HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Any DUers living in Irela...

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:36 AM

 

Any DUers living in Ireland? Is this story true?

http://intentious.com/2012/04/07/ireland-the-slave-capital-of-europe/

April 7, 2012 | Keelan Foley | 6 Comments
Ireland: The slave capital of Europe

On first glance this title may appear to be a bit extreme. Especially for those of you with the fantastical view of Ireland as a green lush country over-populated with mystical little leprechaun’s, where we dance our way to the pub to battle our on going love affair with the ‘black stuff’ (by which of course I mean Guinness). A more likely story reads closer to these lines. The green has long been washed out of our lands thanks to the almost non-stop year round rainfall. Also we do not dance our way to the pub for two reasons. One being that the literal meaning of the term ‘slip jig’ would be put to the test with our abundance of rainfall. The second, and more plausible, reason being that the cost of a ‘night out’ in our recently nominated ‘happiest country in the world’ would amount to a bill equaling a weekly spend on groceries. And what about the slaves I hear you ask?

Ok, so Ireland may not be leading the way in terms of conventional slavery, by which I mean that there is not a great deal of human trafficking carried out in this country. Not to say that it does not happen. But in terms of this article I hope to highlight a new form of slavery which has actually been spearheaded by our very own Minister for Social Protection. Ironic right? Well welcome to Ireland. The land of 1000 welcomes and all that. But at this point I suppose you want to hear about this legal brand of slavery?

Here in Ireland our devout ministers and government officials, looking for a solution to the great unemployment epidemic which is spreading through the country, have come up with a ‘flawless’ amendment to the problem. In a genius moment of clarity they have decided that the main problem surrounding employment is money. Well salary and wages to be precise. So to counteract this problem, they decided to stop paying workers. But of course this would be illegal, so they opted to pay workers 5o euro per week instead and have label it as the ‘National Internship Scheme’. But let me clarify this a little bit. Of course the entire working population takes home more than a measly 50 euro per week. I should have specified earlier that the scheme only applies to educated workers, who have obtained a formal College/University degree.

The aim of the National Internship Scheme is to assist in breaking the cycle where job seekers are unable to get a job without experience, either as new entrants to the labour market after education or training or as unemployed workers wishing to learn new skills. The scheme will also give people a real opportunity to gain valuable experience to bridge the gap between study and the beginning of their working lives.

(www.jobbridge.ie)

152 replies, 12931 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 152 replies Author Time Post
Reply Any DUers living in Ireland? Is this story true? (Original post)
Zalatix Apr 2012 OP
MADem Apr 2012 #1
Zalatix Apr 2012 #3
MADem Apr 2012 #10
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #16
MADem Apr 2012 #40
HooptieWagon Apr 2012 #28
MADem Apr 2012 #54
Zalatix Apr 2012 #29
MADem Apr 2012 #32
Zalatix Apr 2012 #39
MADem Apr 2012 #44
Zalatix Apr 2012 #63
MADem Apr 2012 #73
Zalatix Apr 2012 #74
MADem Apr 2012 #75
Zalatix Apr 2012 #76
MADem Apr 2012 #81
Zalatix Apr 2012 #89
MADem Apr 2012 #91
Zalatix Apr 2012 #96
MADem Apr 2012 #99
Zalatix Apr 2012 #105
MADem Apr 2012 #106
Zalatix Apr 2012 #108
MADem Apr 2012 #110
Zalatix Apr 2012 #112
MADem Apr 2012 #115
Zalatix Apr 2012 #116
MADem Apr 2012 #118
Zalatix Apr 2012 #119
MADem Apr 2012 #122
Zalatix Apr 2012 #125
MADem Apr 2012 #126
Zalatix Apr 2012 #128
MADem Apr 2012 #131
Zalatix Apr 2012 #132
MADem Apr 2012 #133
Zalatix Apr 2012 #134
MADem Apr 2012 #135
Zalatix Apr 2012 #136
MADem Apr 2012 #137
Zalatix Apr 2012 #138
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
MADem Apr 2012 #139
Zalatix Apr 2012 #140
LineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineLineReply .
MADem Apr 2012 #141
Zalatix Apr 2012 #142
MADem Apr 2012 #143
Zalatix Apr 2012 #144
MADem Apr 2012 #145
Zalatix Apr 2012 #146
MADem Apr 2012 #147
Zalatix Apr 2012 #148
MADem Apr 2012 #149
Zalatix Apr 2012 #150
MADem Apr 2012 #151
Zalatix Apr 2012 #152
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #85
Zalatix Apr 2012 #90
Mojorabbit Apr 2012 #62
MADem Apr 2012 #67
Mojorabbit Apr 2012 #77
MADem Apr 2012 #79
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #5
MADem Apr 2012 #7
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #13
Zalatix Apr 2012 #30
MADem Apr 2012 #35
MADem Apr 2012 #33
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #36
MADem Apr 2012 #46
MADem Apr 2012 #34
tsuki Apr 2012 #18
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #21
MADem Apr 2012 #47
MADem Apr 2012 #37
Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #23
MADem Apr 2012 #38
Zalatix Apr 2012 #129
MADem Apr 2012 #130
Zanzoobar Apr 2012 #2
MADem Apr 2012 #8
saras Apr 2012 #4
MADem Apr 2012 #11
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #15
MADem Apr 2012 #41
Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #24
MADem Apr 2012 #50
Honeycombe8 Apr 2012 #27
Liquorice Apr 2012 #6
MADem Apr 2012 #9
Yo_Mama Apr 2012 #12
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #14
Yo_Mama Apr 2012 #17
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #19
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #22
MADem Apr 2012 #55
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #60
MADem Apr 2012 #69
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #78
MADem Apr 2012 #80
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #100
MADem Apr 2012 #101
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #102
MADem Apr 2012 #103
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #104
MADem Apr 2012 #107
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #111
MADem Apr 2012 #113
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #121
MADem Apr 2012 #123
alcibiades_mystery Apr 2012 #124
MADem Apr 2012 #127
MADem Apr 2012 #53
MADem Apr 2012 #48
Bluenorthwest Apr 2012 #25
MADem Apr 2012 #49
Drahthaardogs Apr 2012 #20
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #31
Drahthaardogs Apr 2012 #52
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #56
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #57
Drahthaardogs Apr 2012 #64
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #65
MADem Apr 2012 #120
Zorra Apr 2012 #26
MADem Apr 2012 #42
Cerridwen Apr 2012 #43
MADem Apr 2012 #92
aikoaiko Apr 2012 #45
Posteritatis Apr 2012 #51
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #58
MADem Apr 2012 #68
Zalatix Apr 2012 #114
MADem Apr 2012 #117
riderinthestorm Apr 2012 #59
HiPointDem Apr 2012 #61
riderinthestorm Apr 2012 #70
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #66
riderinthestorm Apr 2012 #71
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #72
riderinthestorm Apr 2012 #82
MADem Apr 2012 #83
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #86
MADem Apr 2012 #87
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #88
MADem Apr 2012 #93
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #94
MADem Apr 2012 #95
Fumesucker Apr 2012 #97
MADem Apr 2012 #98
KamaAina Apr 2012 #84
Codeine Apr 2012 #109

Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:49 AM

1. I am not an expert but I took it to mean that you got fifty euro in ADDITION to your welfare money

That's what the job bridge site seems to say (this is a GOI website, not a commercially copyrighted/for profit one, FYI so paragraph rules do not apply).

JobBridge, the new National Internship Scheme provides work experience opportunities for unemployed people. The scheme started on 1 July 2011 and will be open for 2 years until 30 June 2013. It is aimed at people who have been either getting a jobseeker’s payment or signing for credits for at least 3 months. Participants in the scheme will be offered an internship of between 6 and 9 months with a host organisation. If they take up an internship they will keep their social welfare payment and will get an extra €50 per week.

JobBridge is administered by FÁS employment services and programmes which were transferred to the Department of Social Protection in January 2012.

Participants

How do I qualify for the scheme?
To be eligible for the JobBridge scheme you must be unemployed and:

Getting Jobseeker’s Benefit (JB) or Jobseeker’s Allowance (JA) or signing on for credits
andGetting JB, JA or signing on for credits for a total of 3 months* or more in the last 6 months.

*Since 26 September 2011 periods spent on the Back to Education Allowance, VTOS, FÁS/Fáilte Ireland training courses, Youthreach, FIT, Community Employment Schemes, Tús, the Rural Social Scheme, Back to Work Scheme, Job Initiative or Job Assist may count towards meeting the eligibility of JobBridge, provided:

You have completed these programmes
You have signed back onto the Live Register
You are getting JA, JB or jobseeker credits immediately before starting on JobBridge
You cannot start the internship until your eligibility for JobBridge is confirmed by the Department of Social Protection – see ‘How to apply’ below.

Internships may be offered in a wide range of employment sectors and occupations in public, private and community and voluntary organisations.

How long does the internship last?
Under the National Internship Scheme you can work as an intern in a host organisation from 6 months up to a maximum of 9 months. You will work at least 30 and no more than 40 hours a week.


http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/unemployment_and_redundancy/employment_support_schemes/national_internship_scheme.html


To me, it sounds a lot like "Welfare to Work" programs. It gives unemployed people work experience while collecting welfare plus fifty euro a week so they are more competitive for regular employment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:21 AM

3. And employers pay $50 a week for this labor.

 

Guess who that puts them in competition with...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #3)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:59 AM

10. Well, when wages go down, prices do, too.

And prices in Europe are outrageous.

Seriously, though--this is not an optimal situation, but you tell me, plainly, what the GOI should do. I really would like to know what you want them to do to "fix" this. FORCE corporations to hire people at full wages when they don't want to? How many more companies will leave Ireland if they pull that kind of shit, I wonder? Punish corporations with extra taxes who don't hire "enough" people? Watch the exodus--they'll probably set up shop in Greece, where there are plenty of willing workers and a government desperate for any income at all. Or should they just throw that extra fifty euro at kids and let them stay home with the XBox?

One of the things that separates Ireland from other nations is the sheer quality of their workforce. They are educated. Now, even in a contracting economy, the GOI is taking steps to ensure that, despite a lack of real jobs, they aren't just educated, they're also trained and work-ready. When things improve, as they will, Ireland will be in better shape than nations which have a large "habitually unemployed" sector of their population.

Please--tell me what they should do. I am open to other ideas and will jump aboard if you can come up with a couple of good 'uns. I really would like to know how you'd solve Ireland's unemployment woes, above and beyond this FDR-esque scheme. If you can come up with a solution, you will be lauded around the globe. When we have that sorted, we can work on Greece, next, and then Spain.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:42 AM

16. Really pushing that "FDR" thing, there. This kind of scheme actually *encourages* businesses *not*

 

to hire people at normal rates. Why should they, when the government lets them pay people $2 an hour?

If those businesses can't make a profit except by paying non-living wages, they need to go out of business -- so says basic economics. And if there's a job there and they *can* make a profit, they don't need to be given an incentive to undercut wages.

