http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticke...^ixic,qqqq&sec=topStories&pos=8&asset=&ccode= The U.S. unemployment situation becomes ever more complex the more you dig into it. It's far from simply a problem of there not being enough jobs for people to do. In fact, since the middle of 2009 the number of job openings has risen at twice the rate of actual hires, according to the Wall Street Journal. Despite the massive pool of unemployed Americans, there's a growing number of unfilled positions. Shouldn't the glut of jobless Americans be immediately filling any available job as it appears? Well, it's not happening that way. Many companies are actually having a hard time filling open positions, and there are many factors at play behind this. One reason is that higher-skill positions can't find enough higher-skilled Americans. After all, while there's a glut of unemployed lower-educated Americans, higher-educated Americans remain decently employed. Another issue is that Americans stuck with underwater mortgages, ie. who owe more than their home is worth, aren't able to move for potential jobs. That's a fair excuse. Yet beyond the two factors above, many Americans continue to enjoy the luxury of choice, despite being long-term unemployed: WSJ: Some workers agree that unemployment benefits make them less likely to take whatever job comes along, particularly when those jobs don't pay much. Michael Hatchell, a 52-year-old mechanic in Lumberton, N.C., says he turned down more than a dozen offers during the 59 weeks he was unemployed, because they didn't pay more than the $450 a week he was collecting in benefits. One auto-parts store, he says, offered him $7.75 an hour, which amounts to only $310 a week for 40 hours. "I was not going to put myself in a situation where I was making that small of a wage," says Mr. Hatchell. He has since found a better-paying job at a different auto-parts dealer. It's not that there aren't opportunities, it's that there aren't opportunities that match many Americans' expectations: At Emirates, four cabin-crew job fairs the airline held in Miami, Houston, San Francisco and Seattle attracted an average of about 50 people each, compared to a global average of about 150 and as many as 1,000 at some events in Europe and Asia. "I would have liked to have seen more and would have expected to see more," says Rick Helliwell, vice president of recruitment. The jobs require little more than a high-school diploma and fluency in English. They include free accommodation and medical care, and starting pay of about $30,000 a year. Mr. Helliwell speculates that Americans might be hesitant to move to Dubai, where the jobs are based. "Maybe they have less of an adventurous spirit" given the uncertainties they face at home, he said. This is just one example, but tons of people around the world would die for an opportunity like this. You go through the grind for a few years, with one of the best airline brands, then find something that better fits your other life needs once you have some experience. It can lead to decent opportunities and global experience, especially for someone with only a high school diploma. Yet it received a tiny amount of interest despite the massive pool of unemployed Americans. Which makes one wonder what kind of economic downturn this is. It certainly isn't anything like the American depression given unemployed Americans' ability to be picky.
I thought that the second you turn down work, and continue to receive benefits you were committing fraud of some sort?
Why should any of these poor victims ever have to work again? <img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2919725>
<object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/xdAj8zui6ss&hl=en_US&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/xdAj8zui6ss&hl=en_US&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>
Well only an idiot would take a job that pays 310 a week, which then requires you to spend money on transportation,etc.. when you can make 450 a week on your ass and not have to spend money on work gasoline,wear and tear on the auto etc... Do the math, can you really blame them. I bet if the Job payed 14 bucks an hour things would be different. What they need to do is cut the unemployment checks and that removes the incentive. Anyhow this is pennies compared to the billions Banks got out of taxpayers. Complaining about unemployment fraud is foolish when you have bankers raking in billions from socializing losses,privatizing gains thanks to the taxpayers.
Technically this is true, but in practice you can game the situation. After the dot-com bust, I had a friend who went on unemployment for a very long time. He had previously been a Unix system administrator I think. My recollection is that it worked something like this: The rule was you couldn't turn down any job opportunity in your previous field, but you didn't have to take a job that wasn't exactly what you were doing before you lost your job. So, there were jobs he was qualified and capable of doing like Windows NT system administration, PC Tech, hardware testing (the job he eventually got when his unemployment finally ran out). He avoided having to apply to these jobs by defining his field very narrowly as "Unix System Administrator", so when the case-worker at the unemployment office would locate various IT positions for him to apply to, he'd say "Nope, that's not my field I'm a "Unix System Administrator".
Really. After the Federal government starts paying, it ought to be a universal amount. Some states have programs that pay four or five hundred dollars a week! Other states like Florida only pay out 250 bucks a week or so. Why the disparity between states? If the "generous" states want their citizens to get twice that of other states, let them pay for it.
As far as I understand, in some states, you can get as much as 1/2 of your pay, and considering there would be no 401K taken out (of course, then you wouldn't be adding to that) and I imagine taxes would then be lower, you might make as much as 60-75% of your old salary for the Net pay! Consider someone like me - I make pretty decent money, and if I went on unemployment I would probably honestly have a tough time finding a job that would pay more then 70% of what I currently make in the current environment. So, I can easily see that I might make more in Unemployment then I would likely make from a new job offer for example. As far as the disparity, remember cost of living - where I live, it is common for Condos to rent for $1800/month and houses over $2500. $250 a week would run out pretty fast - so they feel they have to go by some aspect of what the person was making. Also, a person who makes more while they are employed in theory is paying more in taxes to the system then the person who was making less also. JJacksET4
Because if they don't they wont have a future.They will probably lose everything they have - house - car - babes.