You are both welcome to your opinion, even if it is based on fallacy.

You want the truth to that question? Because we have an abundance of dumb and/or lazy people that don't give a fuck. There is no way to "eliminate it".

I know it's not pc or what you want to hear, but that's a big reason why. That and the earth has a limited amount of resources.


edit: Remove dumb from that first sentence. Plenty of dumb people that are doing just great.

I have argued this reductio ad absurdum before.

Why would everyone want to quit their market based wage job, for unemployment compensation? It would be the equivalent to everyone wanting to quit their current day job for a minimum wage job.

So you want unemployment compensation for those that have never held a job?

__________________






"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Because the benefit of not working and still being secure is better than working your ass off and just being a little better off than those that don't work.

What about our Ninth Amendment, at-will employment doctrine, and state at-will employment laws.

Since no employer is required to hire someone under at-will employment doctrine (even in right to work states), no individual should be required to get hired either.

I consider it a form of equality and equal protection of the laws.


In any event, I find your argument more of a distraction than one based on logic and reason. You would not have to work for market based wages if you feel you are being overly taxed; so you have no real basis for any (moral) indignation regarding work.

What about it?

__________________






"Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, but rather to skid in sideways - Chardonnay in one hand - chocolate in the other - body thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and screaming "WOO HOO, What a Ride!"

Since no employer is required to hire someone under at-will employment doctrine (even in right to work states), no individual should be required to get hired either. To do otherwise could be perceived as being more Socialist than necessary or required under our form of federal government.

I consider it a form of equality and equal protection of the laws; something that could ameliorate perceptions of racism.

Sounds good, can't wait to kick back and have everything given to me.

And youre wrong. Its on you to provide YOUR income. YOU. Not the taxpayers.

Oh cmon, lets all get on board with his type of thinking. He wont realize he's wrong until he sees it in person.

We all give up, there's no reason to work under his system (unless of course you're a millionaire). However, how will there be any millionaires? or Food?

In other words, you would be willing to quit your day job for unemployment compensation? How many people making the high five or six figure income range do you think would want that opportunity cost?

How many people do you think will be bringing home six figures under your system?

You are already paying for a War on Poverty, a Drug War, and a Terror War. All I am suggesting is that we lower our tax burden by discontinuing the latter Wars and actually eliminate official poverty in our republic as a form of better morals and ethics.

In any event, unemployment compensation could be mostly self-supporting through contributions from all labor market participants.

However, you seem to missing the point about perceived racism through a lack of equality in the application of the law.

As many as are now, and maybe more since some labor market participants would not want to compete for the market based wages they can command with their current skill sets.