This is a subsidy to employers and an anti-labor measure disguised as aid for the unemployed. And repeated mouthing of "FDR" doesn't gild that ugly weed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #16)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:02 PM

40. You keep snarking at me--but you haven't told me what Ireland should do.

Tell me. Go on. Tell me how Ireland should fix this problem.

I am ALL EARS.

Do you actually think those businesses "need" those workers? Hell no. They are in a position where they can make the ones they pay a salaried wage to work harder for less money. When there are no fucking jobs, the employee isn't calling the shots. And I hardly doubt, unless all the positions throughout Ireland are completely moronic (unlikely in the extreme) that a nine-month internship, one year, max, over a limited two year period (which would mean that the corporation would have to retrain for the position at least twice, maybe three times) is going to be the be-all and end-all solution to their woes. At best, it enables the salaried workers to work a little less hard and it gives the intern a blurb for their resume.

This is a two year program, it is self-limiting, and anyone who applies (and NO ONE HAS TO) gets nine months to a year of work experience and that's it. It's a resume builder and a workforce training experience. And no one HAS to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:07 PM

28. I was in Italy a few years ago

Except for gas and diesel it was quite affordable... especially food and wine. Train fare was cheap, too. Hotels a little less than US, not by a lot though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HooptieWagon (Reply #28)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:33 PM

54. I lived there for many years in/around the Bush 1-Clinton era.

It was still a lira economy, and prices were higher than in America. Food was not overpriced if you knew where to go, but basic goods were dear, and hotels--with the exception of pensiones--weren't a bargain at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #10)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:30 PM

29. That's a fairy tale. Prices never go down as fast as wages do.

 

And what should Ireland do? Repudiate the debt, or just do what Iceland did.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #29)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:20 PM

32. Did I say they kept pace with one another?

What would you have Ireland do? Leave people on the dole, and not do anything? Give them just the welfare money and tell them all to fuck themselves?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #32)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:57 PM

39. That would be no worse than putting them to work for $50 a week

 

and putting them in competition with others trying to get a livable wage.

Corporations will get addicted to $50 a week labor and will not be easily weaned.

Do you even understand how badly that'll affect an economy?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #39)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:15 PM

44. Not if they have to change out staff every nine months--and this is a TWO YEAR program.

It is self-limiting.

Again--I want you to tell me what Ireland should do.

Please. Stop crabbing at me like I am the fucking enemy and tell me, in plain English, what Ireland should do to deal with crippling unemployment?

Is it better to just leave people sitting on their asses at home? You do realize that not all the jobs that are on offer are in "corporations?" Many are in the public sector, and some are traditionally "volunteer" positions that the government is paying the unemployed this stipend (in addition to their welfare payments) to do. You would know this if you read the link.

You do realize that these internships are nine lousy months? A year tops? And that the entire program is self limiting and will go AWAY after two years?

Do you "get" this? Or are you glomming onto the "corporate" thing because ... well, it gives you something to holler about?

You give me the solution. Please. I am waiting for something other than "You are an asshole because you do not see things my way" and no one can tell me what GOI should do.

I'll write to the GOI myself and pass on your swell ideas, if anyone can come up with any. Start talking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #44)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 03:59 AM

63. I told you already. They should do what Iceland did. And I did not call you an asshole so stop lying

 

And I'll believe it's a limited program when they actually follow through on that 9-month/2 year limit.

If they don't, then you will sorely regret supporting this, because Ireland will be stuck with Europe's cheapest and most impoverished labor force and the situation they're in now will look like their glory days.

So no, I will NEVER STOP CRABBING.

As I told you before, Ireland should have done like Iceland did. Since you did not read that and chose to get all offended, I'll elaborate, and hopefully it'll stick this time. Ireland should forgive the mortgage debt for all citizens, hold taxpayers unaccountable for the bank debts, and repeal any move that nationalizes any private debt.
http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/survey/so/2011/CAR110311A.htm

Do you get it yet?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #63)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:09 PM

73. And how will forgiving mortgage debt solve the problem? Elaborate.

Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

You want the government to pay the mortgages? "And hopefully it will stick this time?" What, precisely, will stick? Iceland is not "fixed." You're apparently not paying attention.

Iceland had an unemployment spike in 2010, but it never had the unemployment woes that Ireland is having even at their worst unemployment levels, so I really don't take your attempt at a point. Iceland has not solved that problem yet either--they are still dealing with higher than usual unemployment figures. Oops--what do the kids call that? A big fail?

Iceland Unemployment Rate

The unemployment rate in Iceland was last reported at 7.3 in February of 2012. From 2001 until 2010, Iceland's Unemployment Rate averaged 3.03 percent reaching an historical high of 9.30 percent in February of 2010 and a record low of 0.80 percent in September of 2007. The labour force is defined as the number of people employed plus the number unemployed but seeking work. The nonlabour force includes those who are not looking for work, those who are institutionalized and those serving in the military. This page includes: Iceland Unemployment Rate chart, historical data and news.
http://www.tradingeconomics.com/iceland/unemployment-rate

So, you, I fear, are the one who apparently doesn't "get it yet." You will just have to try again. Or not. I'm afraid your "solution" is not a solution at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #73)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:35 PM

74. What?! Iceland did not pay the banks holding the debts!

 

The banks were left to deal with it on their own.

You really don't understand what they did in Iceland, do you? Sheesh. Before you bash my solution, LEARN WHAT IT IS, FIRST.

One thing that it is NOT: it is NOT the Government bailing out the banks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #74)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:47 PM

75. It didn't help unemployment--and that's what the subject matter is in this thread, in case you are

unclear as to the point of the discussion.

Unemployment is Iceland is ON THE RISE--it's creeping up towards that all time high in 2010. The trend is UP, not down.

Your response to the problem is "Don't pay your mortgage bills?"

Yeah, that's a doozie! Look how well it's not working in Iceland--if the unemployment rate is somehow a "success" indicator!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #75)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:52 PM

76. Sigh. If Ireland hadn't wasted that money on bank bailouts they could have fixed unemployment

 

by hiring unemployed people in public works programs at LIVABLE WAGES.

If your mortgage bill is forgiven, guess what? You have extra money to spend somewhere else. To generate sales. Which leads to more hiring.

Again, Iceland's solution is relevant.

BTW thank you for admitting you were wrong and that Iceland did not bail out the banks. Even if you didn't want to outright admit it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #76)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:23 PM

81. But....but....but....the problem isn't public jobs--it's those EVIL corporations, hiring at slave

wages!

I should be the one with the brick wall--you keep changing your arguments.

What--you want Ireland to be a public works welfare state? That's your "solution?"

Please. Surely you can do better than THAT.

If your mortgage bill is forgiven, you do not have "more money to spend elsewhere" if you do not have a j-o-b. You seem to be missing that critical piece of the pie.

You do realize that the people who are taking these internships, likely as not, are in some sort of council housing? They're not paying mortgages. They are living in subsidized public housing.

I never said Ireland bailed out the banks. Do read. TRY, now. Go back and look. All I did was ask questions, and you were unable to come up with anything sounding like a workable answer. To this point, you still haven't come up with anything that makes a lick of sense.

Here--do some reading about Irish mortgages. You don't quite have the bubble on the topic: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0414/1224314729260.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #81)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:55 PM

89. My arguments have not changed. Quit making shit up.

 

I never said Ireland bailed out the banks. Do read. TRY, now. Go back and look. All I did was ask questions, and you were unable to come up with anything sounding like a workable answer. To this point, you still haven't come up with anything that makes a lick of sense.


You wrote:
Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

You want the government to pay the mortgages? "


And I called you out for implying that I said Ireland should pay the mortgages, which I never once said. YOU should learn to read.

And... a public works welfare state? What kind of nutjob argument is that? I am proposing exactly what FDR did. Did FDR make America into a public works welfare state?

The FDR solution will work for Ireland. History shows it worked for us. If Ireland did like Iceland and refused to bail out the banks it could pay for public works projects instead. Just like FDR did.

Let me repeat since you are hell-bent upon opposing me:
1) Dump the banks and tell them "YOYO".
2) Forgive mortgage debts so Irish citizens are less loaded down with personal debts.
3) Take the Government money saved from telling the banks "YOYO" and do what FDR did: fund public works projects to hire Irish workers at livable wages.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #89)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 03:22 PM

91. You are unclear as to the meaning of a question mark? Apparently, you are.

I didn't "say" anything. I "implied" nothing. I ASKED. You could have cleared up the matter by responding, but you didn't. Instead, you accused, snarked and dodged.

You don't seem to understand that the greatest number of the unemployed people in Ireland have no mortgages along with no jobs. They live in council housing on the damn dole. While I certainly do not disagree that banks offering better terms to people having issues with their mortgage is a GOOD thing, and I would certainly be in favor of such a development, that's not going to solve the unemployment problem (if you will note, it did not solve the problem in ICELAND, either) --all it will do is help people in danger of walking away from their homes and applying for a spot in council housing or looking for a rental to hang on to their homes.

A huge percentage of the people who make up that unemployed figure are non-Irish migrants with rights of habitual residency and refugees, who were let go from menial positions but who qualify for government subsidies. You're going to put Haditha in her hijab out on the road with a pickaxe, doing "public works projects?" Really? That's your solution?

Most of the sectors that "took the hit" in this jobs downturn were manual labor and low level jobs--construction, retail, service jobs in the restaurant and hospitality industries, that kind of work. Your solution sounds like you want to put the final nail in the construction industry's coffin in Ireland to keep people busy, even if they aren't qualified to do the work.

You're going to take work away from an already underperforming private sector, and let "government" build that school or library building instead of O'Malley's Construction Company? You're going to let the "government" construct that roadway or parking lot instead of Finnigan's Paving? You'd want the government to manage the work of creating that new park, instead of O'Brien's Landscaping? How well will that go over with a guy who has been working construction all his life, to see a job he should be doing getting done by a guy with no experience while he sits on his hands waiting for work to keep his business afloat?

Ireland doesn't have an "infrastructure" problem like the USA did. They have a sufficiency of roads and bridges, in good repair too. They aren't bursting out of their seams with a shortage of schools or libraries. They've been prioritizing education of their population for decades now.

All you're doing is shifting the lack of work from the under-employed sectors back to the unemployed, from people with experience, to people with NO experience.

You're playing a shell game, and solving nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #91)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 04:33 PM

96. Oh I saw your question mark. I also know what a RHETORICAL question is.

 

Let's look at that "question" again. I had mentioned Iceland on a number of occasions before you posted that... "question".

So either you didn't understand how Iceland handled the banks, or you were intentionally implying that I didn't understand how Iceland handled the banks, or you were throwing out a rhetorical question which was intended to accuse me of suggesting Ireland bail out the banks. Which was it? Let's make no mistake here - you attacked me first. I said do what Iceland did, and if you knew what you were talking about, you should have realized right off that bringing up Iceland means NOT giving a dime of bailout money to the banks. Why was that not glaringly apparent?

Now, about your criticisms of applying FDR tactics to Ireland's current mess. You wrote:
Most of the sectors that "took the hit" in this jobs downturn were manual labor and low level jobs--construction, retail, service jobs in the restaurant and hospitality industries, that kind of work.

