CDZ With 9.3 million job openings in the United States, why are there still people panhandling on the corner of Intersections?

[danielpalos]

You don't understand what at will employment means.

I understand it better than you.

 

[Blues Man]

I understand it better than you.

I don't think so.

You've never employed anyone and I don't think you ever had a job.

 

[danielpalos]

No it doesn't.

LAziness causes that

Employment is at the will of either party. Anyone can be bought under Capitalism. Thus, underpayment is the cause.

 

[danielpalos]

I don't think so.

You've never employed anyone and I don't think you ever had a job.

I don't think right-wingers care about debate only their hypocrisy.

 

[Blues Man]

Employment is at the will of either party. Anyone can be bought under Capitalism. Thus, underpayment is the cause.

No it is at the will of BOTH parties simultaneously.

You can't force an employer to hire you and an employer can't force you to work for him.

The the will of either individual is irrelevant unless both come to an agreement on employment.

 

[WinterBorn]

Only if you appeal to ignorance of at-will employment laws for any public policies based on previous condition of employment instead of servitude.

No. I am not appealing to ignorance when the unemployment compensation has a specific purpose of providing assistance to those who lost their job through no fault of their own. And it is for a limited time. You want it to be unending.

 

[Blues Man]

I don't think right-wingers care about debate only their hypocrisy.

I'm not a right winger, whatever that means to you.

I don't vote for republicans or democrats either

 

[WinterBorn]

Not the point at all, right-winger. It is about why people are panhandling instead of applying for a job. Underpayment causes that.

Even if that were the case, it has no bearing on my correcting your statement that there is no unemployment only underpayment. That statement is blatantly wrong.

 

[danielpalos]

No it is at the will of BOTH parties simultaneously.

You can't force an employer to hire you and an employer can't force you to work for him.

The the will of either individual is irrelevant unless both come to an agreement on employment.

lol. That is what employment at the will of either party means. Anyone can be bought under Capitalism. Underpayment makes that less likely not laziness.

 

[danielpalos]

Even if that were the case, it has no bearing on my correcting your statement that there is no unemployment only underpayment. That statement is blatantly wrong.

How so? Are you claiming no one can be bought under Capitalism?

 

[WinterBorn]

Not in any at-will employment State. Only those who are ignorant of the law say what you do.

You refusing to work is slightly repugnant. But I notice you left off the rest of my post.

You refusing to work and demanding that you be given money, forcibly taken from those who do work, is repugnant.

 

[WinterBorn]

How so? Are you claiming no one can be bought under Capitalism?

I made no such claim. But I can understand why you want to divert the topic.

 

[Blues Man]

lol. That is what employment at the will of either party means. Anyone can be bought under Capitalism. Underpayment makes that less likely not laziness.

No if it was at the will of either party individually then you could force an employer to hire you.

The will of both people have to align simultaneously ( that meas at the same time in the same place)

 

[danielpalos]

No if it was at the will of either party individually then you could force an employer to hire you.

The will of both people have to align simultaneously ( that meas at the same time in the same place)

That is not what employment at the will of either party means. At-will employment depends on mutual agreement.

 

[WinterBorn]

I'm not a right winger, whatever that means to you.

I don't vote for republicans or democrats either

Yeah, daniel calls everyone who disagrees with him "rightwinger". He continually talks about posting the fewest fallacies, but posts tons of ad hominem fallacies.

 

[Moonglow]

Panhandling: How Much Money Do Panhandlers Make? Can It Even Make Money?

US job openings surge to record 9.3 million in April

There are quite a few panhandlers that i see day to day. I have decided to make a new sign for when i pass them.

THERE ARE 9.1 MILLION JOB OPENINGS
IN JOE BIDEN'S ECONOMY!
WHY DONT YOU QUIT
BEING A PANHANDLER AND GET A JOB
WHERE YOU CAN MAKE
SOMETHING OF
YOURSELF?​

Why, because they are probably discriminated against when trying to get a job.

 

[WinterBorn]

That is not what employment at the will of either party means. At-will employment depends on mutual agreement.

LMAO!! Daniel, what do you think "The will of both people have to align simultaneously..." means? It means mutual agreement.

 

[WinterBorn]

Employment is at the will of either party. Anyone can be bought under Capitalism. Thus, underpayment is the cause.

"Anyone can be bought under capitalism"? Are you saying that someone with a job (trading their skills & time for money & benefits) has been bought?

 

[Moonglow]

Bwaaaaahhhhaaaa...Do you really think someone who panhandles is filing? Many times these people live off the grid...

You should file and get a refund of earned income credit to add to the panhandling income.

 

[danielpalos]

Yeah, daniel calls everyone who disagrees with him "rightwinger". He continually talks about posting the fewest fallacies, but posts tons of ad hominem fallacies.

Being called a right-winger is an ad hominem? You tried to claim I was a sociopath in another thread. Who is worse, hypocrite?