|
How does this keep people with horribly expensive diseases from just moving to Vermont when diagnosed and sticking the state government with the bill? Then when treatment is over you leave the state.... Or just selling postage stamp sized lots to be considered a resident of Vermont. So that you then just bill your out of state doctor to Vermont and laugh all the way to the bank?
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 19:20
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
etalian posted:Because it will be linked to basic residency requirements just like being able to vote or register a car in-state. Good luck with that. Right to travel according to SCOTUS trumps that poo poo. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shapiro_v._Thompson
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 20:14
|
|
|
Nessus posted:Well go file an amicus curae brief with the Vermont Republican Party then, I'm sure you'd be rewarded handsomely. Which is what I was asking in the first place. Does anyone know how they plan to keep it from getting abused? Or do they even care?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 21:31
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:States are able to charge residents and nonresidents different tuition amounts and that seems pretty uncontroversial Tuition isn't welfare.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 21:44
|
|
|
Bicyclops posted:It really is, though, because both of these arguments assume that people are capable of interstate moving without any real difficulty. In this instance, we'd have assume someone would be able to move as soon as they need treatment, and do it fairly swiftly. That is the reason why SCOTUS overruled residency requirements because it kept poor people locked into states.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Joementum posted:There will be an exclusion period, probably 6-12 months. A lot of the details are still being worked out because the state was required to set up a PPACA exchange and picked the same vendor that was used for healthcare.gov, so they've been working on getting that working. Gay marriage isn't the same as 40,000 a month cancer treatments.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 26, 2014 22:50
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Another anecdote, for the hell of it: A friend of mine went skiing once with a Canadian friend of his in the northwest US. My friend managed to hurt his head on the slopes but it wasn't anywhere near painful enough that he thought it was worth getting checked out. His friend *insisted* on driving him to the ER anyway, because you never know what a head injury might do (ignoring certain practical considerations, this is a smart move). The ER did whatever tests they felt needed doing, pronounced my friend fine, and then handed him a bill for $800. *That* was the moment the Canadian guy finally realized why my friend was so reluctant to go to the ER - it hadn't once occurred to him that it would cost anything at all, much less more than their entire ski outing. He was so abashed he paid for my friend's bill himself. 
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Yeah, the real takeaway from that story is definitely that people are irresponsible for getting hurt in a country without public healthcare. Ytlaya posted:I legitimately cannot comprehend the mindset that would have this as a first reaction to that post. It isn't like people don't understand healthcare is expensive in this country. Which is why it sounds absolutely loving insane to me to go skiing and risk breaking a bone, injuring a limb of some sort or a head injury which happen while skiing quite often. The first thing they think after getting slapped with a 20-30k bill is "poo poo this is so expensive I wish I hadn't gone and done that." See also people that ride mountain bikes, surf, skateboard, etc. It isn't like I'm being callus to someone who got sick or got cancer. This is someone who got into a dangerous situation, got injured and then is annoyed they have to deal with the consequences of their actions. I agree our medical system is hosed but people taking risks for no reason doesn't help. Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 21:13 on May 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:You misunderstand--that was with insurance. I went to the ER in November for a constant chest pain that hurt when I breathed. It turned out to be like a stress problem, not a treatable thing. The bill for that? Over 2000 dollars, AFTER my dad's insurance. I agree the prices are hosed but 800 after insurance and they didn't do anything? Really? Was he paying his deductible? I've had insurance from different places for years and I've yet to see a simple 800 bill from an emergency room ever. Even with a wife and three kids.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 21:09
|
|
|
more friedman units posted:Fat Ogre, you're saying that people who play sports are taking unnecessary risks and it's somehow their fault our medical system is terrible. This is like the textbook definition of Just World fallacy. People should be able to go mountain biking or skiing without fearing bankruptcy. When they live sedentary lives, become obese and develop heart problems, are you going to be chiding them for NOT getting enough outdoor exercise? Not at all. You can get exercise without risking smashing your body into a tree, curb or the ground at high speeds. Last time I checked stationary bike accidents were far less serious than a mountain bike accident into a tree or on concrete. This isn't an either or situation. If I told you about someone who drove a car without insurance and then hit another car and caused thousands of dollars of damages and then was all upset about how expensive it is to not have insurance would your feeling still be the same?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 21:45