So, if the Government were to fund public works projects, these very same construction workers that you admitted were put out of work (help me out here, did you or did you not say construction workers were hit in this economic downturn?), would be replaced by people with no experience? No, these folks would be the first to get hired for new public works projects. And why wouldn't the funding go to Finnegan's Painting? They'd get Government contract work, or are you arguing that Government contract work is either not possible or relevant? Or are you just flat-out unaware that public works programs are what FDR did during the Great Depression?

If Ireland doesn't have an infrastructure problem then the Government could take that money that they wouldn't spend on bailing out banks and do better for the workers than FIFTY BUCKS A WEEK.

Apparently what's missing here is you don't get the original article writer's point: businesses will dump these workers once they have to pay more than $50 a week. In the world of labor prices this is a giant shot of crack cocaine right up the nose for employers.

Abuses will happen. Companies have already TRIED to exploit this. They will find loopholes or they will evade enforcement activity. Existing workers WILL find themselves in competition with $50/week workers. They WILL be displaced.

Ireland may well go ahead with that solution, MADem. Ireland will regret this. Mark my words. I will come back and tell you, "I told you so".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #96)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:23 PM

99. There you go with that "implied" shit again. I do not "imply." I do not accuse. I do not suggest.

My only goal was to have a forthright CONVERSATION, not play games. You just weren't ready to hear ANYTHING that wasn't part of the Me-Too Chorus supporting that horrible and inaccurate article you were shopping.

I invite your attention to some of the links Cerridwen has posted to this thread that are very salient, from mainstream sources, and that accurately describe this program in all its dimensions. I've also posted a link in this thread to give us all a better idea as to what sectors and workforce personnel are being most affected by this downturn in Ireland.

One more time--the people who got crapped on first in this downturn, since you don't "get" what I am saying, are not the OWNERS or very skilled labor employed by the construction companies, but low level employees--often migrant workers--non-Irish people who have been in the country long enough to qualify as "habitual residents," eligible for the dole, subsidized housing, etc., who do things in construction like haul bricks and make cement. Service workers, too, like dishwashers, busboys, fast food workers are out of work; unskilled laborers, like moppers, chambermaids, landscaper assistants. Bottom of the barrel, unskilled labor. This training scheme is not for many of them, owing to language barriers. The ones who are skilled in English have a better chance with the program--because many of those lowly laborers are actually better educated than their circumstances imply (which is common when immigrants come to a new country with a language barrier to overcome). The other big-and-growing segment of the unemployed sector are the kids coming out of school with no job experience and no hope of finding work--that's where this scheme comes in. That is who is targeted, here. It is geared towards entry level workers in need of work experience and TRAINING.

Now, let me address your remarks about those construction workers. Because there are less jobs, the more experienced personnel, the carpenters, sheet-rockers and so forth, don't have "apprentices" to help with the scut work (these are the migrant-unemployed residents I am talking about) because they aren't getting the amount of jobs they used to get. They still have the companies, they still try to find work where they can, they just aren't working full bore, because people are not hiring, so they laid off the unskilled people, and if they need cement mixed on the job, they do it themselves, and if they need bricks shifted, they do that themselves as well. They just aren't hiring those "entry level" or "menial job" people.

What's the difference between hiring a company to "subcontract" public works projects, and asking companies to provide realistic, meaningful, supervised job training? I'll tell you -- at the end of the job training, the prospective employee can do something more than mix concrete or wheel a barrow full of bricks.

I thought the companies and corporations were the ENEMY in your example, anyway--why now, are you positioning them as government subcontractors-- an instrument to the cure of Ireland's woes?

Further, Ireland does not have infrastructure problems or shortfalls, like we did when FDR was finding a solution--putting people to work fixing things that are not broken is a pointless exercise. They have a well maintained, more-than-adequate infrastructure. They aren't in need of an FDR-style refitting by way of "hard labor" on a national level. They have plenty of schools, libraries, etc., and their stuff is in good repair.

The LAST thing you are missing is that the corporations ARE NOT PAYING FOR THESE INTERNS. They do not pay one single, solitary Euro for 'em (it's Euros, not bucks, FWIW). The GOVERNMENT pays that extra fifty, not the corporations. Why would the government do this? Because it's not "slave labor"--it really is a JOB TRAINING scheme.

The corporations have to make certain promises to the government in order to even get an intern. Most importantly, they have to pledge that the intern is NOT replacing a "real" worker. It's a bit of value added for them, nothing more.

The corporation also has to pledge to provide "supervised, meaningful training" in exchange for the internship grant. The worker cannot be "unsupervised." The work can not be rote or menial. They also have to submit to being inspected on a random basis to insure compliance.

There were problems at the start of the program and the government moved quickly to fix them and stop those abuses--so no "waiter" internships, no "pizza dough maker" internships, or "Vajazzler" internships, either. All that is covered in the links elsewhere in this thread.

You bought off on the worst-case/evil-corporate-government-sucks scenario. The reality is not as you have been led to believe. This is a scheme that gives kids out of school a bullet for their resume and a reference that a prospective employer can call to find out if the worker is any good, if he/she shows up on time, understands the workplace culture, dresses appropriately, is a go-getter and motivated, that kind of thing. It also gives the corporations an opportunity to "try before they buy" if they are thinking of adding on more workers. If someone does well at an internship, and someone retires or they want to add on workers, the corporation will probably go with the intern they know, rather than a stranger--and everyone benefits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #99)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 07:15 PM

105. Oh, really? Then why did you even bring up the government bailing out the banks?

 

I said the solution was to do what Iceland did. What inspired you to even ask me if I felt Ireland should do what Iceland DECLINED to do?

You don't get to throw that at me and then run away from it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #105)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 07:41 PM

106. Go back--I didn't bring up the banks at all--I asked a question after YOU brought up the banks.

I was talking about unemployment in Ireland, which is bad, and you started talking about banks in ICELAND.

I pointed out that Iceland's unemployment, for Iceland, is once again bad and getting worse--but that's only after you were the one who averred that Iceland's solution re: the banks was a solution to Ireland's woes.

I'm not running away from anything. I was not the first person to throw down "banks." YOU were.

If you'd stuck to the topic of "unemployment in Ireland and the Job Bridge scheme, you wouldn't have a need to start trying to blame me for a subject matter you--not me-- threw down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #106)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 07:56 PM

108. You did bring up the banks. You "asked" me this, do you remember?

 

Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

What in God's name inspired you to ask that question after I said Ireland should do what Iceland did?

If you knew what Iceland did, you would have already known in advance what my answer was to your question. There was absolutely no rational reason for you to ask "Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?" except if you were trying to imply something... or unless you don't know what Iceland did.

Again... which is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #108)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:02 PM

110. No -- you did. You said--rather self-importantly, too

As I told you before, Ireland should have done like Iceland did. Since you did not read that and chose to get all offended, I'll elaborate, and hopefully it'll stick this time. Ireland should forgive the mortgage debt for all citizens, hold taxpayers unaccountable for the bank debts, and repeal any move that nationalizes any private debt.


You brought it up--you were the one who went all the way to ICELAND to avoid the subject of unemployment in Ireland--NOT ME.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #110)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:16 PM

112. You're shooting yourself in the foot.

 

You cite me as bringing up the banks:
hold taxpayers unaccountable for the bank debts,


Stop. Think for a second. You asked after that:
Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?


When you hold taxpayers unaccountable for bank debts, how does that translate into the government paying the banks holding the debt? You do realize that the government = taxpayers, right?

Again, you have failed to show the rational basis for why you asked "Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?"

For the thousandth time, you were either trying to accuse me of suggesting Ireland pay the banks' debts, or you didn't understand what Iceland did. Which is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #112)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:21 PM

115. Yes--AFTER that. You brought them up. I simply asked AFTER you brought them up in the first place.

If you didn't want to talk about the banks, why did YOU (not me--YOU) bring them up?

Good grief.

Stop moving the goalposts--it doesn't work. YOU brought up banks, not me, and anyone reading the thread can see that.

I wanted to talk about Ireland, you were the one who rambled on about banks and Iceland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #115)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:25 PM

116. I'm not moving the goal posts. The same question for the 1001th time.

 

When you hold taxpayers unaccountable for bank debts, how does that translate into the government paying the banks holding the debt?

Why do you keep running away from that question? YOU ACCUSED ME of suggesting Ireland pay for those private debts. I DEMAND to know why.

You will not escape that. I will not stop dogging you about that as long as you keep replying. Get used to it. I will not relent. Ever.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #116)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:29 PM

118. Wait a minute--you said you didn't bring up banks, and now you are demanding I respond to questions

about them. That's rich!!

I am not running away from any question--especially questions about topics you claimed to not bring up. However, I'm here to talk about Ireland's unemployment--not to dance all over the world, to Iceland and beyond, with you--because you've lost the bubble on your own OP.

I'll tell you what I will never escape--the lousy logic you have mustered here in an attempt to change the subject away from the Job Bridge scheme in Ireland--which is not the awful, corporate load of crap you keep trying to pretend it is. It's a government program, and you don't have a single detail right about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #118)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:34 PM

119. YOU ACCUSED ME of suggesting Ireland pay for those private debts. I DEMAND to know why.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #119)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:48 PM

122. I accused you of NOTHING. I asked you questions. That's not accusing. And the only reason I asked

you questions was because YOU--not ME-- brought up banks, and Iceland, and provided a big long link that I don't think you actually even read, and wanted to talk about everything but Ireland's Job Bridge scheme--which is the topic of this OP that YOU started.

When asking a question becomes an accusation, we're really through the looking glass.

Since the riff now (since you seem to be setting a decided TONE here--and it is an unpleasant one) is to make DEMANDS, I demand to know why you didn't answer the questions I asked, I demand to know why you denied that you brought up banks first when you DID bring them up first, and I demand to know why you are demanding that I answer questions when you won't extend the same courtesy to me--how do you like them apples?

You are, sir, behaving very badly indeed and your conduct is quite apparent to anyone reading this thread.

I suggest you start a conversation with your banking pal on this thread, and perhaps start a fight about FDR with him, if you'd like. You are getting nowhere with me, and that is entirely your own fault.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #122)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 09:19 PM

125. Yes, YOU DID ACCUSE ME of suggesting Ireland pay for those private debts. I DEMAND to know why.

 

You are wrong. I never once suggested Ireland pay for those debts. You had no reason to ask me if I did make such a suggestion.

You are, sir, behaving very badly indeed and your conduct is quite apparent to anyone reading this thread.


Then go find those people and have them tell me how 'apparent' it is. I challenge you.

You had no rational reason to ask me if I wanted Ireland to pay those banking debts. No rational reason at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #125)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:11 PM

126. Repetition does not make an inaccurate comment accurate.

You brought up the banks, you provided the link.

It's on you, no matter how often or how vociferously--through the (also repeated) use of the dramatic "accuse" word--you say otherwise.

I think you really need to get one of those lives most people have. You're not getting the drama you seek out of me, because I will not play your silly game. I came to this thread to talk about unemployment in Ireland, and here you are, hijacking your own thread away from the topic of the OP and trying to draw people into mindless fights...for what purpose? To what end?

