[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621288]It's rather asinine that you'd get a degree in something , without looking to see if, i don't know, there were actual openings in the field.. Jesus its like whining that your liberal arts degree is worth less than the paper its printed on, and your life sucks because no one can use you.[/QUOTE]
STEM?
I still find it inconceivable that anyone in Parliament felt that it was the government's duty to give supermarkets access to what is effectively slave labor. Why would they hire anybody when they have all the workers they need for free?
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621288]It's rather asinine that you'd get a degree in something , without looking to see if, i don't know, there were actual openings in the field.. Jesus its like whining that your liberal arts degree is worth less than the paper its printed on, and your life sucks because no one can use you.[/QUOTE]
Are you blind or stupid?
Geology isn't some dying fucking art and never will be.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;39620028]Geology IS more important than shelf-stacking. You don't want to die if a supervolcano decides to erupt and we have no controlled release method, do you?[/QUOTE]
Are you being purposely stupid?
Clearly we can stack shit up the volcano and build a dome over it through item-stacking. Common sense goes a long way, you know.
[QUOTE=Doneeh;39621349]Are you being purposely stupid?
Clearly we can stack shit up the volcano and build a dome over it through item-stacking. Common sense goes a long way, you know.[/QUOTE]
Or fill it with concrete.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621330]Alright so lets use geology, because heaven forbid someone uses something else. GEOLOGY- a highly specialized field, subject to growth and shinkage due to a constantly shifting economy. You get a degree in geology, and whoops, we're in the middle of a recession, so fuck you there are no jobs in geology open right now, so you have two options: 1. go to work in a field other than you studied, and hope to get a job later, or [B]2. cry your eyes out like a baby, and sit on wealth fare, then when someone comes up with a back to work scheme, bitch and moan about "oh god why do i have to do this",[/B] well, because you picked a highly specialized field, and there are no openings in said field, now stop crying and start being useful.[/QUOTE]
You mean, work for far below minimum wage or have your benefits cut off. People would happily take these placements if they were getting a fair wage for them.
Shit, I'd take the crappy jobs I complained about in the OP if I was getting paid the same as the people I'd be working with.
[editline]17th February 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621395]If your still making your benefits on top of a wage, I fail to see a problem. So you mean to tell me, they collect wages, and they collect unemployment (or what ever it is you call it across the pond), and they complain? or are they making horribly low amounts of money because they aren't collecting unemployment.[/QUOTE]
You're not making a wage. Or even close to it. You only get a slightly increased benefits payment (It's less than £30 a week more than your regular payment for 30 hours of work).
This guy explained it in another thread.
[QUOTE=tdnoob;39562357]Unemployment benefits are £56.25 a week for the under 25's ([url]https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance/what-youll-get[/url])
Working 30 hours a week at minimum wage for people aged 21+ is £6.19 an hour. ([url]https://www.gov.uk/national-minimum-wage-rates[/url])
Working minimum wage for 30 hours a week gets you £185.70 a week compared to the £56 she was getting, so she is being forced to work for £1.87 an hour, not only is that illegal she would also lose her benefits if she refused. it's practically slave labour. ([url]https://www.gov.uk/jobseekers-allowance/further-information[/url])[/QUOTE]
[editline]17th February 2013[/editline]
[I]And[/I] you lose your benefits for two weeks, then a month, and finally six months for every time you turn something down or get dismissed from a placement. You're forced to either work for less than minimum wage, or get a job, and not being able to is the entire reason you're in the position to be put on this scheme to start with.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621330]Alright so lets use geology, because heaven forbid someone uses something else. GEOLOGY- a highly specialized field, subject to growth and shinkage due to a constantly shifting economy. You get a degree in geology, and whoops, we're in the middle of a recession, so fuck you there are no jobs in geology open right now, so you have two options: 1. go to work in a field other than you studied, and hope to get a job later, or 2. cry your eyes out like a baby, and sit on wealth fare, then when someone comes up with a back to work scheme, bitch and moan about "oh god why do i have to do this", well, because you picked a highly specialized field, and there are no openings in said field, now stop crying and start being useful.[/QUOTE]
she had a work placement, but got moved to shelf stacking in order to keep her benefits
i'm having a hard time working out if you're troling, or just dumb
Most likely morbidly stupid.
