So....how many posters do we have who have heard of this INCEL Movement?

[danielpalos]

anyone can Talk. Men have arguments.

You simply manufacture stories, story teller.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve simple poverty. Our alleged war on poverty has not done what You claim.

Let me see if I understand what you are claiming. Existing welfare programs can do more and offer more than unemployment compensation. But you insist that unemployment compensation will solve the problem? That is ridiculous.

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

 

[danielpalos]

anyone can Talk. Men have arguments.

You simply manufacture stories, story teller.

Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment can solve simple poverty. Our alleged war on poverty has not done what You claim.

Let me see if I understand what you are claiming. Existing welfare programs can do more and offer more than unemployment compensation. But you insist that unemployment compensation will solve the problem? That is ridiculous.

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

 

[danielpalos]

With welfare they have a recourse to an income, and a recourse to food stamps which cannot be used to buy alcohol or drugs. And there is medical care available to help them with mental health and substance abuse issues. Camp grounds? Who will pay the fees for that? Will you provide them with tents, sleeping bags ect?

you have to make sense, not just tell incoherent stories.

solving for a simple poverty of capital under capitalism, must solve for dilemmas in a market friendly manner.

Let me help you out. I'll explain it carefully.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.

You suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

What I wrote in the this post is neither a story nor is it incoherent. And explains clearly why welfare serves the homeless far better than unemployment compensation.

lol.

i am suggesting solving for simple poverty in a market friendly manner and let consumers participate in those markets they desire.

And I explained in three sentences why welfare programs work better. You chose to ignore the truth.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
Both offer an income. With unemployment compensation, an income is all that is offered. With welfare programs it is not.

With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Food stamps provide food and not alcohol or drugs. Someone with substance abuse issues would use money to buy drugs or alcohol.

With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Having access to medical care is important. It gives them a way to get into programs to fight their addictions and to get mental healthcare. Without addressing those issues, they will either end up back on the street or they will end up dead. Giving an alcoholic or an addict money with no healthcare is giving them a death sentence. Plus, depending on how long they have been living on the street, there are probably other health problems that have developed.


And you suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? That won't work either. Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

 

[WinterBorn]

Let me see if I understand what you are claiming. Existing welfare programs can do more and offer more than unemployment compensation. But you insist that unemployment compensation will solve the problem? That is ridiculous.

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

 

[WinterBorn]

Let me see if I understand what you are claiming. Existing welfare programs can do more and offer more than unemployment compensation. But you insist that unemployment compensation will solve the problem? That is ridiculous.

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

The "ready reserve labor force" is not a military reserve. There is absolutely no requirement, or even need, for a firearm.

 

[WinterBorn]

you have to make sense, not just tell incoherent stories.

solving for a simple poverty of capital under capitalism, must solve for dilemmas in a market friendly manner.

Let me help you out. I'll explain it carefully.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.

You suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

What I wrote in the this post is neither a story nor is it incoherent. And explains clearly why welfare serves the homeless far better than unemployment compensation.

lol.

i am suggesting solving for simple poverty in a market friendly manner and let consumers participate in those markets they desire.

And I explained in three sentences why welfare programs work better. You chose to ignore the truth.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
Both offer an income. With unemployment compensation, an income is all that is offered. With welfare programs it is not.

With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Food stamps provide food and not alcohol or drugs. Someone with substance abuse issues would use money to buy drugs or alcohol.

With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Having access to medical care is important. It gives them a way to get into programs to fight their addictions and to get mental healthcare. Without addressing those issues, they will either end up back on the street or they will end up dead. Giving an alcoholic or an addict money with no healthcare is giving them a death sentence. Plus, depending on how long they have been living on the street, there are probably other health problems that have developed.


And you suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? That won't work either. Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

 

[danielpalos]

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

There is no requirement to actively seek work in Any at-will employment State.

 

[danielpalos]

You insisting they cannot, is even More ridiculous.

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

The "ready reserve labor force" is not a military reserve. There is absolutely no requirement, or even need, for a firearm.

it was an analogy, story teller. Aesop was much better.

 

[danielpalos]

Let me help you out. I'll explain it carefully.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.

You suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

What I wrote in the this post is neither a story nor is it incoherent. And explains clearly why welfare serves the homeless far better than unemployment compensation.

lol.

i am suggesting solving for simple poverty in a market friendly manner and let consumers participate in those markets they desire.

And I explained in three sentences why welfare programs work better. You chose to ignore the truth.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
Both offer an income. With unemployment compensation, an income is all that is offered. With welfare programs it is not.

With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Food stamps provide food and not alcohol or drugs. Someone with substance abuse issues would use money to buy drugs or alcohol.

With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Having access to medical care is important. It gives them a way to get into programs to fight their addictions and to get mental healthcare. Without addressing those issues, they will either end up back on the street or they will end up dead. Giving an alcoholic or an addict money with no healthcare is giving them a death sentence. Plus, depending on how long they have been living on the street, there are probably other health problems that have developed.