There's a paucity of rationality afoot--but don't throw that at me, either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #126)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:33 PM

128. Yes, YOU DID ACCUSE ME of suggesting Ireland pay for those private debts. I DEMAND to know why.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #128)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:58 PM

131. No, I did not.

You can keep insisting that all day--and I'll keep refuting your inaccurate claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #131)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 12:13 AM

132. You have refuted nothing. You falsely accused me with your so-called "question".

 

There was no reason for you to ask me if I wanted Ireland to pay for those banks' debts.

You are scared of addressing that. I command you to run away from that question AGAIN.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #132)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 12:18 AM

133. No--not accurate. Not a word. Sorry. You can keep on all night if you'd like.



Your conduct is very ... instructive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #133)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:17 AM

134. You made an accusation and now you're scared to own up to it.

 

You keep talking about how others see my actions but it seems you're the one who's been getting piled on here.

Again, I call you out to show who else sees things as you see it. I'm still waiting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #134)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:25 AM

135. Incorrect. Not scared. Keep trying if it makes you happy. Keep waiting, too!

You're very revealing. Not in a good way, though--in case you were unclear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #135)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:28 AM

136. I can and will go on forever. You did accuse me. You are running away from what you said.

 

FACT: you did write this.

Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?


I am 100% correct. Flawless. You've lost this debate, utterly. The only way you have out of this now is if you claim you did not write
Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

You're sunk. By your own words. Go ahead, deny you wrote that. I have screencapped it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #136)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:45 AM

137. I am right here and you're still wrong!



Seek help. Really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #137)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:04 AM

138. Feel free to still be here. That way I can keep outing you as a liar.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #138)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:48 AM

139. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #139)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:50 AM

140. Was your account hacked? Did someone else write this under your login?

 

Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #140)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:51 AM

141. .

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #141)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:53 AM

142. Okay so you admit you lied about me. Gotcha.

 

Cat finally got your tongue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #142)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 02:57 AM

143. Untrue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #143)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 03:30 AM

144. You are convicted by your own words. You wrote this.

 

Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

You want the government to pay the mortgages?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002561993#post73

Now I dare you to deny that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #144)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 03:32 AM

145. No, you're the one convicting yourself--doing a great job, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #145)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 04:12 AM

146. You are the only person who believes that.

 



In reality, you wrote
Who pays the banks holding the debt? The government?

You want the government to pay the mortgages?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #146)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 04:15 AM

147. Wrong, again. Keep it up, though--this is a great record of your behavior for future reference. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #147)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 04:36 AM

148. You're still the only one who believes that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #148)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 04:38 AM

149. Incorrect. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #149)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 10:36 AM

150. Who else signs onto your brand of irrational beliefs?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #150)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:32 PM

151. You have convinced us all that you have an intimate understanding of that subject.

You have a nice life, now. I really do hope you get some help. Thanks for proving what I thought was the case with regard to your behavior.

I will be bookmarking this thread for future reference.

Please, have the last "irrational"word. It's plain that you need it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #151)

Mon Apr 16, 2012, 01:56 PM

152. Who's "all"? You've got absolutely nothing. Bye!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #74)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:13 PM

85. By bailing out the banks, what started as a financial crisis became a sovereign debt crisis and was

 

the immediate cause of the present intractable unemployment problem all over the globe. With no end in sight, and promises (from capital) that this is the "new normal".

i.e. workers being forced to pay for the criminal activities of capital in reduced wages, unemployment, and reduced public services and public jobs.

Which is it's disingenuous to act like the unemployment crisis "just happened" and the poor government "has to do something" and unpaid internships are the best that can be done, just to help people over this bad patch, and everything will return to status quo soon.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #85)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:56 PM

90. My point exactly. Ireland should NOT have done that.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #10)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:50 AM

62. I read a while back they were pushing that here also

but I think the internships were no paying. I can see both sides. It would be great to gain some experience for people but human nature being what it is, I expect soon some full time people would be let go and their place taken by unpaid interns

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #62)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:01 AM

67. Colleges have been doing that for about 20 years or so, some of them.

Five year plans that include internships. Thing is, the idea is to give people 'credible' work experience, not work as a janitor or a window washer. They're expected to get in there and do a bit of the entry-level 'business' side of things, and to do that for just six months (or, in the case of the Ireland scheme, nine months to a year). In order to make that work, they need to be both trained and supervised.

I suppose it could work (using them as a substitute for hired workers) if you had a very willing staff who were focused on the training/supervision aspect (which would mean your employees would have to work against their own self-interests), but I can tell you from close-up and personal experience that it is a LOT of work. Before the reserves were integrated into the forces in a more seamless way, I used to have to deal with an influx of reservists periodically who arrived for their two week ACDUFORTRA with a very varied level of actual skill and experience. I got my crews to develop a two day training and assessment module (two days when they weren't actually working, but we could figure out what they knew and what they needed to learn) and we took the effort to train to weaknesses. As a consequence, we got about six to eight days of fairly solid work out of them, instead of having to trip over them for the entire two weeks, and the Service got reliable reservists who could actually jump in and do the job in a surge situation. But it wasn't 'easy' and it was disruptive to the work environment to some extent. Was it worth it? From a big picture perspective, sure. From a small group dynamic perspective? Eh. Workplaces do have their own cultures, as we all know and when you throw a newcomer in there, it always rocks the boat a bit. Once or twice we had a reservist who simply had the talents to click in a group, or who could jump in and really 'cover' for someone in a situation of illness or something like that, so sure, it was a success story, overall, IMO.--but it wasn't without effort on our part

I don't think a corporation would fire a trained worker for the joy of having two and a half untrained workers coming and going for a lousy two years. It's just too much of a liability on too many levels. Of course, if the jobs are mindless and moronic, like, say, washing floors or bagging groceries, that's a different thing altogether.

I figure, the taxpayers can subsidize people to stay home with the telly and the Xbox, or they can subsidize people to have work experience and be competitive in the job market--not just in Ireland, but in the entire EU. It is a model that has worked in other places. If it were up to me, I would make sure any model included formal training on essential elements of employment, particularly for those who have never held a job or are long-term unemployed. People sometimes think that "everyone" knows that one needs to show up for work, on time, in proper attire, ready to do the job--but not everyone understands that. If most of the job apprenticeships/internships can be found in the public or volunteer sector, good enough, too--I have no issue with that, at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #67)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:54 PM

77. I helped train student nurses

doing clinical rotation so I have a feel for it and I at one time did these rotations as a student. When my husband was a medical intern they worked him almost to total exhaustion and it did take the place of a paid individual to do the job so I can see both sides. In a less skilled type of profession it might be possible for one trained person to have two unpaid or low paid trainees to do the job of two or three people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mojorabbit (Reply #77)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:07 PM

79. I don't disagree with anything you have said.

I will say, though, in the case of a "voluntary" internship, if the company or public sector employer was in the habit of working the interns to death, I'd bet that the word would get around in a hurry and those kids would just stay home and not sign up for the scheme. Kids would also drop out in a hurry if the requirements were too brutal. They'd still get their welfare checks, no matter what.

This is a self-limiting program designed to get people into the swing of having a job, of getting up and going to work every day, and understanding workplace expectations. It's a resume builder and a reference. If you do well, you'll get good references, and maybe a leg up if the company or public sector department where you are working starts hiring.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #1)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 03:43 AM

5. It means that taxpayers subsidize employers, who get at least 30 hours of work for the equivalent

 

of about $65, or $2 an hour.

Nice deal. But not for the workers.

Why would they hire a regular worker when they can get a subsidized slave?

Drives down the price of labor, as all such schemes do.

The maximum jobseekers allowance for individuals = equivalent of $244/week = $12.6K/yr. And there's a means test which includes capital property. For example, you get docked if you have savings. And if you live with a partner getting some kind of welfare payment, "the total amount paid to you as a couple cannot exceed the maximum amount paid to one person (including adult and child dependants) on one social welfare payment."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #5)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:46 AM

7. Well, the WPA was a "make work" scheme, too, and people called FDR a genius.

Ireland is in the absolute shits when it comes to employment. http://www.google.com/publicdata/explore?ds=z8o7pt6rd5uqa6_&met_y=unemployment_rate&idim=country:ie&fdim_y=seasonality:sa&dl=en&hl=en&q=unemployment+in+ireland

What's a better idea? Leave people on the dole, lounging around, doing nothing? How about putting them to work building roads or planting trees, not using their brains or educational talents? That's what the CCC did--pretty much brute strength, there.

Most welfare-to-work schemes work in that fashion. The idea is to make the person more desirable as a future employee. Participation in an internship for a year or so lets a prospective employer know that the applicant can get his or her ass up out of bed every morning and show up for work. There's a history of success there, already.

There's means testing for those kinds of things here, too, which includes the requirement for people to go through their savings first before they qualify. Yes, it's not optimal. Certainly, it would be better if there were more jobs. No one's arguing that point.

What do you propose that the government do, though--squat and crap those jobs out? Contraction is happening everywhere--at least Ireland is coming up with something that will give people work experience for a year or so and give them something to put on a resume. The program isn't MANDATORY, is it? Stay home if you don't want the CV bullet. When the economy starts to improve, as they always do eventually, the ones who stayed home will be at the back of the line.

Really--what should the GOI do? Let "the market" decide? The market would end up deciding that those businesses would prefer to do more with less, and a very few would work much harder while many would have nothing. I give them credit for pushing forward in a rough time--I gave them credit years ago, too, when they invested in the education of their population rather than being cheap and short-sighted.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:29 AM

13. WPA did useful work and paid a living wage. It was a public works program, not a cheap labor

 

program for private employers. WPA actually *supported* wages rather than undercutting them.

No, contraction *isn't* happening everywhere. It isn't happening for financial capital, whose profits are bigger than ever. And it isn't happening for those on top generally, including the servants of big capital at the top of the workforce, the people who write the propaganda about what a great deal this kind of anti-labor program is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:31 PM

30. Ding ding ding. Livable wages, not undercutting wages

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #30)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:37 PM

35. It would be nice if it were true, but it isn't true. WPA paid borderline wages.

Last edited Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:08 PM - Edit history (1)

Summer pay scales in 1938 were: Skilled workers (69 hours per month) = $78.66, Semi-skilled workers (79 hours per month) = $62.40, Unskilled workers (107 hours per month) = $49.25. During the winter of 1938, approval for the rebuilding came from President Roosevelt for the necessary WPA money. New dam plans called for the construction to be just south of the original dam. Army Corp engineers worked 18 hours a day monitoring every step, which included spreading the dam out to absorb weight. In February 1941, the announcement was made that the county would become owner and maintainer of the park by the WPA.

...The WPA employed a maximum of 3.3 million in November 1938. Worker pay was based on three factors: the region of the country, the degree of urbanization, and the individual's skill. It varied from $19/month to $94/month. The goal was to pay the local prevailing wage, but limit the hours of work to 8 hours a day or 40 hours a week; the stated minimum being 30 hours a week, or 130 hours a month.







http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Works_Progress_Administration

I'm not going to do your homework for you, but you go to the new 1940 census--or even the 1930 census, and bounce average rents off those figures, then figure in a few bucks for heat, light, and oh--that pesky thing called FOOD--and clothes, and see how far those "living" wages stretched. You needed more than one wage earner in most domiciles, unless you were a single living in a rooming house, or taking in boarders.