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:If you go outside your house, there's a risk you might come to harm. Why would anyone take the risk of going outside?! People who choose to go outside are to blame if they get mugged, hit by a car whatever. It's their own stupid fault for leaving their basements. Yeah and if someone else hurts you, you get to sue them to pay for your injuries. Like if you get hit by a car the insurance picks up the bill, or your own uninsured motorist, or you get a judgement against them and the hospital goes after them. Please make more strawman arguments. Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 21:56 on May 4, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 21:53
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:The injury rate for skiing is below 2.5 per 1,000 skiers; in 2012 the injury rate on the roads was 11 per 1,000 licensed drivers. Maybe you should hassle him for being driven to the ER instead, what sort absolutely loving insane person would take that risk without health insurance? Yeah like I said car insurance covers that.... Or is there a skiing insurance you can get? Maybe something like health insurance?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 21:58
|
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:Or we could have universal coverage and then people wouldn't have to worry about crippling debt for taking part in generally safe activities and you wouldn't have to blame them for being lunatics. Hence this thread about UHC in Vermont. At what point did I say we shouldn't have UHC?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:Plenty of car accidents happen with the other party speeding off before you can get their details. Muggers don't kindly provide their information to you after a beating. Many accidents don't involve anyone else at all and may be as simple as tripping down stairs and breaking bones. The straw man is saying people are to blame if they go out and get hurt by someone else or something else. I was talking about engaging in voluntary activities known to be dangerous without insurance. You brought up getting mugged etc. Last time I checked people don't volunteer to get mugged. Hence strawman.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 22:08
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:I really don't understand your argument. Nowhere did he say that the American friend didn't have insurance, and as my own experience shows, you can easily rack up a crippling bill at the ER even with insurance. So what are you trying to say? 2000 is crippling now? Where do you live that 2000 is crippling but you don't qualify for state aid etc for being poor as gently caress?
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 22:09
|
|
|
Redeye Flight posted:Wherein I'm a graduate student.  I had a full time job with health insurance when I went to college. I guess I just don't understand.
|
|
#
¿
May 4, 2014 22:14
|
|
|
EvanSchenck posted:This is kind of basic, but insurance works by spreading risk across the group of people covered by the plan, or the risk pool. When somebody covered by the plan has to make a claim they're paid off with money from the larger number of people who also paid premiums but don't make claims--with health insurance, the healthy subsidize the sick. In a single-payer system the entire population is in the risk pool, so people who require extremely expensive care are paid off by the healthy majority. To expand on this single payer forces companies to play nice in many cases, for example stuff like replacement hips etc. If you're a company you're going to work to produce the lowest costing best quality replacement hip in the hopes that yours is the single payer of choice hip. As a pharmaceutical company you may not produce much of cheap anti-biotic XYZ because there is no profit in it for you. Thing is if everyone is going to be prescribed that anti-biotic because of single payer, the economy of scale makes it profitable for someone to pick up that slack unlike the current situation. Instead of companies only having to worry about tiny market shares they now have to focus on a large scale market share. This has the flip side issue of higher barriers to entry, in that it gets much harder to get your product to market because the established players will work regulations in that favor their products or company policies. Think military industrial complex.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 15:33
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:I don't know about that. New innovations are already going to be expensive and not covered on most insurance. In any case they're only going to be available to the rich, who can still pay for them if they want. Yes they are expensive but if you can show that your new hip is X% better in every way that the currently produced hip, they'll switch to purchasing your expensive hip over the other one. It forces the market to be super competitive in that everyone wants that controlled piece of the pie. The problem comes when they lobby to change the laws to keep it from working that way and stifling the competition, or they just make a poo poo ton of money and effectively become the only option in town because they ran everyone out of business or bought everyone and folded them into their own company.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 16:26