Lets hope he doesn't forget to breathe
It's a terminal case of reading neither the thread nor the article properly.
ok guys this is serious ive forgot how to read somebody help me out please i cant read the article oh god whats going on
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621288]It's rather asinine that you'd get a degree in something , without looking to see if, i don't know, there were actual openings in the field.. Jesus its like whining that your liberal arts degree is worth less than the paper its printed on, and your life sucks because no one can use you.[/QUOTE]
its rather moronic to expect kids to predict the job market 4+ years out
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621666]Oh god i'm so sorry i assumed you made a living wage in the UK, especially since everyone likes to play it off like Europe is gods gift to earth, with streets made of gold, and no fat people. In the US, dependent upon the state (using Washington as an example) you make anywhere from $400 a week (single) to around $750 a week (married, with child) in unemployment, not counting all of the other benefits. That's totally a living wage.[/QUOTE]
Great. So you're stupid over two continents.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621666]Oh god i'm so sorry i assumed you made a living wage in the UK, especially since everyone likes to play it off like Europe is gods gift to earth, with streets made of gold, and no fat people. In the US, dependent upon the state (using Washington as an example) you make anywhere from $400 a week (single) to around $750 a week (married, with child) in unemployment, not counting all of the other benefits. That's totally a living wage.[/QUOTE]
um, that unemployment amount is incorrect. it varies by state and is based on a formula. states can and do pay far less than the amount you listed, and it can be tough to qualify for as well.
This system sounds like a good way for employers to take advantage of the unemployed.
Why not have some social workers maintain a list of "real" jobs from which they can offer to the unemployed and which the unemployed must accept if they want to keep their benefits?
I mean they will probably get same kinda jobs such as these and as probable temp jobbers they might still get fucked in the ass but the pay would be better?
If the problem is the overall lack of jobs or if the employers just dont want to hire people for actual money then isn't shit fucked on a bit more overall level?
[QUOTE=Lazor;39621727]um, that unemployment amount is incorrect. it varies by state and is based on a formula. states can and do pay far less than the amount you listed, and it can be tough to qualify for as well.[/QUOTE]
He said
"anywhere from $400 a week"
when its 'anywhere from $40'.
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621830]source:[url]http://www.esd.wa.gov/uibenefits/benefitcheck/how-much.php[/url]
How is it with your "advanced systems" and "oh god the US sucks at everything" are your people making less money on wealth fare weekly?, according to current currency exchange rates she's making £56 a week, which is $86.92; far below even the minimum of $143. What's up with that? Don't spin the health benefits either, as medicaid takes care of that. Stop trying to spin something for a joke and make real arguments/discussion.[/QUOTE]
I was just picking fault with your hyperbole. You said the unemployed get anywhere [I]from[/I] $400 in America. When the correct sentence would be anywhere from $40. One tenth of your original dramatization.
Anyway, unemployment benefit in US is a flawed and bad system. Its based on your previous jobs and is inherently difficult to get and many needing people don't even get anything.
TLDR: You have no reading comprehension.
[QUOTE=wickedplayer494;39620028]Geology IS more important than shelf-stacking. You don't want to die if a supervolcano decides to erupt and we have no controlled release method, do you?[/QUOTE]
But what if the only way to untrigger the volcano is to stack the same type of rocks into designated mountain "shelves"?
What will you do then, Mr. fancy-pantsy-geologist-man?
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621909]TLDR: You have no idea what your talking about. Having actually applied for it at one point, and receiving it before current job: It's not inherently difficult to get, it takes time, and the ability to file forms properly. By the way, the average unemployment output in the US was $306 a week (source [URL]http://images.businessweek.com/ss/08/12/1224_states_unemployment/index.htm[/URL]) Please cite your sources as to "many needing people going without"[/QUOTE]
I guess you missed this in your source:
[i]"About 37% of the jobless receive benefits."[/i]
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;39621362]I never said it was useless, i'm saying the people who are complaining about "oh god why cant i do x" are useless. Geology is a HIGHLY specialized field of science, as such its not like its job numbers are growing by leaps and bounds.[/QUOTE]
So no one should ever study it? Also are you seriously suggesting that when someone is choosing a field to study they should be thinking 4-10 (depending on what it is, it could take that long) years into the future? Sorry but some things (like geology) are always needed, maybe not in huge growing numbers that people in other fields are needed but always needed.
Its also a completely false argument for geology, if anything in the coming years its going to be useful to have many around given how much the world is changing.
I can't help but think a PhD Math holder would be a fantastic shelf stacker. They would always have the optimal shelf stacking formula.
:v:
headline should read "politician believes shelf-stackers are more important than scientists"
idk how unemployment works in britain, but at least in america you have to work so many hours a week after a certain point, the real problem in this economy is underemployment, that geologist can't find a job in his field and is forced to work as a shelf-stacker, which is a tragic waste of experience
Making sure grocery store shelves are stocked is pretty important, but aren't geologist the guys that find oil, gold, and minerals vital to economic growth?
[QUOTE=cqbcat;39624458]Making sure grocery store shelves are stocked is pretty important, but aren't geologist the guys that find oil, gold, and minerals vital to economic growth?[/QUOTE]
Yeah, they're those guys, the guys who literally hunt out the base materials that our economies are based off of.
So yeah geologists are worth more than shelf stackers.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;39621315]STEM?[/QUOTE]
everyone and their dog has a bachelor of science
[QUOTE=Zeke129;39624786]everyone and their dog has a bachelor of science[/QUOTE]
I do not.
However, my dog is studying as a theoretical physicist.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