If you have family still living who lived through those times, sit down with them and let them talk. It'll open your eyes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:22 PM

33. You seem to be not understanding that they are getting both their welfare check and this stipend.

You are also not understanding that they don't HAVE TO DO IT.

You want work experience? Sign up. You want to sit on your hiney playing your Xbox and collecting your welly? Go for it.

You tell me how Ireland is supposed to shit out jobs for people--go on--I'm all ears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #33)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:48 PM

36. I understand quite well that they're getting their UNEMPLOYMENT benefit and this "stipend".

 

Whether the internships are voluntary or mandatory is beside the point (though I would argue that in an economy of 15% unemployment with fewer slots than qualified people to fill them, programs like this are something other than 'voluntary'.)

The point, which you keep avoiding, is that this program allows employers to pay employees $2 an hour.Which drives down wages.

Which does not encourage employers to offer jobs at normal wages.

Which allows businesses to profit from the use of cheap, essentially slave-level labor (the compensation is far below the cost of even minimal living).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #36)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:24 PM

46. And the point you are "avoiding" is that not all the jobs are "corporate."

Many are in the "public" sector, and others are traditionally "volunteer" jobs that they are paying the stipend for people to do in order to give them JOB EXPERIENCE--as the link notes, but boy oh boy, because some are in the "private" sector, let's sound the fucking alarm.

And no one HAS to do them for the lousy fifty euro per week, for nine lousy months to a year.

And they will still get their welfare cheque, if they stay home and do nothing, or if they volunteer for the internships.

And in two years, the program ends.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #13)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:32 PM

34. Bullshit. I have relatives who benefitted from both WPA and CCC.

It was NOT a living wage. It was a wage that could keep you in a rooming house, eating meagerly, or in an apartment ONLY if other members of your family were also working and bringing home a check. The monthly wages were barely enough to keep people going on their own, particularly in urban environments. And "meaningful work?" Sure, if your gig is infrastructure improvement, I suppose so--but not everyone is cut out to build roads and bridges, and a huge percentage of the WPA cash went to hard (i.e. "slave" labor). People didn't complain though--they were grateful to have a job. Times were very hard indeed. You just aren't getting what it was like.

Your assertions are not backed up by facts. My uncle went to a CCC work camp because it included "three hots and a cot" and he ate like a horse. His leaving the nest enabled the rest of the family to have a little more chow at the dinner table.

And I would like you to tell me what you want the Government of Ireland to do. How can they "force" corporations to hire more people, without draconian measures that will drive those corporations from their shores? Do tell. I am ALL EARS.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:32 AM

18. No brains, no talent. Wow.

The WPA and CCC built roads, bridges, schools, community centers, recreational park centers, restored historical sites and built dams. Not much talent or brain power there.

We have a school in our county built in 1936 by the WPA. It is beautiful and still in commission.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tsuki (Reply #18)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:37 AM

21. And medical facilities

 

Last edited Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:50 PM - Edit history (1)



Bethpage State Park and the old Jersey City Medical Center were expanded with labor provided by the Works Progress Administration, one of the vaunted New Deal programs that put millions of people to work around the country during the Great Depression. They make up what the historian Nick Taylor called the “invisible legacy” of Depression-era public works projects in the New York region. “That legacy is all around us,” said Mr. Taylor, author of “American-Made: The Enduring History of the W.P.A.” “We just don’t see it because we take it for granted.”

Officials in the New York region were quick to take advantage of Washington’s wish to spend as much money as quickly as possible. Hague, for example, had already begun work on the Jersey City Medical Center before Roosevelt’s election. The W.P.A. money allowed him to expand the complex into the nation’s third-largest medical facility. At Hague’s insistence, the center offered medical care to all Jersey City residents regardless of their ability to pay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #21)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:32 PM

47. If you actually think every person who built that thing worked in the building trades for a living,

I have a WPA bridge to sell you.

People weren't assigned to jobs based on their desires for employment self-actualization. If you were an office worker and needed work, you could end up mixing cement on a project like that. Tell me how that is "better" -- year in and year out--than a public or private internship lasting nine to twelve months that is entirely voluntary and part of a program that will expire in two years and is solely designed to strengthen a resume, not provide an endless pool of labor?

Do you think Ireland should force their white collar workers to build roads and hospitals? Get 'em all off the welly, and give them a pick and shovel and a regular paycheck building roads, dams, bridges, schools, hospitals and libraries? Is that your solution?

If they took out the corporate jobs in this equation, and only kept in the public and volunteer ones that are part and parcel of the scheme, would that make you happy?

You still haven't said what Ireland should do. I'm waiting.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tsuki (Reply #18)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:49 PM

37. How low can you go? Nice "deliberate" misinterpretation, there.

You know what you did. It's what people do when they don't have a valid argument.

People who worked WPA or CCC didn't have CHOICE. They were grateful for the job. My uncle, who was a trained accountant, planted trees in order to Not Starve.

How nice that you have a lovely school built by WPA workers, do you suppose ALL of them were actually IN the building trades, or do you think some of them might have had other talents--I wonder how many accountants or other mid-grade, educated workers worked as hod carriers on that project? Probably way more than you care to acknowledge.

No one is saying--least of all ME--that WPA didn't have its place. It did--it kept people from going hungry. Ireland is paying people dole money, and if they WANT to get job training, they can get it and a small stipend. No one's forcing them to be "slave labor." They can stay home all day if they'd prefer.

So why don't YOU tell me what Ireland should do to force private corporations to employ more people? I'd really love to hear your solution to this problem, as opposed to snark.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #7)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:52 AM

23. not using their brains or educational talents? Wow!

The Federal Theater Project. Theater artists whose careers began with the FTP include Arthur Miller, Orson Welles, John Houseman, Martin Ritt, Elia Kazan, and Joseph Losey.
Aurthur Miller and Orson Wells, known for not using their talents and intellects....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Theatre_Project

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #23)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 04:54 PM

38. You are deliberately twisting my remarks, and that is a cheap shot on your part.

For every Orson Welles, there were a hundred of my uncle the accountant, planting trees with the CCC out in the middle of nowhere. He wasn't a farm/agricultural worker, but that's where the damn job was, so that's where he was assigned. No one said "Oh, gee, you can go do the books for the Federal Theater Project"--he was glad to get a job planting trees, because it meant he would EAT.

You might want to look at the everyday and mundane workers, and not just the rare bright lights who were able to self-actualize. Most people didn't get a "swell" job, they got a job that ensured they would not starve.

Now I would like you to tell me what Ireland should do, since you're such an expert on this topic. Explain to me how Ireland forces corporations to hire more people without driving those corporations to Spain, or Greece, or Italy, where the governments will be less likely to give them shit in this austere environment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #38)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:37 PM

129. Once again you just can't take responsibility for the things you've said.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #129)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:56 PM

130. Wow, you really are something!

Grrrrrr! Grrrrr!

Not much sunshine in your life, is that it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:00 AM

2. Translation:

 

"The scheme will also give people a real opportunity to gain valuable experience to bridge the gap between study and the beginning of their working lives."

Translation:

You over-paid for an undervalued commodity. Here's a check you overeducated, underemployed, nearsighted, nincompoop. Next time, learn a trade.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zanzoobar (Reply #2)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:47 AM

8. That's not what I am hearing at all. Rather ugly commentary, that. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 03:27 AM

4. Wow. Awesomely hateful responses. Interesting. Must be that "working class" thing.

 

What they're saying is that ordinary people out of college have to work for prison wages for a a good chunk of time before they can get hired for entry-level jobs that any non-brain-damaged 10-year-old can do.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to saras (Reply #4)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:13 AM

11. No they aren't. They are saying if you WANT to work, to gain experience in a shitty economy with

high unemployment and no prospects, for a VERY LIMITED period of nine months to a year, in a government-subsidized scheme that will only last for two years, we will pay you an extra fifty euro on top of your dole money to work in public/private/volunteer positions, which will give you experience for when the economy improves. OR...don't. Stay home and play Nintendo all day, and we won't give you the fifty euro.

Unless you're reading something I'm not seeing--and I will happily admit to error--this program is not mandatory. You don't want the work experience, the resume bullet, you don't have to take the extra fifty euro (which is probably geared towards defraying commuting costs, buying lunch at work, a decent few outfits for the job, etc.) on top of your existing dole payment. Stay home, collect your welfare payment, eat cheetohs and play World of Warcraft, and wait for the economy to improve.

I don't see any "have to" in that equation at all. No one is being "forced" to be "enslaved." It's a program the goverment has instituted for a limited time to provide job training in a shitty economy with very high unemployment. Public sector and "volunteer" jobs are included in the scheme as well as private postings.

When the economy improves though, as they will, eventually, who's first hired? The kid with the Cheetoh-stained fingers, or the one with the experience and recent reference?

When FDR did it, he was a genius, not a slave master. Just saying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:38 AM

15. In an economy with high unemployment, doing an unpaid or low-paid internship still leaves you

 

in an economy with high unemployment, where only a few have any hope of improving their situation with a low-wage internship.

FDR didn't do this. Quit saying he did, it's a falsehood.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #15)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:04 PM

41. This is a NINE MONTH INTERNSHIP. A year, tops.

The entire program is lasting for two lousy years.

FDR DID do this--he "made work" to keep people busy and fed. That's what the GOI is doing, not so much to feed them (they will get enough money to feed themselves through welfare) but to give them a little--not much, nine months to a year--job training against the day when the economy rebounds.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:55 AM

24. This is not what FDR did, not at all, and repeating that mendacity will not make it more

true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #24)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:50 PM

50. No, it's more like what Mike Dukakis did.

Still waiting for you to tell me what Ireland should do to provide job training to a large cadre of young unemployed people. Should these college kids be given pickaxes and sent out to build roads? Maybe they could cut peat? How about we send all these business school grads off to build a library? Would that be "cool" because it's a "public project?" Think they could get it done in nine months to a year?

Easy to complain, harder to come up with any solutions, I notice. It's also amusing how people are deliberately misconstruing the purpose and scope of this program in an agitated fashion.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #11)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 01:02 PM

27. Well, that sounds okay, then. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 03:47 AM

6. It reminds me of the Georgia Works program and Bridge to Work in the American Jobs Act. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liquorice (Reply #6)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:49 AM

9. Welfare to Work in MA, too.

Or, if we want to go back almost a century, the Works Progress Administration or the Civilian Conservation Corps.

When there are no jobs to be had, what is a government to do? They can't force corporations to hire people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:22 AM

12. A lot of college students in the US

seek entirely unpaid internships just because it helps them in the competition for "real" jobs.

This is a just a way to ensure that the expense of education doesn't go to waste because of a wretched economy.

