G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Recent Comments
- Woodshed_rabbit on This is not The Jungle
- Woodshed_rabbit on This is not The Jungle
- Woodshed_rabbit on This is not The Jungle
- peterike on The guns that killed Tamerlan Tsarnaev weren’t illegal
- JP on This is not The Jungle
- The Querl Xoralundra on This is not The Jungle
GLP Approved
- Captain Capitalism
- Dalrock
- Dennis Mangan
- Econ Log
- Elusive Wapiti
- Foseti
- Hawaiian Libertarian
- HBD Bibliography
- Heartiste
- Lion of the Blogosphere
- Marginal Revolution
- Matt Forney
- Randall Parker
- Razib Khan
- Reihan Salam
- Roosh V
- Simon Grey
- SOBL
- Steve Sailer
- The Last Psychiatrist
- The Spearhead
- Thrasymachus
- Ulysses
- Vox Day
Tweet Tweet
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
the U.S. can increase employment by cutting the number of hours employees work
Clearly, they do not know about the stupid EEOC …
Given how difficult it is to fire worthless/dishonest/violent workers, I think employers would simply suck up the overtime costs where they apply, or provide more benefits to exempt employees to get them to work more.
Male leaders make body language mistakes sometimes
What most women think of as collaborative work is simply make-work so that women can feel good about earning their sinecures …
“frican-Americans, the finding that 58% of adult women within that group experienced sexual abuse as children”
Are you serious, brah? All those ghetto single mothers ‘raising’ little boys behind closed doors should be where your outrage is placed. Female sex abuse is vastly over-stated and male sexual abuse is vastly under-stated.
And just because 58% of black bitches are fat doesn’t mean that 58% of black bitches were raped as children. I sincerely hope you didn’t derive the 58% abuse number using the black female obesity rate.
Whitey,
read the article for once. i didn’t pull the stats out of my ass. the 58% figure isn’t the obesity rate. there is plenty of “outrage” to go around regardless.
FTA: “In 2005, 33,298 women responded to questions about childhood physical or sexual abuse. Nearly 58% of the women reported at least one instance of abuse as a child or teen, and 11% reported severe physical or sexual abuse.”
Sorry, Chuck, but what I read there means that 47% could have simply been slapped or spanked, that is,experience something they categorized as non-severe physical abuse. Even the remaining 11% could have suffered what they considered severe physical abuse, with no physical abuse at all. That said, two thoughts: For something so hard to get good numbers on, it is frustrating that the survey or at least the reporting on it is so unclear.
Secondly, hopefully without being banished from the manosphere, let me assert that some percentage of men are sexual abusers. Thus, African Americans may actually suffer less sexual abuse as children as a perverse side-effect of fatherless households, and African-American and other adult or teen women may suffer more abuse from black males, ceteris paribus.
As for 1) the French tried that through some sort of national law 15 years ago or so. Didn’t work to lower unemployment.
As for 4), these days researchers tend to count simple spanking or slapping when screaming etc. as child abuse.
Thus, African Americans may actually suffer less sexual abuse as children as a perverse side-effect of fatherless households
Single mothers let a rotation of boyfriends live or stay over with them, who in turn can abuse her children.
Uh huh. Gonna go in a wild and say that most of those abuses comes from “Mommy’s new boyfriend” because Mommy kicked out daddy or is a baby-momma.
The TPJ in turn activates their “analyze-and-fix-it” circuits and leads men to immediately search for solutions, rather than understanding that sometimes people just need to be heard.
Tip: The next time someone comes to you with an emotional problem, try being an empathetic sounding board rather than an executive problem solver.
“Can you please leave your petty office cat fights out of my office and come back when you have a serious big person business problem to solve?”
Is that empathetic enough?
number 1 is bunk. See “Lump of Labor Fallacy”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lump_of_labour_fallacy
Agreeing with ATrain here. As Heartiste said recently, workers are not a fungible resource. There are huge fixed costs associated with finding and training suitable workers, of course employers are going to squeeze as much as they can out of the workers they have.
It would probably be more efficient just to pay the unemployment benefits for the excess workers than to shoe-horn them into unsuitable jobs.
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Senator, already proposed a law that would classify single parenthood as child abuse. Slowly there will be more politicians being open about this.
By our definition of it, it isn’t hard to believe a high percentage of African American women have experienced sexual and physical abuse. The article states that this is the reason so many black American women are overweight, they engage in comfort eating as a way to cope with the trauma of begin sexually and physically abused.