|
|
|
Axe Master posted:Then you're laughably out of touch. Chemistry graduate students, for example, are expected to work in the lab anywhere from full time to 80 hours/week and a typical stipend is between 20 and 30k/year, typically on the lower end. Insurance is frequently done through the school, and at private universities at least is 1. bad coverage 2. expensive as gently caress. Or maybe force them to pay grad students a livable wage and offer better insurance? It isn't like the university isn't going to profit off your work.Or if that is too extreme, maybe choose a different career? I had a bunch of friends graduate with history, art and poli-sci degrees and then were annoyed they couldn't find work and were up to their eyeballs in debt. It isn't like everyone told them, those degrees don't pay for poo poo, maybe you should rethink it. I made a conscious decision to get a job to pay for school (no loans), and get a job that had insurance. The only reason I stuck with it and got my degree was that I felt like it might be useful to have it one day. Still hasn't really been needed but oh well. Meanwhile my friends that bragged about getting done in 4 years are saddled with debt, work at a lovely job not using their degree or skill set and are bitter as gently caress. I on the other hand took 7 years to earn a 4 year degree by only going to school part-time, I graduated with no debt, and had health insurance and a full time job the entire time I was in school. So that once I graduated I could immediately say I already had 5 years of real work experience and got paid even more. (the first 2 years weren't career related) I don't see why that is so crazy. Oh and that was basically 7 years of 80 hour work weeks (40 at work and 40 for school) so cry me a river. Also I saved my work money in high school instead of wasting it on cars, or cloths or other stupid poo poo. Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 23:02 on May 5, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 22:51
|
|
|
forgot my pants posted:You spent 40 hours a week on school while going part time? Either you're exaggerating or you are a really slow learner. 9-12 hours of school actual school depending on the semester. Usually 3-6 in the summers 5-6 hours of labs. Studying and Homework for the rest of the time. On top of having to work over time etc with work.
|
|
#
¿
May 5, 2014 23:56
|
|
|
How are extreme sports handled in countries with UHC? Are they covered or have reactionary laws been passed saying they don't cover voluntarily dangerous activities?
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 12:58
|
|
|
Look at you guys getting angry at actually weighing your options and taking the jobs that have healthcare and pay enough to get your way through college. poo poo isn't fair. I'm not saying it is. I'm also not saying that we shouldn't fix it. What I am saying is there are ways around it if you put thought and effort into it instead of rolling the dice and gambling on not getting sick so you can get your grad degree and then hopefully get that job related to your science degree once you get your PHD and hopefully you'll get tenure and that you'll never have a serious accident or illness that entire time. Also hopefully your spouse will have decent healthcare in the meantime if you want kids etc. It is about priorities in life and working in a given system. Sure it doesn't encourage people to take science degrees unless they have money or insurance from mom and dad. If you don't have that support network to help you out, DON'T loving risk it and instead take the practical jobs that will get you paid and get your healthcare taken care of. How many of you saw people that were the first in their family to ever go to college and they went for an arts degree thinking, "I'll study what my passion is!" Hell I've even seen it with some of the science degrees. How many Anthropologists, Archaeologists, Paleontologists, Sociologists, Psychologists etc are really needed? Yet why do people keep getting these degrees? Surefire way to end up with a poo poo job, in debt up to your eyeballs. Until we fix our healthcare system and fix the issues with student loans people need to wake the gently caress up and stop loving themselves over.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 14:58
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Really, if an 18-year-old can't predict the job market and economic condictions 4-6 years out with better accuracy than any professional economist, then he's got no business getting a degree. Yeah because lawyers have always made lots of money  Meanwhile people everywhere still need nurses, plumbers, electricians, machinists, computer drafting, computer science graduates, engineers etc. Better get that degree in Romantic Literature of the 1800s instead.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 15:03
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Wow. So much for entrepreneurship, scholarship, and utilizing one's potential. gently caress all that. Do something "safe". That you think you can't utilize your potential and play it safe is amusing. Get a decent 'safe' job to save money so you can start that business you always wanted to start...oh well gave up on dreams by playing it safe and now you have that nest egg to fall back on and live off of. I'm done with the education derail as it isn't all related to the initial issue of the thread.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2014 15:07