It's not that dissimilar to what FDR did back in the GD. Ireland is just barely off the bottom of a depression, but it sank back into contraction in the last half of 2011. It has to take depression type measures in order to counter not only its own problems but the global problems:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0323/1224313766383.html

Unemployment is hanging in there close to 15%. At 4.7%, unemployment is over 10% higher than before the depression started. Young Irish workers are emigrating to countries like Canada and Australia. What's extreme and unnecessary when unemployment is below 6% may be a good thing when unemployment is pushing 15%.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 07:33 AM

14. You're the second person who compared this program to FDR's programs. It must be the new

 

talking point.

It's *nothing* like FDR's jobs programs. They paid real wages and did public works, not private works.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #14)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:19 AM

17. They got very little for it

The welfare payments plus the 50 Euro subsidy probably add up to more. Take the CCC:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_Conservation_Corps

The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was a public work relief program that operated from 1933 to 1942 in the United States for unemployed, unmarried men from relief families, ages 17–23. A part of the New Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, it provided unskilled manual labor jobs related to the conservation and development of natural resources in rural lands owned by federal, state and local governments. The CCC was designed to provide employment for young men in relief families who had difficulty finding jobs during the Great Depression while at the same time implementing a general natural resource conservation program in every state and territory. Maximum enrollment at any one time was 300,000; in nine years 2.5 million young men participated.

The American public made the CCC the most popular of all the New Deal programs. Principal benefits of an individual’s enrollment in the CCC included improved physical condition, heightened morale, and increased employability. Of their pay of $30 a month, $25 went to their parents.


These workers were almost totally drawn off the relief roles, and employment was supposed to be limited to one person in a family.

WPA worked similarly.
http://eh.net/encyclopedia/article/couch.works.progress.administration
Hopkins and Roosevelt proposed that WPA compensation be based on a “security wage” which would be an hourly amount greater than the typical relief payment but less than that offered by private employers. The administration contended that it was misleading to evaluate the programs’ effects solely on the basis of wages paid -- more important were earnings through continuous employment. Thus, wages were reported in monthly amounts.

Wages differed widely from region to region and state-to-state. Senator Richard Russell of Georgia explained, “In the State of Tennessee the man who is working with a pick and shovel at 18 cents an hour is limited to $26 a month, and he must work 144 hours to earn $26. Whereas the man who is working in Pennsylvania has to work only 30 hours to earn $94, out of funds which are being paid out of the common Treasury of the United States” (U.S. House of Representatives 1938, p. 913). Recurring complaints of this nature led to adjustments in the wage rate that narrowed regional differentials to more closely reflect the cost of living in the state.


One problem for Ireland is that it has run out of money. The property tax levy has not been paid by at least 40% of those who owed it, and next year's proposed tax levy is probably going to force more foreclosures. So they are trying to get the most bang for their buck under bad circumstances.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #17)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:51 AM

19. As a person with a relative in a WPA job and a CCC camp in our neck of the woods, I beg to differ.

 

Last edited Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:30 AM - Edit history (2)

$30 in 1937 = $450 today (and more if you use the old CPI calculations); plus all living expenses, medical, clothing, transportation. Poor people here would raid the CCC dump for fod, and that $25 a month sent home was the average rent for a house in 1937.

And if we put it in terms of gas prices: a gallon was ten cents in 1937. $30 would buy you 300 gallons, which would cost you about $1200 today. So the wage was about $1200, plus housing, food, medical, clothing and transportation. Sounds better than bloody $65 a month.

And to reiterate the point: the work was PUBLIC work, of benefit to the general public, not PRIVATE work in which unemployment compensation (paid by workers) is called "wages" through the back door and where employers pay basically NOTHING for a 30-40 hour workweek the only benefit of which GOES TO THEIR PROFIT MARGINS.

As for WPA, they paid prevailing wages:

"..the Emergency Relief Appropriation Act of 1936 provided for the prevailing wage on work relief projects. The prevailing wage was realized by lowering the hours of labor."

http://books.google.com/books?id=b0_IowoZsw8C&pg=PA146&dq=works+progress+administration+prevailing+wages&hl=en&sa=X&ei=eG-JT_zLLszTiALCt4SoAQ&ved=0CD8Q6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=works%20progress%20administration%20prevailing%20wages&f=false


In contrast, your wonderful cheap-labor internship programs work you 30 to 40 hours a week for $65.

And the claim that Ireland has "run out of money" is just ridiculous. The Irish, like the rest of us, are footing the bill for the bankster bailout: the bailout transferred the location of the crisis from private capital to governments: a financial crisis became a sovereign debt crisis, to be paid by workers. Thus the institution of "labor discipline" across the globe.

I never thought I'd see the day when DEMOCRATS would DEFEND CHEAP-LABOR CRAP like this.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:51 AM

22. Your interlocutors are certainly misrepresenting the wage structure of the New Deal programs

Good demonstration of that here. These were real wages. Calling them "$30 a month" with no additional comment is, of course, deeply dishonest of the people you are debating with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #22)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:58 PM

55. I have relatives who worked in those programs.

The lucky ones got "23 Skidoo!" The most common wage was nineteen bucks. See how far that goes when the rent is thirty and you've got a dozen or more people living in your two bedroom flat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #55)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:19 AM

60. $25 was the average rent for a HOUSE in 1937. You could rent a flat for considerably less.

 

http://www.thepeoplehistory.com/1937.html


This is about people receiving public assistance (not a job). We can then assume that the lowest cost to keep one person alive and in some kind of housing in NYC in the period was about $380 a year, and three people = $557.

"Mr. Corsi testified that the average weekly budget for relief families in NYC was...single person, $7.30, family of three, $10.70...This included all allowances -- food, rent, gas, light, household necessaries -- but not fuel."

The Works Progress Administration in New York City By John David Millett
p. 23 (footnote).


WPA wages varied during the history of the program as well as by regional prevailing wages and job category. But, for example:

"In June 1936 the average monthly wage on the WPA in NYC was $75.33."

$75/mo = $900 a year, or 161% of the minimal wage needed to feed and house three people.

The Works Progress Administration in New York City By John David Millett
p. 148 (footnote).

Look it up in google books.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #60)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:49 AM

69. I know what my relatives were paying for rent--it's in the census.

Check out City of Boston rents. You might actually learn something.

And if you knew any "three person" households, you were the rarest of creatures. During the Great Depression, the population of my ancestor's two bedroom, third floor apartment in a three decker ranged between twelve people and -- at the worst of it--NINETEEN.

See how far that paycheck would take you to feed those people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #69)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:05 PM

78. Unlike yourself, I've linked evidence to support my claims. Not to mention that the rent your

 

relatives paid has no relation to *average* rents and is just an individual data point. Since your posts are full of unnecessary personal attack, I won't be responding to you further.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #78)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:15 PM

80. I've provided links that you've ignored, and of COURSE you won't be responding to me further!



I have not personally attacked you--not once--and you've responded snarkily, AT--but not TO, me, away from the subthread, in hopes that I wouldn't see what you wrote. Despite that effort to enjoy the Last Word on the sly, I responded to your points, one by one.

Further, I have asked you over and over again to propose a solution to the problem of Irish unemployment, instead of simply complaining about the problem, and you have failed to do that, over and over.

So sure--of COURSE you're not going to respond. Why should you? You haven't up to this point!

And if you think that "average" rents have a thing to do with "urban" rents in major industrial and import-export population centers, well, I have a WPA-built bridge for sale.

Since I won't be hearing from you again, you have one of those nice days, now!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #55)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:29 PM

100. "23 Skidoo" long precedes the New Deal as an expression

And is generally attributed to cops telling dudes to leave the vicinity of the Flatiron Building in New York City (on 23rd Street), where they would gather to watch the wind kick up the ladies' skirts. This is long-time NYC lore, and you can actually test the theory even today, since the wind comes whipping down Broadway in more or less the same way, and it's a models district now. My wife worked in the Flatiron building many years ago, and we often talked about the 23 Skidoo then. This may be mythology, of course, and the phrase has been noted in the late 19th century, but it has zero to do with New Deal wage structures, in any case. That said, you have provided no evidence, and you're generally mixing in various wage structures. Your anecdotal "relatives" could have at least informed you of the actual use of the phrase you're deploying here, in any case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #100)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:36 PM

101. 23.80, actually--the average paycheck under the program. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #101)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:40 PM

102. 23 Skidoo

has nothing to do with whatever you're talking about.

It's nice that you keep insisting it does, but I'd like to see actual evidence of people referring to wages from New Deal programs with this expression.

We know for a dead fact that the expression was used mostly in the 1920's, and can be traced back much farther than that. So let's see the transformed usage, if it's not just something you've invented. I'm certainly interested in real evidence here. I like 20's and 30's usage, and have read literature and other documents from the period for most of my adult life. So show me something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #102)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 05:51 PM

103. 23.80 was the term--I asked my uncle, who is nearing a hundred.

That was the most common paycheck.

Look what google gave me when I asked! You could have done this, ya know. But hey, I'll "show you something" since you didn't want to do it yourself.

http://www.nancydrewsleuth.com/cmovie.html


A popular expression from the movie is "I'll bet you 23.80..." It's slang from the 1930s--23.80 was the weekly paycheck amount given to WPA workers during the Depression. It became an amount used when betting someone or an expression of joking or emphasizing a large amount.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #103)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 06:37 PM

104. Which has zero to do with 23 Skidoo

Nice try on that deflection, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #104)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 07:45 PM

107. It wasn't a deflection, it was a correction. WTF is WRONG with you?

This is apparently not a conversation for you, it's a sick and very immature contest of some sort.

I provided a link, I asked my WPA uncle, what the fuck more do you want? I have no problem saying I misspoke--would that you could muster the ability to ever say the same?

Like I said, this is a contest for you, and sorry to tell you, with that attitude, you lose.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #107)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:03 PM

111. OK there, 23 Skidoo

The problem is that usage is a symptom of your ignorance of the era. Besides, your own point crumbles on the question of averages. If you were being serious instead of just being in a "contest," you would quite rightly ask how $23.80 could be a well-known average if there weren't higher and lower amounts. And if there were higher and lower amounts, were they pinned to cost-of-living in particular areas? Were there, in fact, multiple schedules and adjustments in WPA wages based on geography? How about based on time? Did those wages change over time? These are real questions that don't boil down to incorrect citations of common phrases or quotations from Nancy Drew. If it wasn't a contest, those would be the kinds of questions you would ask. Maybe you can Google those, or ask a relative or something.

I'm glad, however, that you have finally been disabused of the notion that 23 Skidoo refers to something about the WPA wage structure. You clearly believed this, and perhaps even for some time. Now you can proceed with some clarity, or, at the very least, some fact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #111)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:18 PM

113. It's not "ignorance of the era"--I fucking MISSPOKE.

I will wager you have made a mistake or two in your perfect life...your insufferably snarky attitude in this thread, clearly, is one of those more grievous errors, even if you can't quite realize that at this point. In time, perhaps you will.

But hey--whatever. You're the big know-it-all and damn if you want to make absolutely sure everyone else knows it, too. Let us all bow to your superior knowledge of...oh....EVERYTHING. Especially "the era."

