What would a socialist America look like?

[danielpalos]

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what we are discussing.

Also, voluntarily quitting a job is not part of the natural rate of unemployment.

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

 

[WinterBorn]

No, that is not all we are discussing. If there are those who cannot be employed, because of their own inabilities or because of a natural unemployment rate, they should be on welfare, not UC.

employment is at will; forcing people to work is illegal in any at-will employment State.

No one said anything about forcing anyone to work.

Forcing others to give you their money is also illegal in almost all instances.

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; not your right wing appeal to ignorance and emotion.

If you are unemployed for longer than the time limits on unemployment compensation, you draw welfare. We don't redesign the entire unemployment compensation system.

that law is in conflict with State laws and a federal doctrine regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

State law or federal law must be supreme in any conflict of laws.

There is no conflict at all.

 

[danielpalos]

you miss the point; we could be greatly reducing that cost through equal protection of the law. Disgruntled employees could simply quit rather than have to litigate.

They can quit now. They simply do not collect unemployment compensation.

why be illegal to a federal doctrine and State laws, right wingers?

it could open the door to litigating perception.

Nothing I said is illegal under federal doctrines or state laws.

A federal doctrine and State laws claim employment is at the will of either party.

Yes it is. You keep saying that like I am arguing with you about it.

But federal doctrine and state laws have limitations on unemployment compensation.

there can be no limit at-will employment; but the will of either party. Government cannot force someone to work under our at-will employment regime.

 

[danielpalos]

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what we are discussing.

Also, voluntarily quitting a job is not part of the natural rate of unemployment.

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

Also, you going on welfare does not increase the cost of gov't. The welfare system is set up for longer terms and greater volume.

And the poor? With the tax system we have in place, the poor pay little or no taxes. However, when businesses have to pay more payroll tax, they compensate by raising prices. Payroll taxes are part of the cost of doing business.

unemployment compensation is more cost effective than any form of means testing.

 

[WinterBorn]

Also, voluntarily quitting a job is not part of the natural rate of unemployment.

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

 

[danielpalos]

employment is at will; forcing people to work is illegal in any at-will employment State.

No one said anything about forcing anyone to work.

Forcing others to give you their money is also illegal in almost all instances.

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; not your right wing appeal to ignorance and emotion.

If you are unemployed for longer than the time limits on unemployment compensation, you draw welfare. We don't redesign the entire unemployment compensation system.

that law is in conflict with State laws and a federal doctrine regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

State law or federal law must be supreme in any conflict of laws.

There is no conflict at all.

a door of litigatable perception?

 

[danielpalos]

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

how is demand or supply created?

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

 

[WinterBorn]

They can quit now. They simply do not collect unemployment compensation.

why be illegal to a federal doctrine and State laws, right wingers?

it could open the door to litigating perception.

Nothing I said is illegal under federal doctrines or state laws.

A federal doctrine and State laws claim employment is at the will of either party.

Yes it is. You keep saying that like I am arguing with you about it.

But federal doctrine and state laws have limitations on unemployment compensation.

there can be no limit at-will employment; but the will of either party. Government cannot force someone to work under our at-will employment regime.

Not once have I suggested anyone be forced to work. But work is how we get our paychecks. You want a paycheck without working. That requires someone else work and give you the pay that they earned. So, in effect, YOU are forcing people to work against their will.

 

[WinterBorn]

Also, voluntarily quitting a job is not part of the natural rate of unemployment.

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

Also, you going on welfare does not increase the cost of gov't. The welfare system is set up for longer terms and greater volume.

And the poor? With the tax system we have in place, the poor pay little or no taxes. However, when businesses have to pay more payroll tax, they compensate by raising prices. Payroll taxes are part of the cost of doing business.

unemployment compensation is more cost effective than any form of means testing.

No it is not. The means testing is simply you filling out a form. Just like you will do if you collect unemployment compensation. Except the means testing happens once. The forms for unemployment compensation happens continuously.

 

[WinterBorn]

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

how is demand or supply created?

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

What you want is outside of supply and demand. It is pure socialism. You want to live off society without offering anything in return.

 

[danielpalos]

why be illegal to a federal doctrine and State laws, right wingers?

it could open the door to litigating perception.

Nothing I said is illegal under federal doctrines or state laws.

A federal doctrine and State laws claim employment is at the will of either party.

Yes it is. You keep saying that like I am arguing with you about it.

But federal doctrine and state laws have limitations on unemployment compensation.

there can be no limit at-will employment; but the will of either party. Government cannot force someone to work under our at-will employment regime.

Not once have I suggested anyone be forced to work. But work is how we get our paychecks. You want a paycheck without working. That requires someone else work and give you the pay that they earned. So, in effect, YOU are forcing people to work against their will.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is equitable.

 

[WinterBorn]

No one said anything about forcing anyone to work.

Forcing others to give you their money is also illegal in almost all instances.

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; not your right wing appeal to ignorance and emotion.

