Chicago Boyz

                 
 
 
What Are Chicago Boyz Readers Reading?
 

 
  •   Enter your email to be notified of new posts:
  •   Problem? Question?
  •   Contact Authors:

  • CB Twitter Feed
  • Blog Posts (RSS 2.0)
  • Blog Posts (Atom 0.3)
  • Incoming Links
  • Recent Comments

    • Loading...
  • Authors

  • Notable Discussions

  • Recent Posts

  • Blogroll

  • Categories

  • Archives

  • Unemployment

    Posted by Assistant Village Idiot on February 3rd, 2020 (All posts by )

    Some NH towns are below 2% for unemployment now. As a consequence, you will be seeing more people working who have bad attitudes and/or have no idea what they are doing.

    Don’t get me wrong.  It’s a good thing that no one, neither their families nor the government, has to work to support them. Even partial survival in the workforce is a benefit for everyone concerned. It’s just that I want you to remember to be of good cheer when you are being served by knuckleheads, grifters, and punks. It’s all for the best. It is making it harder on charities that rely on volunteers, though.  They increasingly have to turn to retired people, who have bad backs and bad digestions, to get their jobs done. It doesn’t make low unemployment a bad thing.  It’s just a downside.

    There is also a growing movement of people on disability working under the table, because they can get hired and make extra.  I want to be supportive of everyone obeying the law and not abusing the system, but in the longer view I am not that upset.  First, it’s not likely to last forever. The economy is chugging along, but things happen, like China having a new coronavirus and suddenly depressing world trade; it’s hard to imagine that there won’t be at least a minor downturn in the next few years.* Secondly, people get reminded how having a job and doing something useful is satisfying and will strive to keep it even if growth slows.  Some will enter legal employment programs (MEAD in NH) that allow them to keep their insurance, so they are not only employed, but even paying a bit in taxes. That is psychologically a good thing.  I had psychologist friend years ago who followed these things, and insisted that requiring people to pay something in taxes, even if it means giving them more in cash benefits, was good for both the recipients and the national morale of everyone feeling that they are in this together.  He was very big on not helping the poor with “invisible” benefits like housing and Medicaid, which don’t have clear dollar signs.  Those, he said, make the rich feel better but do less for the poor – and the national understanding – than benefits with dollar signs.  “People understand dollar signs very well,” he used to say.  “They don’t understand safety nets nearly as well.” I can’t prove this to you and I may be deluding myself here.  But that does seem intuitively true.

    A few will even re-enter the legal workforce, having found a slot in a business that needs them and is willing to put up with their limitations. Ex-cons, the dull or socially clumsy, and  obviously-pregnant women have initial entry barriers to employment that are higher than the continuing barriers. Joe Bob Briggs over at Taki’s Mag discusses that here.

    Back to my original point: rejoice that the irritating SOB isn’t sitting at home waiting for his mother or girlfriend to bring him food, like a limpet.

    *The reader should know that my economic predictions are consistently wrong.

     

    4 Responses to “Unemployment”

    1. MCS Says:

      When I was hiring people for manual labor, I was asked by the state employment agency if I would consider people on parole/probation. I decided that I would, at least partially on the basis that It was hard to see how they would stay out of prison if they couldn’t get a job.

      I would love to relate a heart warming story of redemption but I can’t. Several of the ones that I’m aware of ended up back in some sort of custody. I also don’t have any horror stories. I wasn’t giving them access to my bank account and supervised them pretty closely. Overall, they were neither noticeably better or worse that the non-felons I hired. I did notice a consistent lack of judgement making decisions in their lives but even that wasn’t probably that different form the others. Twenty years of hearing stories that begin – “I was at the bar and -“, were a little less common in this group because of monitoring.

      The parole/probation department was supposed to supervise these guys but seemed to consider inconveniencing me as a sideline. My employees were constantly having to take time off for check ins and drug tests during work hours.

      I never made a point of finding out what the charges were, the ones I knew about would be considered violent felonies such as assault, armed robbery and one murder during a robbery. If I was prevented from asking directly about prison, I’m confident that I would pick it up in the first 30 seconds of face to face, once you’ve seen the mannerisms, they are very distinctive and rather disquieting.

    2. Mike K Says:

      On the subject of felons as employees, I have had some conversations with prison guards who were joining the military, either full time or reserves. We talked about the prisoners. What was it like being a guard ?

      They all agreed that prisoners are the most manipulative people on earth. We talked about the problems with female guards. So many of them get involved with male prisoners. “Selling refrigerators to Eskimos” is the theme.

    3. JaimeRoberto Says:

      And hookers will be more expensive and less attractive. At least that’s what I hear.

    4. MCS Says:

      I don’t know if they were trying to manipulate me or not, I just know it grated on my nerves. A sort of studied subservience and I hate being called boss or chief.

      I’m glad that there are people willing to be prison guards, I can’t imagine wanting to spend my life in prison, even if they let me out every night.

    Leave a Reply

    Comments Policy:  By commenting here you acknowledge that you have read the Chicago Boyz blog Comments Policy, which is posted under the comment entry box below, and agree to its terms.

    A real-time preview of your comment will appear under the comment entry box below.

    Comments Policy

    Chicago Boyz values reader contributions and invites you to comment as long as you accept a few stipulations:

    1) Chicago Boyz authors tend to share a broad outlook on issues but there is no party or company line. Each of us decides what to write and how to respond to comments on his own posts. Occasionally one or another of us will delete a comment as off-topic, excessively rude or otherwise unproductive. You may think that we deleted your comment unjustly, and you may be right, but it is usually best if you can accept it and move on.

    2) If you post a comment and it doesn't show up it was probably blocked by our spam filter. We batch-delete spam comments, typically in the morning. If you email us promptly at we may be able to retrieve and publish your comment.

    3) You may use common HTML tags (italic, bold, etc.). Please use the "href" tag to post long URLs. The spam filter tends to block comments that contain multiple URLs. If you want to post multiple URLs you should either spread them across multiple comments or email us so that we can make sure that your comment gets posted.

    4) This blog is private property. The First Amendment does not apply. We have no obligation to publish your comments, follow your instructions or indulge your arguments. If you are unwilling to operate within these loose constraints you should probably start your own blog and leave us alone.

    5) Comments made on the Chicago Boyz blog are solely the responsibility of the commenter. No comment on any post on Chicago Boyz is to be taken as a statement from or by any contributor to Chicago Boyz, the Chicago Boyz blog, its administrators or owners. Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners, by permitting comments, do not thereby endorse any claim or opinion or statement made by any commenter, nor do they represent that any claim or statement made in any comment is true. Further, Chicago Boyz and its contributors, administrators and owners expressly reject and disclaim any association with any comment which suggests any threat of bodily harm to any person, including without limitation any elected official.

    6) Commenters may not post content that infringes intellectual property rights. Comments that violate this rule are subject to deletion or editing to remove the infringing content. Commenters who repeatedly violate this rule may be banned from further commenting on Chicago Boyz. See our DMCA policy for more information.