And since you have such perfect knowledge of "the era"--unlike me, plainly, who was a bit sloppy listening to an old man talk--why don't you hop to, and set to work answering all those snarky little questions you asked? Please, don't spare the detail now--since you know everything, and are so much smarter, and better informed, and all. We're all here to learn, so do start teaching! Don't leave those rhetorical questions dangling, now!

I will await your all-knowing responses, peppered with your superior and absolute accuracy due to your vaunted knowledge of "the era," with bated breath!

Tick, tock!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #113)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:39 PM

121. Tsk tsk

Temper, temper. My claim stands: your interlocutor schooled you on wage structure. You think differently. Please feel free to proceed with your evidence whenever you manage to calm down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #121)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:52 PM

123. Temper? Oh no--I'm simply plainspoken. Tick tock, now--waiting on your answers to all those

questions that surely you, an "era" expert, have right at your fingertips, now!

I'll wait. Tick, tock--not tsk, tsk! Come on, you can do it!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #123)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 09:05 PM

124. G'luck with your plainspoken tantrums

As for the rest, I have no interest in doing your homework for you. Is that how you got through school?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to alcibiades_mystery (Reply #124)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:14 PM

127. Your baiting and goading reflects rather poorly on you.

You boasted that you were the "era" expert, and now you can't deliver on your assertion. For some reason I am not all that surprised.

The one having the "tantrum" here isn't me, quite obviously. And as for getting through school, I think you need to get cracking on that homework. Tick, tock!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #19)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:21 PM

53. And go on and figure out what nineteen bucks is worth in todays dollars--or twenty three bucks...as

in "23 Skiddoo!" Those were the most common wages, and there was no birth control back then. If you had a wife, you had a shit load of kids. You also probably had grandma and gramps bunking in, along with Uncle Mortie, Auntie Zelda, cousin Broke, and assorted unemployed, no-prospects in-laws who were unable to pay rent because they had no jobs.

The work in Ireland is TEMPORARY--nine months to a year--and the entire program lasts two lousy years and then ends. The work is also available in PUBLIC and VOLUNTEER positions as well as corporate. You'd know that if you read up on the program, but instead you continue to tout it as something that it is NOT.

Go ahead and keep misrepresenting what this is, if it makes you feel good. It's not "cheap labor crap" it's a job training scheme very similar to Michael Dukakis' WELFARE TO WORK program that took tens of thousands of habitual welfare recipients off welfare, trained them in the ethos and culture of the work place, and transitioned them to full-time employment by giving them a resume bullet and references.

Oh--and in case you're unclear, Mike was and is a DEMOCRAT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #14)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:38 PM

48. It's exactly what Mike Dukakis did in MA, sorry to tell you.

It was called Welfare to Work and he partnered with private corporations, who provided internships and job training to the habitually unemployed. The corporations taught the habitually unemployed skills and good work habits (like showing up on time and doing the job properly). It worked.

You're also glossing over the fact, yet again that this is a nine to twelve month internship--not a permanent job. The entire program only lasts for two years. The internships are in the public sector and in traditionally volunteer jobs as well as in the corporate sector.

And they're VOLUNTARY.

Yet still, you complain in hyperbolic fashion.

You're the one who isn't getting it, and you're still not coming up with a solution.

All you are doing is griping. What's YOUR SOLUTION? Come on--Ireland waits for your wisdom!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Yo_Mama (Reply #12)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:59 AM

25. It is utterly dissimilar to FDR era work programs, which were all public works and paid

decent wages for work that did good for the community, not some company. I don't think you know what WPA and the other programs did at all, frankly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Bluenorthwest (Reply #25)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:39 PM

49. You do realize this scheme includes "public" and volunteer jobs?

And the entire program is only on for two years, and each internship only lasts nine months to a year?

You do realize this isn't "jobs"--it's job TRAINING?

Please--tell us what Ireland should do. Put college graduates to work building roads and bridges? Hmmm? What?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 08:57 AM

20. The Irish are still immigrating like crazy to the United States, unlilke most of Europe.

There are problems in the Mother Land. As my uncle said "If things were great at home people would not be coming here". There is a reason there are 65 million people of Irish decent in the United States and only about five million people in Ireland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drahthaardogs (Reply #20)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 02:48 PM

31. Ireland is about the size of South Carolina..

South Carolina has a population of about 4.3 million, less than Ireland.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #31)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 09:40 PM

52. Yes, and people are still immigrating in droves to places like Utica, New York.

You have to ask why this is the case when the mass immigration of most Europeans ended decades ago.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drahthaardogs (Reply #52)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 10:58 PM

56. Ireland does have the highest birth rate in the EU..

http://www.ionainstitute.ie/index.php?id=1539

I haven't driven across Ireland but I've driven across SC several times, it takes less than half a day, neither is a very big place, hard to get the economies of scale you can on a continent on a small divided island.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #56)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:19 PM

57. fertility rate in ireland is 2.07 live births per woman. that's replacement rate.

 

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=fertility+rate+ireland&oq=fertility+rate+ireland&aq=f&aqi=g2g-v4&aql=1&gs_l=hp.3..0l2j0i15l4.1844l5719l1l6422l22l17l0l0l0l0l469l6031l2-3j9j5l17l0.pfwe.1.&psj=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=788bc5505444c846&biw=1016&bih=499


ireland has a population density of 73 people per square km, 190 people/sq mile.

england has a population density of 395/sq km, 1023/sq mile. its fertility rate is 1.95.

Not much difference.

people are leaving ireland because of 15% unemployment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #56)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:47 AM

64. Over 1,000 people a week are leaving Ireland

They are going to New Zealand, Canada, and Australia and to some degree America. Why everyone wants Ireland to be this Utopia of green pasture in Europe. The countryside is breathtaking and the people are (in my opinion) the nicest in Europe, always polite and trying to accommodate you. However Ireland has had a lot of problems for a long, long, time. People have never really "quit" leaving Ireland in large numbers.

Just an FYI, Ireland kind of adopted the "austerity" movement like Greece. I hope people look to the actuals before they try to adopt that nonsense here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drahthaardogs (Reply #64)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 09:20 AM

65. Yes, the Irish have been leaving Ireland for a long time..

Part of it was due to the Catholic Church I suspect.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drahthaardogs (Reply #64)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:34 PM

120. Are any of them "habitual residents" from other EU nations, returning home until the job situation

improves?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 12:57 PM

26. Wow. In the US that would be a Republican/Third Way neoliberal dream come true.

Circumventing minimum wage to pay people working in private industry third world wages, legally creating fear and competition among workers by directly supporting the use of scabs.

The Koch Bros. must be lovin' it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zorra (Reply #26)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:06 PM

42. Colleges do it now, all the time. Five year plans are becoming increasingly common.

They include internships so that students have work experience upon graduation.

A lot of the colleges using this model charge hefty tuitions, too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:08 PM

43. "...they are being tainted by more unprincipled employers taking advantage."

As usual, there are some businesses attempting to exploit the system. They're also being removed for doing so and, according to 2 of the articles cited at the bottom of the blog post you linked,

The Department of Social Protection has confirmed that some job postings were removed from the site because they were not “in accordance” with the intent on the scheme.


http://www.thejournal.ie/jobbridge-companies-want-a-pizza-chef-a-waiter-and-a-personal-assistant-221854-Sep2011/

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/employers-exploit-internship-scheme-to-get-free-workers-2845363.html

Both articles I linked are from the end of last year and it looks like steps have been taken to remove the businesses and their job listings and to put in place mechanisms for job-seekers to report exploitive job postings.

So, yeah, some businesses tried to exploit the program and the government had to step in to stop it.

How, surprising, huh?

Oh yeah, and anyone arguing this exploitive practice is okay because, hey, working for shit wages is better than not working, better take it up with Ireland's Department of Social Protection because they do not agree with you...or the businesses who tried to pull this crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cerridwen (Reply #43)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 03:45 PM

92. Those are EXCELLENT links with important facts in them.

From your second offering:

Employers have to pay nothing to the interns -- who get less than €2 from the State for up to 40 hours work a week, on top of dole payments.

... measures have since been introduced to protect the scheme from abuse, including "random site visits" to workplaces.

Employers have to guarantee that a placement will not include unsupervised work, and that employees will gain significant experience. They also have to prove they would need to take on a new recruit if they did not hire the intern.

In the six weeks since its launch, 1,978 placements have been advertised on the JobBridge website and 415 people have begun internships.


Gee, it's job training! Not slave labor! Not a substitute for hiring someone! And the government pays the entire freight, it's not "corporations paying slave wages" either. And, of course--it's VOLUNTARY.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 05:18 PM

45. So this is a voluntary internship with nominal pay. Sounds like most internships I know



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 06:18 PM

51. Looking at a few other articles on that site I can't take anything they say seriously. (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:34 PM

58. Response wiki for multiple posts.

 

As a certain poster has repeated the same things in multiple posts & its too tiresome to respond to each one, I'll just put this list here and add to it if new arguments (sic) come up.

1. Dukakis did it! Colleges do it!

So what? The fact that there are cheap-labor programs in the US doesn't make Ireland's acceptable. All these programs ultimately derive from the same political forces and the same ideology. It's no accident that they're sprouting like toadstools all over the globe as capital attempts to force labor into paying the cost of capital's frauds.

2. It's only 9 months!

So what? Is nine months of slavery OK because it's only 9 months? No wrong becomes more acceptable just because it's short-term. It's still wrong.

3. There are some public and volunteer jobs!

First, all these jobs are basically "volunteer" jobs, as they pay about $2 an hour or less (if the employer makes you work more than the minimum 30 hours). That there are some in the public sector doesn't make the subsidies to the private sector more acceptable, nor does it make paying people $2 an hour or less more acceptable.

For those who try to collapse the $65 a week "stipend" for these jobs into the unemployment payments jobless workers are getting as though they were one thing, this is crap.

Irish workers, like American workers, fund their unemployment benefits through payroll taxes. UE isn't a gift from the government; workers pay for it. Don't insult them by telling them that their UE + $65 = a decent wage for a 30 to 40 hour week, WHEN THEY ARE THE ONES FUNDING THE UE PAYMENT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

4. It's voluntary!

No such labor measure is "voluntary" in an atmosphere of 15% unemployment.

5. It's good work experience! It helps new grads get a foot in the door!

When I was in school, there was such a thing as internships in some jobs. BUT THEY PAID.
There was no such thing, however, as hairdressing internships (one of the 'internships' listed on the Irish website, and requiring a person trained in a certificate program). Or internships in mechanics shops (another, also requiring a trained person). You took a training course which included practical experience and you went out & got an entry-level job.

For all that *some* individuals may get into steady employment through a basically unpaid internship, the fact remains that *most* won't in a climate of 15% unemployment. Such programs do *NOTHING* to encourage employers to hire people at regular wages, and are a collusion between government and employers to HOLD DOWN WAGES.

It gags me to see Democrats supporting, even touting, such evil crap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #58)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:41 AM

68. As a "certain poster" has failed to answer my question, which I have asked, POLITELY, more than once

I will ask you ONCE AGAIN--not that I actually believe you have a credible answer for me--to respond:

What would you have Ireland do? How would you propose that they solve their unemployment problem?