If you are unemployed for longer than the time limits on unemployment compensation, you draw welfare. We don't redesign the entire unemployment compensation system.

that law is in conflict with State laws and a federal doctrine regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

State law or federal law must be supreme in any conflict of laws.

There is no conflict at all.

a door of litigatable perception?

If there is a legitimate reason for litigation, it should happen. If you file a grievance, it does not automatically go to litigation. It is reviewed and can be dismissed at that level if there is no merit to the grievance.

 

[danielpalos]

in right wing fantasy?

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

Also, you going on welfare does not increase the cost of gov't. The welfare system is set up for longer terms and greater volume.

And the poor? With the tax system we have in place, the poor pay little or no taxes. However, when businesses have to pay more payroll tax, they compensate by raising prices. Payroll taxes are part of the cost of doing business.

unemployment compensation is more cost effective than any form of means testing.

No it is not. The means testing is simply you filling out a form. Just like you will do if you collect unemployment compensation. Except the means testing happens once. The forms for unemployment compensation happens continuously.

only if you make up your own stories.

 

[WinterBorn]

Nothing I said is illegal under federal doctrines or state laws.

A federal doctrine and State laws claim employment is at the will of either party.

Yes it is. You keep saying that like I am arguing with you about it.

But federal doctrine and state laws have limitations on unemployment compensation.

there can be no limit at-will employment; but the will of either party. Government cannot force someone to work under our at-will employment regime.

Not once have I suggested anyone be forced to work. But work is how we get our paychecks. You want a paycheck without working. That requires someone else work and give you the pay that they earned. So, in effect, YOU are forcing people to work against their will.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is equitable.

And welfare will do that.

 

[danielpalos]

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

how is demand or supply created?

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

What you want is outside of supply and demand. It is pure socialism. You want to live off society without offering anything in return.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. It should be that simple under Any form of capitalism.

Only the right wing sayeth; Capitalism, what is That.

 

[WinterBorn]

In federal doctrine and state law. Shouldn't we be legal in the way we distribute tax dollars?

it is about capitalism, and the laws of demand and supply. Compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is lawful and is more cost effective in any market based economy. Why increase the Cost of Government and take it out on the Poor, right wingers?

Also, you going on welfare does not increase the cost of gov't. The welfare system is set up for longer terms and greater volume.

And the poor? With the tax system we have in place, the poor pay little or no taxes. However, when businesses have to pay more payroll tax, they compensate by raising prices. Payroll taxes are part of the cost of doing business.

unemployment compensation is more cost effective than any form of means testing.

No it is not. The means testing is simply you filling out a form. Just like you will do if you collect unemployment compensation. Except the means testing happens once. The forms for unemployment compensation happens continuously.

only if you make up your own stories.

I do not make up stories about having to continuously send forms to the unemployment office showing you are actively seeking work. I do not make up stories about the means test only happening when you are first certified for welfare and for periodic recertifications.

 

[danielpalos]

compensation for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment; not your right wing appeal to ignorance and emotion.

If you are unemployed for longer than the time limits on unemployment compensation, you draw welfare. We don't redesign the entire unemployment compensation system.

that law is in conflict with State laws and a federal doctrine regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

State law or federal law must be supreme in any conflict of laws.

There is no conflict at all.

a door of litigatable perception?

If there is a legitimate reason for litigation, it should happen. If you file a grievance, it does not automatically go to litigation. It is reviewed and can be dismissed at that level if there is no merit to the grievance.

and, a formal response.

 

[WinterBorn]

What you want is not about supply and demand. YOu don't want to supply anything. You simply demand a paycheck, after quitting a job. That is not what UC is designed for. It is what welfare is designed for.

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

how is demand or supply created?

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

What you want is outside of supply and demand. It is pure socialism. You want to live off society without offering anything in return.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. It should be that simple under Any form of capitalism.

Only the right wing sayeth; Capitalism, what is That.

It is quite simple. And that is what welfare is for.

 

[danielpalos]

A federal doctrine and State laws claim employment is at the will of either party.

Yes it is. You keep saying that like I am arguing with you about it.

But federal doctrine and state laws have limitations on unemployment compensation.

there can be no limit at-will employment; but the will of either party. Government cannot force someone to work under our at-will employment regime.

Not once have I suggested anyone be forced to work. But work is how we get our paychecks. You want a paycheck without working. That requires someone else work and give you the pay that they earned. So, in effect, YOU are forcing people to work against their will.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is equitable.

And welfare will do that.

no, it won't. that is not what it is for nor should it be. We already have the infrastructure in place and could be lowering the cost of Government in a market friendly manner.

 

[danielpalos]

at-will is demand or supply, at-will.

What? That is absolute nonsense.

how is demand or supply created?

nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics.

What you want is outside of supply and demand. It is pure socialism. You want to live off society without offering anything in return.

Compensation for Capitalism's natural rate of unemployment. It should be that simple under Any form of capitalism.

Only the right wing sayeth; Capitalism, what is That.

It is quite simple. And that is what welfare is for.

in right wing fantasy? why do we have any homeless.