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Conservatives don't want to debate the issues. It's all about distracting from issues by offering "common-sense" individual solutions to systemic problems. I know you think your quote is a joke but it isn't that far from the truth of what needs to be done. I've seen it work enough times to know it isn't bullshit. People just get tied up with "I sunk thousands into this degree I need to try to find work tied to it." Instead of just giving up on that tactic and switching to something different or even going back to school for something different. Your job is literally you selling your labor or services to someone. Your wages and benefits are tied to how much worth you bring to the table and how valuable your services are in the market place. That you can't find a job in many cases means you aren't selling something people want, you lack the skills or features that set you apart from a hundreds of others just like you. You shop around for a good deal on everything from haircuts to home electronics to groceries, employers do the same for employees. That people don't understand this is honestly a failure of our educational system. Your options are either keep blindly plugging away at getting a job or try a different course of action. One good thing about Obamacare is it makes it much easier to start your own business now. You don't have to worry about not being able to get Health Insurance, which is huge. If eventually the US switches to UHC that will make it much much easier for more people to start their own companies and do things that kept them tethered to their old jobs by playing it safe for so long. It amazes me that if Republicans stump for Job Creators that they hate the idea of Universal Healthcare so much because it will literally help people create more jobs.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 15:14
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:
It isn't a matter of gumption. It is a matter of taking stock of your assets evaluation what you're good at and doing that. I've seen jobs literally destroyed by a software application. Entire departments wiped out because they aren't needed to sift through and collate and sort reports that a printer and a SQL statement now does. Those people were either fired or changed positions in that company. It isn't like they can just magically get their job back. It literally doesn't exist. VitalSigns posted:Oh hey, what caused the sudden and apparently inexplicable attack of national laziness and stupidity in 2008? Bootstrap shortage? Shrinking radio audiences mean that fewer young people are getting a gumption-boost from right-wing blowhards telling it like it is? I really want to know the cause of this national epidemic in 2008. People also got laid off outside of the 2008 bust but again it is different for different sectors of the economy. No one is crying about all the Blockbuster or Hollywood Videos employees that got laid off. Or the guys who worked at Venture, Service Mechandise, Sam Goody, Tower Records, Virgin Megstores, Circuit City, Comp USA, Mervyns, Waladen Books, B Dalton Books etc are they? Technology and other forms of competition killed almost all those stores and business models. No amount of boot straps or complaining is going to get those guys their jobs back. It just won't happen. People have to adapt and find something else. This isn't right wing bullshit it is just plain common sense. VitalSigns posted:It sure is strange how a pile of debt seems to make people too lazy and stupid to shell out a bunch more money going back to school for a STEM degree. I just don't understand why a lifetime of debt makes it hard to afford a brand-new education: why not just call up Dad and ask for $80k? It isn't making them lazy it is keeping them throwing more money and effort after that pile of debt instead of moving the gently caress on. It is a sunk cost fallacy plain and simple. It is the same thing that keeps people paying on underwater houses instead of just writing them off and telling the banks gently caress you. Corporations do this poo poo all the time but people get hung up on emotional attachments etc that can end up costing them money and job opportunities. If you got a degree in whatever lets say English, you will treat your current job as something you're doing in the meantime until you get that job related to your degree. Instead of looking at it as a sunk cost and writing it off and moving on or even treating your current job as a possible career. "I'm only working at Starbucks until my Novel gets published..." Kind of like how everyone in Hollywood is an Actor that is just temporarily waiting tables until they get their big break... Everyone sees how loving ridiculous that idea is, but when it comes to telling people about higher education, maybe try a different angle they get lambasted as some uncaring privileged rear end in a top hat.You don't have to get a STEM degree at all. That can't solve the issue for everyone. It helps for a good number of people but there are still loads of jobs outside of STEM jobs that can be had. You still need people skilled at things like accounting, marketing, communications, business development, product management etc.