I guess white people are overweight only because we eat too much and exercise too little.
The 58% is of total abuse both physical and sexual not sexual alone. White people remain the majority of chesters!
Some of the physical abuse is likely from the mother. Black kids often refer to the whuppin they will be getting from mom.
A lot of places employ part-time employees because full-time employment comes with mandatory benefits, and an associated higher overhead from the accounting, et cetera. Pretty much everyone that is currently ‘under employed’ would not be working part-time if it wasn’t currently law enforcing the existence of part-time, at-will employment.
There is also a management culture where they do indeed believe that employees are fungible (excluding themselves). It’s actually against corporate policy to show ‘favoritism’. That is giving more hours, preferential treatment in scheduling to employees that do better work. I’m sure there is a ‘diversity’ angle in not ‘discriminating’ between two workers, but I don’t think most managers (who have never had a real job before) are aware of it. It just really enrages or disgusts them when you point out that some people are better than others at their job.
What’s worse is that the whole non-’favoritism’ thing doesn’t translate into sharing responsibility for a task or project when things go bad. They know it is futile to castigate the fuck ups and slackers, and they fully expect others to pick up their slack, but without actually getting any additional hours, remuneration, et cetera.
IIRC Chuck has touched on this before about some waitstaff not being able to pull their weight, covering 2 tables, while another waiter covers 4 or 5 tables, but when it comes to divvying up the tips that doesn’t come into play. Well, it’s the same pretty much everywhere, and the further you get away from the unique snowflakes in middle management, the worse it gets because the expectation that all workers are fungible is more strongly adhered to, even in fields that require lots of education, certification, et cetera, and this idea doesn’t even begin to make sense.
It’s certainly better to collect those benefits than work a part-time job. If you start working >15h/week they’ll stop sending those unemployment checks, which is almost certainly leaps and bounds better than the check you will be getting from McDonald’s.
Dealing with perpetual unemployment and underemployment is going to be a sticky issue for the West and well parts of the East . As I have said before, it gets us what we see now, ultra low birth rates. The age of media and birth control put an end to free high quality babies . Thus only the wealthy and the dysgenic and the highly religious breed which basically will end up being an end game for modernity
Now as for the the US kept it kept its borders closed they might have been able to do social credit but as it is, well its not going to happen and in time the US and the West I suspect will economically crap out.
As for cutting the work week, actually it did work but as par of a long term push to a smaller work force with higher wages. We pushed youth (under 14) first, followed with a 40 hour work week than retirement (pushing out seniors) and women.
Women getting back into the work force, free trade and the end of “everyman” manufacturing jobs and union pay of course undid much of the progress and left us with a skeleton of socialism.
A system that only creates low paying , social parasites (high and low) and highly specialized work can’t sustain an industrial age economy.
A real fix is not one that can be complicated, you need to rig the tax code to favor wages, control trade , null immigration (net should be around 10k per year max for the US) and pay the poor and uneducated not to breed. There are obvious reasons this won’t happen so the net effect is Mexification
Nah, black mothers are fully capable of filling the role of disciplinarian when the man is absent.
Number 1 seems anything but intuitive. It assumes there is some fixed number of jobs or amount of labor needed, and that it can be reallocated. In reality, this would just weaken the economy and result in fewer jobs and/or lower paying jobs.
“…so the net effect is Mexification.”
“Mexification” is not inevitable.
A Provisional Government of National Restoration (PGNR) would use both stick and carrot methods to remove alien population groups from US territory.
I am responding to that Prosper guy.
How do you plan to expel the majority youth population of Texas and California ?
While I am down with the whole PGNR thing, short of atrocity say a holodomor or semi autonomous kill swarms or something getting millions to move away is not going to be easy.
And we need Cali and Texas if only for resources.
Cutting hours won’t cut unemployment. The French did this years ago and it did not work.
Effective male contraception plus stupidly expensive child support will put a stop to poor people having babies real quick.
“stupidly expensive child support”
I’d argue the opposite: eliminate all forms of child support, and you’ll get the same result with much less government bureaucracy.
Pingback: The Economics of Employment Translated to Manospherian…. « stonerwithaboner
The Baker article translated into Manosperian….
http://stonerwithaboner.wordpress.com/2012/07/08/the-economics-of-employment-translated-to-manospherian/
What’y'all think?