And you suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? That won't work either. Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

You have no valid argument that demonstrates any understanding of economics. A fine and wonderful and capital solution to a natural rate of unemployment must be Good and not Bad. You have no valid argument that says otherwise.

Simplifying Government can only lead to greater efficiencies and lower cost.

 

[WinterBorn]

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

There is no requirement to actively seek work in Any at-will employment State.

I never said there was. I simply pointed out that when you use the phrase "capitalisms natural rate of unemployment", you are referring to people who are actively seeking employment.

 

[WinterBorn]

Not at all. Not all of the problems that lead to poverty can be solved by giving them money.

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

The "ready reserve labor force" is not a military reserve. There is absolutely no requirement, or even need, for a firearm.

it was an analogy, story teller. Aesop was much better.

So, since it was an analogy, what can you not afford in order to be part of the ready reserve labor force?

 

[WinterBorn]

lol.

i am suggesting solving for simple poverty in a market friendly manner and let consumers participate in those markets they desire.

And I explained in three sentences why welfare programs work better. You chose to ignore the truth.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
Both offer an income. With unemployment compensation, an income is all that is offered. With welfare programs it is not.

With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Food stamps provide food and not alcohol or drugs. Someone with substance abuse issues would use money to buy drugs or alcohol.

With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Having access to medical care is important. It gives them a way to get into programs to fight their addictions and to get mental healthcare. Without addressing those issues, they will either end up back on the street or they will end up dead. Giving an alcoholic or an addict money with no healthcare is giving them a death sentence. Plus, depending on how long they have been living on the street, there are probably other health problems that have developed.


And you suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? That won't work either. Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

You have no valid argument that demonstrates any understanding of economics. A fine and wonderful and capital solution to a natural rate of unemployment must be Good and not Bad. You have no valid argument that says otherwise.

Simplifying Government can only lead to greater efficiencies and lower cost.

I have shown, over and over, that the welfare programs have more to offer, provide more solutions, and are generally more efficient at solving for simple poverty, especially as a solution to the plight of the homeless.

 

[danielpalos]

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

There is no requirement to actively seek work in Any at-will employment State.

I never said there was. I simply pointed out that when you use the phrase "capitalisms natural rate of unemployment", you are referring to people who are actively seeking employment.

it is about increasing market participation to ensure "full employment of capital resources" in our markets.

anyone who is naturally unemployed should be able to qualify for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

There is no at-will basis for Any for-cause, conditional requirements in any at-will employment State.

It is about equal protection of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

You are the only one claiming that is the case.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what I am discussing. It is about ensuring the ready reserve labor force can stay ready while in reserve.

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

The "ready reserve labor force" is not a military reserve. There is absolutely no requirement, or even need, for a firearm.

it was an analogy, story teller. Aesop was much better.

So, since it was an analogy, what can you not afford in order to be part of the ready reserve labor force?

"The tools to command a market based wage under our form of Capitalism."

Ensuring full employment of capital resources means normal market activity should continue.

 

[danielpalos]

And I explained in three sentences why welfare programs work better. You chose to ignore the truth.

With welfare and unemployment compensation both offer a recourse to an income.
Both offer an income. With unemployment compensation, an income is all that is offered. With welfare programs it is not.

With welfare there are food stamps which provide food with no access to alcohol (or other drugs). Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Food stamps provide food and not alcohol or drugs. Someone with substance abuse issues would use money to buy drugs or alcohol.

With welfare there is access to medical care, to help them with mental health issues and addictions. Unemployment compensation does nothing like this.
Having access to medical care is important. It gives them a way to get into programs to fight their addictions and to get mental healthcare. Without addressing those issues, they will either end up back on the street or they will end up dead. Giving an alcoholic or an addict money with no healthcare is giving them a death sentence. Plus, depending on how long they have been living on the street, there are probably other health problems that have developed.


And you suggested putting the homeless in campgrounds? That won't work either. Who will pay the fees? Who will provide them with tents and sleeping bags?

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

You have no valid argument that demonstrates any understanding of economics. A fine and wonderful and capital solution to a natural rate of unemployment must be Good and not Bad. You have no valid argument that says otherwise.

Simplifying Government can only lead to greater efficiencies and lower cost.

I have shown, over and over, that the welfare programs have more to offer, provide more solutions, and are generally more efficient at solving for simple poverty, especially as a solution to the plight of the homeless.

you only make up stories, story teller. our alleged war on poverty is Proof of that failed and Costly policy. We need fine and wonderful and capital solutions.

 

[WinterBorn]

Really? We have discussed homelessness at length. Money is not the solution there. In fact, as I explained, it could cause more damage and death.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is about people looking for jobs. Not people wanting money from tax payers for luxuries.

Ready Reserve Labor Force? Have you looked up what that means?
"It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work."

Now let's boldface some points you missed.