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Employers don't "shop around" for labor. And, right now, it doesn't matter WHAT you majored in. Someone posted an article that you conveniently ignored showing that even "good degrees" face high unemployment for the graduates of 2014. The problem isn't that we have a population of ill-educated workers; the problem is that the wealthy don't need them (at all, not just "we don't need a feminist underwater basket weaver"), and the workers are so burdened with debt and so poor on average that they can't go about hiring each other. Sure they do. In a recession it is a buyer's market for employers. They get to prune resumes and find who or what they want. They get to set labor rates and costs to what people are willing to work for. Why hire this unskilled guy for 20 an hour when I can get an unskilled guy with X degree for 20 an hour as well? You can't rely on your degree. A degree is literally a foot in the door MAYBE. Also graduates of 2014 a degree again isn't enough. If you don't have the work experience why would they want you anyway? This happens all the time with people looking for jobs. A guy with a newly minted degree applies for an entry level job asking for Salary requirements that are way beyond what entry level pays. So naturally they get passed over for the dude with or without a degree that is ok for the Salary requirements allowed for that position. And we do have a population of ill-educated workers. People think they are done learning once they are finished with college or have a job. You should always been learning and keeping your skill set up to date. If your employer goes tits up, and you haven't kept up with the latest tech in your field because your employer only used Outdated_Tech_98 you're going to be hosed when looking for a new job. poo poo most people don't keep an up to date resume unless they are looking for a job. It isn't the wealthy that don't need them. Just having a business doesn't make you wealthy. The issue is if you don't have marketable skills you aren't wanted. Which again goes back to what I was saying earlier that people need to realize that just getting a degree now isn't financially worth it once you add in the cost of student loans and lost work experience. I graduated college in 2004, and tuition has almost doubled since then at my college. The degree didn't get more valuable in that time, nor did the educational experience double in usefulness. Our education system needs an overhaul as bad as our healthcare system does. Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 17:17 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
anonumos posted:You know nothing about that company or why it failed/was sold off to the lowest bidder. The company execs ran it into the ground, offering poo poo customers didn't want, at prices that weren't competitive, and essentially destroying the entire business model that made it a worthwhile store in a niche of their own. They chased the big box retailers and failed... Uh huh, yeah and same with Circuit City and eventually Best Buy. Amazon and New Egg apparently are just thriving because the Comp USA exec bungles. Was Block Buster bad execs as well? Not Netflix, Amazon and Redbox destroying it? Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 17:20 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
anonumos posted:CompUSA failed because we had customers coming in all the time looking for computer parts and our parts section was nearly empty. But boy did we have a thousand big screen TVs that nobody could afford! Brick and Mortar electronic stores are mostly doomed. It doesn't matter how great they are. Radio Shack is dying right there with Best Buy. Why goto a brick and mortar store when you can get the same part cheaper, shipped next day with no sales tax?
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 17:25
|
|
|
rscott posted:It's literally everyone's fault but the people who control the purse strings and wield the power in this society. Got any more bootstraps tales for us Fat Ogre? Are you aware that you can't just discharge student loan debt through bankruptcy anymore, and that you have to start paying that poo poo off 6 months after you stop going to school full time? It's not a sunk cost fallacy to be 3 years through a bachelors that you're 60k in debt in already, because you will owe that 60k plus interest for the rest of your loving life. Your tax returns will be garnished, and your already pitiful wages as well. Hardship exemptions are basically impossible to get. General personal bankruptcy law has been tightened as well. Normal people can't just walk away from their debts like corporations can, the deck has been stacked against them. Totally aware of it. Which is why I'm saying we need education reforms, and that people need to be exceedingly careful about what they are doing in school. When I was in school people would just get a ton of credit cards increase the limits, then pay their bursar bill with credit cards. File for bankruptcy and go on. Now colleges don't let people do that or you have to cash advance and make the minimum payments somehow. It still is a sunk cost if you keep trying to get a job related to your expensive degree instead of looking for other ways to support yourself and get rid of the debts.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 19:17
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:The credit card company should've challenged that during bankruptcy. If you have no intention of paying a debt when you incur it it's fraudulent and non-dischargable. Unless the charge is so many days old, I think the law is 90 days it may have been bumped up during the Bush era bankruptcy reforms in the early 2000s.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 19:51
