He is saying whites need not apply.

He is saying skilled workers need not apply.

His statement would be considered racist if a conservative had said something like this statement.

 

What do you base that on?

 

From Reich:

 

"I'd suggest that all contracts entered into with stimulus funds require contractors to provide at least 20 percent of jobs to the long-term unemployed and to people withincomes at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level."

 

 

 

 

 

Do you really think the guy is saying non-skilled workers are going to build our bridges? Really?

I'm going to quit my job and let Obama take care of me. I mean, this is what I'm taking from this.

 

I'm in the same boat. Obama will pay for my house and all my expenditures.

Debate all you wish about his concept of bringing more people into the workforce but don't fall prey to those that are dim-witted or have their own agenda.

Agenda-driven people will read anything they want into comments like that, which in the end, accomplishes very little other than inciting the fringes.

Edited January 29, 200917 yr by westsider

He is saying whites need not apply.

He is saying skilled workers need not apply.

His statement would be considered racist if a conservative had said something like this statement.

 

But that is NOT what was said! He said not to limit it to white construction workers.

Agenda-driven people will read anything they want into comments like that, which in the end, accomplished very little other than inciting the fringes.

 

Evidently. I just want to throw my hands up...or yell really loud.

I'm going to quit my job and let Obama take care of me. I mean, this is what I'm taking from this.

 

What part of link lead you to this conclusion? I though the debate was about who jobs would be given to, not quit and you will be taken care of?

How does 335 million for STD prevention create jobs?

 

In addition, from what I understand the tax cuts are going to come in a form of being in your paycheck or something like that. So do you think an extra 20-30 dollars is going to be much of impact or would you rather want it in one large lump sum....refund, stim check etc?

What part of link lead you to this conclusion? I though the debate was about who jobs would be given to, not quit and you will be taken care of?

 

"So that the money goes to OTHERS, the long term unemployed minorities, women, people who are not construction workers or high skilled professionals."

 

"He wants to force ALL the recovery money to go to ONLY low income neighborhoods"

 

I'll quit my job, live in the ghetto and become a slouch, that way I can be eligible for this money. I'm sure after 8 years of this I can build up and be set for a lifetime so that I can watch my father WHO IS a construction worker work his butt off and get no help what so ever.

But that is NOT what was said! He said not to limit it to white construction workers.

 

These jobs have never been limited to white construction worker. They have always been opened to anybody who is qualified.

 

These guys want to give jobs to people who are basicly unemployable, which probably means unqualified over people who are qualified.

 

I don't care what color somebody is as long as they are qualified.

 

Singling out white workers in his statement is really stupid.

I looked at it again and still believe these individuals are talking bigotery and reverse racism. They want unskilled workers building bridges based on the fact they are a minority, not their ability.

I looked at it again and still believe these individuals are talking bigotery and reverse racism. They want unskilled workers building bridges based on the fact they are a minority, not their ability.

I have to say, I agree.

How does 335 million for STD prevention create jobs?

 

In addition, from what I understand the tax cuts are going to come in a form of being in your paycheck or something like that. So do you think an extra 20-30 dollars is going to be much of impact or would you rather want it in one large lump sum....refund, stim check etc?

 

All fair questions.

 

I think many people who are living week to week will spend that extra money.

What do you base that on?

 

From Reich:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Do you really think the guy is saying non-skilled workers are going to build our bridges? Really?

 

It certainly looks that way if one in five jobs is going to someone who has been unemployed long term. My experience is that there is usually a pretty good reason someone is unemployed long term and it doesn't bode well for the person having to hire them. Still, there are obviously jobs on a bridge construction that do not require high level skills. I just don't think it is 20% of them. A concern is if the contractor has to hire extra labor to cover these 20%. That will result in these projects costing much more than they should.

I looked at it again and still believe these individuals are talking bigotery and reverse racism. They want unskilled workers building bridges based on the fact they are a minority, not their ability.

 

You do realize there are many people in the construction industry already that are not skilled enough to build bridges, right? He's not talking about taking some cat off the street with no high school diploma and making him the head engineer. That's not painfully obvious to you?

It certainly looks that way if one in five jobs is going to someone who has been unemployed long term. My experience is that there is usually a pretty good reason someone is unemployed long term and it doesn't bode well for the person having to hire them. Still, there are obviously jobs on a bridge construction that do not require high level skills. I just don't think it is 20% of them. A concern is if the contractor has to hire extra labor to cover these 20%. That will result in these projects costing much more than they should.

 

Go to Detroit and ask the long-term unemployed line workers if they are unskilled. Heck, go to Silicon Valley and see how many long-term unemployed or underemployed are unskilled.

 

I would be hesitant to make a gross generalization about long-term unemployed workers. If it was 2000, maybe. Not 2009.