about every part of your life. They aren't stupid, If they were stupid they wouldn't be in power.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
-
Bad day to ask the English that our government has today announced measures to sack/lay off/delete/expunge at least 500,000 publicly employed workers while at the same time introducing draconian measures to force the unemployed and the sick back into work. All in the name of creating more jobs.
pseudonym67 My Articles[^] Personal Music Player[^]
-
As we all know, there is unemployment. But still certain members of parliament are trying to get more women to work, by (for example) subsidizing day care. Why? What good would it do? Wouldn't that just result in an even higher unemployment rate?
It's about the votes. And remember, it doesn't need to make sense to you, but it probably makes sense to the ones that are affected.
"When did ignorance become a point of view" - Dilbert
-
- Provide employment for Day Care Workers - good thing. 2) Get more short skirts into offices - good thing. 3) Um...
Real men don't use instructions. They are only the manufacturers opinion on how to put the thing together.
OriginalGriff wrote:
- Get more short skirts into offices - good thing.
As politically incorrect as it is... I agree...
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
Please oh Please take my five... :laugh:
I wasn't, now I am, then I won't be anymore.
-
That is what you tell yourself to make you feel safer, but in reality the government controls just about every part of your life. They aren't stupid, If they were stupid they wouldn't be in power.
Invisible Empire: A New World Order Defined (High Quality 2:14:01)[^] Watch the Fall of the Republic (High Quality 2:24:19)[^] The Truthbox[^]
You don't need to be intelligent to be a lying, manipulative weasel. In fact from what I've seen it helps if you aren't. Of course thanks to Mr. Dunning and Mr. Kruger we have an explanation as to why they may think they are, but typically they aren't. Take Palin for example. It doesn't take a rocket scientist(or even an English major) to tell you that comparing yourself to Shakespeare because you make up words is a remarkably bad idea, but she did.