It refers to the unemployed and underemployed in capitalist society. It is synonymous with "industrial reserve army" or "relative surplus population", except that the unemployed can be defined as those actually looking for work and that the relative surplus population also includes people unable to work.

People looking for work may be given unemployment compensation. That does not fit you, however. Since you are not looking for work.

The relative surplus population includes people unable to work, which would mean they draw from the welfare programs and disability.

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

There is no requirement to actively seek work in Any at-will employment State.

I never said there was. I simply pointed out that when you use the phrase "capitalisms natural rate of unemployment", you are referring to people who are actively seeking employment.

it is about increasing market participation to ensure "full employment of capital resources" in our markets.

anyone who is naturally unemployed should be able to qualify for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

There is no at-will basis for Any for-cause, conditional requirements in any at-will employment State.

It is about equal protection of the law.

There is already equal protection under the law. If someone is unemployed (I have no idea how someone is naturally or unnaturally unemployed) they will qualify for welfare programs easier.

 

[WinterBorn]

Let me guess, you want to volunteer for the "ready reserve labor force" and sit idly by and draw a check while waiting to be "called up to active labor"?

Do you know the source of the term "ready reserve labor force"?

That is what being ready in reserve, means. I cannot afford to purchase my own musket. It must be a State or Union security issue.

i could be considering using the same caliber ammunition for my side arm and my long arm.

The "ready reserve labor force" is not a military reserve. There is absolutely no requirement, or even need, for a firearm.

it was an analogy, story teller. Aesop was much better.

So, since it was an analogy, what can you not afford in order to be part of the ready reserve labor force?

"The tools to command a market based wage under our form of Capitalism."

Ensuring full employment of capital resources means normal market activity should continue.

Oh, you mean like marketable skills which employers might want and would be willing to pay top dollar to employ. I understand.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes Daniel, you are better off hitting the "Funny" icon than actually trying to address what I said. For the homeless, welfare programs are more effective and efficient.

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

You have no valid argument that demonstrates any understanding of economics. A fine and wonderful and capital solution to a natural rate of unemployment must be Good and not Bad. You have no valid argument that says otherwise.

Simplifying Government can only lead to greater efficiencies and lower cost.

I have shown, over and over, that the welfare programs have more to offer, provide more solutions, and are generally more efficient at solving for simple poverty, especially as a solution to the plight of the homeless.

you only make up stories, story teller. our alleged war on poverty is Proof of that failed and Costly policy. We need fine and wonderful and capital solutions.

Nonsense. Neither program alone, and as they currently stand, will solve all of the problems.

But expanding welfare programs is much easier than the massive changes you want to make. And since welfare provides money, food, healthcare, job training and even daycare in some situations, while unemployment compensation only provide money, it is much better for solving those complex problems in efficient ways.

 

[danielpalos]

You are alleging there is Any requirement to work in Any at-will employment State. Can you show me Any express State law in an at-will employment State that defines employment relationships, that says otherwise?

I have alleged no such thing.

I have simply reminded you of the definition of the natural rate of unemployment. And that is that the person is actively seeking work.

There is no requirement to actively seek work in Any at-will employment State.

I never said there was. I simply pointed out that when you use the phrase "capitalisms natural rate of unemployment", you are referring to people who are actively seeking employment.

it is about increasing market participation to ensure "full employment of capital resources" in our markets.

anyone who is naturally unemployed should be able to qualify for unemployment compensation in our at-will employment States.

There is no at-will basis for Any for-cause, conditional requirements in any at-will employment State.

It is about equal protection of the law.

There is already equal protection under the law. If someone is unemployed (I have no idea how someone is naturally or unnaturally unemployed) they will qualify for welfare programs easier.

Equal protection of the law in this case means being able to qualify for unemployment compensation, for simply being unemployed.

 

[danielpalos]

Solving for simple poverty through the Government and fiscal and lawful Command of the public sector, can only improve market participation for the private sector.

And the long term solution for simple poverty is the various welfare programs, not unemployment compensation. But you want to wreck both programs because of the means tests.

You have no valid argument that demonstrates any understanding of economics. A fine and wonderful and capital solution to a natural rate of unemployment must be Good and not Bad. You have no valid argument that says otherwise.

Simplifying Government can only lead to greater efficiencies and lower cost.

I have shown, over and over, that the welfare programs have more to offer, provide more solutions, and are generally more efficient at solving for simple poverty, especially as a solution to the plight of the homeless.

you only make up stories, story teller. our alleged war on poverty is Proof of that failed and Costly policy. We need fine and wonderful and capital solutions.

Nonsense. Neither program alone, and as they currently stand, will solve all of the problems.

But expanding welfare programs is much easier than the massive changes you want to make. And since welfare provides money, food, healthcare, job training and even daycare in some situations, while unemployment compensation only provide money, it is much better for solving those complex problems in efficient ways.

Our alleged War on Poverty proves you still don't have it right.

Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States, solves for an actual economic phenomena.