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:There's a presumption of abuse for things like luxury purchases and cash advances for a few months before the petition, but if you can prove the debt was fraudulent there's no time limit. Same if you lie about your income on the CC application.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 20:41
|
|
|
rscott posted:So your solution to a systemic problem that is affecting 10s of millions of Americans (funny how this applies to healthcare costs and higher education costs) is to "figure out a different way to support yourself and get rid of your debt". Stunning analysis really. Why didn't everyone think of that before? Nice strawman. I'm not saying that. One is a solution on a personal level while the country works towards healthcare reform and student loan/education reform. It would be like me telling people how to smoke pot without loving over your life and you getting mad because that doesn't fix the pot legalization problems in the country 
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 21:14
|
|
|
Someone got seriously angry enough to buy me a new AV
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 21:15
|
|
|
AYC posted:1. Explain to me how I can get a well-paying job without a college degree. Trade schools, starting your own business, getting certifications for fields that don't require a degree like IT, support jobs, or other service jobs. Then use that decently paying job to pay for your degree and not get crushed by debt. If you're really lucky your job will pay for your school and you can get promoted upwards once you get your degree.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 21:19
|
|
|
menino posted:Any plan that has the phrase 'if you're really lucky' is bullshit. So like most people's plans they have like going after tenure or jobs after grad school that pay well?
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 21:30
|
|
|
anonumos posted:Name one company that will pay for your school. You see, by and large companies have stopped doing this. Why bother? They can hire another fool who ALREADY went to school and kick you to the curb. I've had numerous different jobs that paid for classes related to your job. They won't pay for all of your schooling but they can and will pick up certain classes. This is most likely dependent on the industry your job is in. My sister could have had all of her student loans for med school paid for if she chose to be a doctor for few years in a rural area. She didn't want to do that though, but it was an option by multiple employers.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 22:06
|
|
|
AYC posted:I'm pretty sure most people just want a well-paying (or hell, a decently paying!) job after high school. I don't know how many job applicants I've seen that totally fail to look up what it is exactly a company does before applying for a job. That just simply giving us a resume and barely wearing business casual to an interview means they should get the job. Why do you want to work here, "uh I need a job." Yeah..... It isn't luck finding a job. There are poo poo tons of them out there. By saying it all comes down to luck basically implies no one has any skill whatsoever and everyone is equally qualified for every job. That the people in HR are just pulling resumes out of a hat and aren't looking at how well a person's attitude, relevant skills and qualifications fit them to that job
Fat Ogre fucked around with this message at 22:45 on May 8, 2014 |
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
Nessus posted:I'm curious, what is the correct answer to "Why do you want to work here?" Depends on the job and the place you want to work. But "I need a job for money" is about the dumbest non answer you can come up with. I would like to expand my job skills. I am looking to advance my career in X and this job looks like an excellent opportunity to do so. I'm excited for the challenge this job will bring to my everyday life. I like that your company is involved in XYZ and I want to be involved in that even if it is just starting out at as ABC position to start with. I want to live here and establish roots in the community and this looks like a wonderfully stable place to build a career. etc etc. It isn't even smart enough to lie. It is being honest and not a goony shut-in that can't interact with others or smug idiot that thinks talking to people is below them. Many times the HR interview is to see how you interact with others that aren't your peers in your job at all just to see if you'd fit in the work environment.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 11:04 |
|
|
Mo_Steel posted:In February 2014 there were 4.2 million job openings and 10.5 million unemployed persons. Even if we were to assume that every one of those unemployed people were somehow lucky enough to be geographically and educationally and professionally situated to meet the exact qualifications of those openings and they all tried super really hard, there'd still be over 6 million people unemployed through no fault of their own. So it is impossible for people to create businesses for themselves? And every job out there is over the table and in that list of 4.2 million jobs. How exactly are illegal immigrants finding jobs then? Again it is unrealistic to assume you'll ever get rid of unemployed people ever. From your link of the 10 million unemployed 3.8 have been unemployed for 27 weeks or longer. That is 6 loving months without a job. Sorry but that is ridiculous.
|
|
#
¿
May 8, 2014 23:09
|
|