I've asked. You have not answered.

Now, unlike you, I'll respond to your points. See, that's how adults do it--they answer when asked, and they don't put snarky comments where they hope the person they are insulting won't see them.

1. Dukakis did it! Colleges do it!

Yes, and most states and nations in the developed world have some form of this. It is not a "cheap labor" program either--it's a training program. "Cheap labor" would offer interns a permanent job, not a lousy nine month internship in a self limiting two year program.


2. It's only 9 months!

Yes, and it's nine months that you have to ASK FOR, be accepted into the program, and volunteer to do. You still get your WELFARE (not "unemployment"--many have never, ever worked so they aren't un-employed, they are NEVER employed) check even if you eschew the opportunity.


3. There are some public and volunteer jobs!

Weren't you the one who was whining that it was all "corporate" jobs? That the evil Irish gubmint was selling slaves to corporations? So, the FDR thing is out the window now? What about those public/volunteer jobs, eh? Now you're shifting the goalposts to gripe that the people aren't getting paid enough! OK, how about they tell people they can work in these jobs and get paid MORE--but they won't be getting their welfare payment--would that work for ya? The government can pay them their full wage, but they won't get the welfare check. Guess what? The amount they received would probably be less in that case.

You still haven't explained how Ireland is supposed to fix their unemployment problem--all you are doing is complaining. Where is your solution? Cough it up!

4. It's voluntary!

Yes, it is--and 15% unemployment won't last forever even if you insist that it will--and odds are, the people with experience and a reference on their resume will be hired before the people who have been sitting on the couch during the economic downturn. Since Ireland is part of the EU, their citizens can compete for jobs not just in Ireland, but anywhere in the EU if they'd like. Don't wanna participate in the scheme? Stay home and collect your cash and play World of Warcraft! No harm, no foul! That's what VOLUNTARY means--no one has a gun to your head.

5. It's good work experience! It helps new grads get a foot in the door!

I don't know where you live, but I find apprentice schemes quite "acceptable." In fact, I find them optimal in many cases, either in conjunction with formal education--or oftentimes, not. My mechanic, who is the only one I will trust to fix my 25 year old car, has apprentices routinely for six months at a pop, some from the local vocational school, others straight from the unemployment office without any voke training whatsoever--often the first time they ever remove a tire or do an oil change is in his shop. I can't understand why you find this outrageous, or feel that people need to pay tuition or possess a 'certificate' in order to work under the supervision of a trained expert. Lots of the old ladies I know go to a beauty school and pay students a cut rate to wash, set and cut their hair. They don't have "certificates" but they do the work under the supervision of a trained person WITH a certificate. How the hell do you think people learn? Most people I know learn by DOING. Why do you think that the only way to learn is to go and PAY an educational institution a tuition to go to a class, and then get a certificate? Talk about an elitist perspective! Some people don't have the money to pay for auto or beauty school and would be screwed if they took out a loan to take a course and then discovered they hated the work. Why not let people try out a field to see if it suits them before they try to scrounge up the money for a course they may not like? Why is that so EVIL to you? That makes MUCH more sense to me, frankly.

It gags me to see you complaining, proffering insulting characterizations about me, and not offering up any better ideas. Anyone can gripe--that's way too easy. Try coming up with a scheme to fix the situation, I'll be sure to write to the GOI with your bright ideas.

Like I have said, over and over again--and you have failed to respond--I am more than willing to listen to your SOLUTIONS to the problem of Irish unemployment. Your railing and whining and crying that this is bad/wrong/wahh-waah-waah-corporategreeed-governmentsubsidy is just unproductive. Come up with a better idea, as I have asked, over and over and over again. Then we can discuss the topic, if you will respond TO me for a change, instead of ABOUT me, while hiding your snark downthread where you hope I might not notice it.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #68)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:18 PM

114. Face it, HiPointDem nailed it right to the wall.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Reply #114)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:25 PM

117. Gee--you and he agree on those banks you brought up, but you don't agree on FDR--even if you don't

quite realize it. You might try really reading the thread before you start cheerleading.

He didn't nail a thing to the wall, and neither did you. You have failed to make your case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sat Apr 14, 2012, 11:38 PM

59. This sounds like a lot of internships. I think Ireland has been so very lucky for a long time

economically that unpaid or minimally paid internships sticks in their craw.

Unfortunately I think this is the "new" norm... its been pretty common for a long time in the US but obviously not there and they resent it.

Well, welcome to reality peeps.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #59)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:29 AM

61. No. Ireland has traditionally been a low-wage, high-unemployment country by virtue of its

 

position as a colony and sweatshop to England.

It had a brief boom in the neo-liberal era, circa 1995-2000, (much touted by the capitalist press as an example of the glories of reducing taxes and labor protections), ending in a big crash and the present 15% unemployment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HiPointDem (Reply #61)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:52 AM

70. Traditionally and historically oppressed but recently, yes they definitely had some great years

They capitalized on that and have an exceptionally well educated population well positioned to grow in the decades ahead. I just don't think the Irish have had a history of unpaid internships like we have in the US. Their education-to-work model is different than the US and the adaptation of unpaid internships must feel like some kind of hideous US import.

I am Irish. Living in the US at the moment fyi.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #59)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 09:30 AM

66. Ireland's been lucky?

"The Luck of the Irish" is an ironic statement, the Irish war of independence was less than a century ago..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_War_of_Independence

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #66)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 11:58 AM

71. Yes, yes I know but as an actual Irishwoman I think that recently they have had a good run

Maybe lucky wasn't the right word. I had a party for 50 last night at my house and was dog tired (and perhaps a wee bit drunk). I hadn't checked in to DU lately with all the party prep.

I know it seems weird but it's actually (sometimes) relaxing to just browse some of the threads. I usually try to avoid posting when I've been drinking but alas, sometimes its irresistible. So here I am unluckily caught using lucky. My bad. I'll now head off to clear up post-party mess and check back in later for a sound thrashing! Lol!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #71)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 12:07 PM

72. ...



I do think it's ironic that a people who have been oppressed for centuries and within living memory of a few anyway won their freedom in a bloody struggle can be thought of as "lucky" just because they had decent jobs for a little while..

Kind of shows how our thinking is becoming warped by the constant deluge of right wing propaganda in the US.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #72)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 01:56 PM

82. Yup, in the light of the day (and more sober! Heh) of course that makes sense

I was mostly making an observation about the recent years....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riderinthestorm (Reply #71)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:06 PM

83. And of course, the unspoken bit of business here is that the people who have lost their jobs, many

of them, are not Irish citizens. They are migrants from other corners of the EU, who are ordinarily resident in the nation. When those unemployed are standing side by side with youngsters coming up out of school and looking for work, it's not surprising that the unemployment rate is so high. Because the government is somewhat compassionate, they aren't booting people out of the country, even as they are slow to grant citizenship.

This is a few years old, but it illustrates the difficulties: http://www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/display.cfm?ID=740


So far, the recession has hit non-Irish nationals harder: their unemployment was 14.7 percent in the first quarter of 2009 compared to 9.4 percent for Irish nationals. The same quarterly report showed that non-Irish nationals made up 15.6 percent of the labor force (those between ages 17 and 65). The sectors experiencing the most significant job losses, including construction, wholesale, and retail trade and industry, are those where migrants tend to work.

The number of unemployed continues to grow, representing an increasing burden on the state. Even given the habitual residency condition on social welfare, the number of non-Irish unemployed workers entitled to support is substantial.

According to CSO, which tracks claims for unemployment and other employment-related government assistance, non-Irish nationals made up 18.5 percent of all persons (80,786 of 435,735) on the Live Register in July 2009. Of those non-Irish nationals, over half were from EU-12 countries.

The difficult economic conditions could result in migrants returning to their countries of origin in large numbers, as EU-10 nationals have the ability to legally return and take up work once conditions improve. Sufficient data to test this hypothesis are not yet available.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #83)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:25 PM

86. We're getting into some serious WTF territory here..

The government wants to pay substandard wages to the Irish while non-Irish make up 15.6% of the labor force?

Evidently the Irish have a lot of Lucky Duckies and a few Hollingsworth Hounds too..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #86)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:41 PM

87. Those non-Irish were last hired/first fired.

Some of them qualify for welfare payments and subsidized housing because they are ordinarily (habitually) resident as a consequence of getting in on the ground floor of the hiring boom, or they are refugees. Ireland IS part of the EU--they have to deal with all that regulatory stuff, too, even though their borders are a bit tighter than other EU nations.

As I noted, that's not fresh info--that is from a couple of years ago, but it is possible to extrapolate.

This job training program is less likely to help that segment of the population, though. It's geared towards people who have no/little work experience, like kids just out of school or young adults who have been "habitually unemployed" and unable to find a job. The goal is to get a little work experience and a resume bullet--not to give someone an actual job at "substandard wages." This kind of scheme isn't going to help those refugees. They had a lot of the more menial jobs which aren't likely to qualify in a job training fashion. The ones who don't speak English very well are at even more of a disadvantage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #87)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:52 PM

88. Yep, clearly they have some Hollingsworth Hounds...

Perhaps I'm just jaded by living in a society where Orwellian doublespeak is very nearly the official language but I find it hard to believe that such a program will remain true to the stated purpose and won't be used as an excuse or means to drive down wages.

We have or had such a program in my state and it was a textbook case of failure by deliberate design.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #88)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 03:54 PM

93. Apparently, they've already gone through the "attempts to abuse the system" and they've taken steps

to overcome it. They have very careful criteria and they're now vetting the jobs (no more Vajazzling Internships) to ensure that they meet appropriate criteria.

Look upthread at Cerridwen's contribution to this thread, and the links provided in that post. They're making this work--also, the corporations aren't paying a cent--the government pays it all, and demands actual training in return.

Here's another link that talks about the program being extended to offer internships to the disabled as well, who were previously excluded from it and told to use another government employment program:

http://www.thejournal.ie/plans-to-extend-jobbridge-to-people-with-disabilities-confirmed-414216-Apr2012/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #93)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 04:06 PM

94. Evidently the Irish system has a bug..

Hollingsworth is on the line to his MP as we type, this bug must be reprogrammed posthaste.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #94)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 04:29 PM

95. I don't think Hollingsworth will win this one, when all is said and done.

He won't be able to hire a personal assistant on this scheme or someone to intern in scrubbing his marble floors.

I think the GOI is sincere about this program, and they do want it do what it is advertised to do--provide 'significant' training and experience. I wish them the best, I hope it works as a stopgap to keep motivation up until things turn around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #95)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 04:36 PM

97. I hope things turn around..

The person I know who pays the most attention to the financial situation, a lot more than me, tells me there's an entire wardrobe full of other shoes yet to fall in the markets, stock, bond, commodities..


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Fumesucker (Reply #97)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 04:38 PM

98. I hope not. I think we've all suffered enough! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 02:10 PM

84. Self-hating Irishman

First off, it's 100,000 welcomes (cead mile failte).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Zalatix (Original post)

Sun Apr 15, 2012, 08:01 PM

109. People who cannot properly use apostrophes are not to be taken seriously. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread