Plans to help the recession

cleverendeavouR

cleverendeavouR

Tank
Joined
Jan 12, 2009
Messages
2,279
Reaction score
0
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/03/bill_that_help_recession_victi.html

In a move that could turn unemployed Wall Street traders or pharmaceutical workers into classroom instructors, the Legislature unanimously approved a pilot program today to fast-track public school certification in the areas of math and science.
Click to expand...

The 18-month pilot programs overseen by the Department of Education and implemented, in part, at Montclair State University will focus initially on financial services employees rocked by the recession's disastrous impact on Wall Street.
Click to expand...

Just what we need, more unqualified teachers.



I'm majoring in Elementary Education and specialize in Math/Science. There goes my job.
 
:-/

I agree with the phrase "unqualified teachers." A vast majority of the laid off financial services employees in question don't want to teach, they just want income. There's nothing wrong with wanting work, but good teachers have to want to teach. That's actually why I am supportive of the low teacher salary, so that a majority of teachers are there to teach, not to land an easy job that has steady hours and salary.

I'm a music education major. Hopefully they don't do some similar fast-track program for laid off music industry employees and transform them into music educators. That would be disastrous.
 
jet_porkins said:
:-/

I agree with the phrase "unqualified teachers." A vast majority of the laid off financial services employees in question don't want to teach, they just want income. There's nothing wrong with wanting work, but good teachers have to want to teach. That's actually why I am supportive of the low teacher salary, so that a majority of teachers are there to teach, not to land an easy job that has steady hours and salary.

I'm a music education major. Hopefully they don't do some similar fast-track program for laid off music industry employees and transform them into music educators. That would be disastrous.
Click to expand...



In New Jersey teachers start at 40 to 45 thousand a year, not exactly a low salary.
 
Destroy wallstreet and start over!
 
Both would be cool.

Obama wouldn't be killed by a nuke - He would just stand up and be as badass as usual.
 
Nicky 0123 said:
Both would be cool.

Obama wouldn't be killed by a nuke - He would just stand up and be as badass as usual.
Click to expand...

Obama%20in%20Springfield-thumb-325x487.jpg


i can see that happening
 
Wanna really help out during the recession? Give you underwear away to Goodwill and FREE BALL! Do eet!

Oh yeah, public education in America will always be terrible.
 
Obama's already proving himself a poor choice, with his protectionist slant & generalist anti-banker rhetoric - gg America...

He's also demonstrated he's stupid enough to believe that The New Deal made things better, instead of making things far worse :|

Bring on the economic-inhibiting market regulation.

EDIT: Not that I'm suggesting that McCain would be any better, I'm confident that he'd be just as bad - but perhaps he'd have the balls to let your shitty car manufacturing firms die.


Capitalism without bankrupcy is like the concept of heaven without a hell - it just doesn't work.
 
ComradeBadger said:
Obama's already proving himself a poor choice, with his protectionist slant & generalist anti-banker rhetoric - gg America...

He's also demonstrated he's stupid enough to believe that The New Deal made things better, instead of making things far worse :|

Bring on the economic-inhibiting market regulation.

EDIT: Not that I'm suggesting that McCain would be any better, I'm confident that he'd be just as bad - but perhaps he'd have the balls to let your shitty car manufacturing firms die.


Capitalism without bankrupcy is like the concept of heaven without a hell - it just doesn't work.
Click to expand...
^agree

The US economy (capitalism) is focused around debt. Without debt, banks would be out of business.

...and yes, the new administration would've been much wiser to just let unsuccessful businesses collapse imo. They were "unsuccessful" for a reason. You can't pass out tropheys and rewards to everyone if they didn't earn it. (i.e. bailout plan LOL What a joke.)
 
Saturos said:
^agree

The US economy (capitalism) is focused around debt. Without debt, banks would be out of business.

...and yes, the new administration would've been much wiser to just let unsuccessful businesses collapse imo. They were "unsuccessful" for a reason. You can't pass out tropheys and rewards to everyone if they didn't earn it. (i.e. bailout plan LOL What a joke.)
Click to expand...

You do realize how many jobs would be lost if these businesses did collapse, right?

It's not as much saving the businesses as it is saving the workers.

Sure, it would've been (relatively) okay, perhaps even better in the immediate future if only one or two went out of business - but several at the same time spells disaster. Talk to any reputable economist on your "theory" and they'll tell you that you're an idiot.
 
Also, the more difficult it is to fire workers, the more difficult it is to create new jobs.

The one exception to the bailout plan - Citi is now well and truly back on it's feet, well capitalised and re-structered - but it can't hire experienced European personell because it's fired Americans :/ smooth move Obama.

Kinslayer said:
You do realize how many jobs would be lost if these businesses did collapse, right?

It's not as much saving the businesses as it is saving the workers.

Sure, it would've been (relatively) okay, perhaps even better in the immediate future if only one or two went out of business - but several at the same time spells disaster. Talk to any reputable economist on your "theory" and they'll tell you that you're an idiot.
Click to expand...

The car would never have been invented if the government intervened to protect the failing equine industry.

Government intervention in markets is never a good idea.
 
ComradeBadger said:
Government intervention in markets is never a good idea.
Click to expand...

So, even though they were as a whole a great success, you think the New Deal policies never should have been implemented?

Also, I don't think a new type of insurance is going to be invented by the failing of an insurance industry :rolleyes:
 
They're going to get their asses handed to them by their own students.
 
I'm curious, shouldn't this be in Politics? :p

I'm just going to ride this thing out. I don't imagine it's going to get as bad as was some people are saying.
 
ComradeBadger said:
The one exception to the bailout plan - Citi is now well and truly back on it's feet, well capitalised and re-structered - but it can't hire experienced European personell because it's fired Americans :/ smooth move Obama.
Click to expand...

I'm severely uninformed about economics as a whole, but how can you blame Obama for Citibank's internal hiring policies?

I'm not being sarcastic or anything, I genuinely don't know.
 
It's a condition of receiving government money that they cannot hire foreign workers if they have layed off US ones.

Kinslayer said:
So, even though they were as a whole a great success, you think the New Deal policies never should have been implemented?
Click to expand...

They prolonged the downturn, don't buy into the political myth.

Kinslayer said:
Also, I don't think a new type of insurance is going to be invented by the failing of an insurance industry :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

No, but a more effecient, better structured company would come about by nessesity. The horse thing was just an example. If you don't understand how it applies, don't try and argue.
 
ComradeBadger said:
No, but a more effecient, better structured company would come about by nessesity.
Click to expand...
How would they get capital? Surely investers aren't in the mood for risky new companies.
he asks not knowing much about economics
 
I just hope Obama has a secret plan to fight inflation.
 
ComradeBadger said:
They prolonged the downturn, don't buy into the political myth.



No, but a more effecient, better structured company would come about by nessesity. The horse thing was just an example. If you don't understand how it applies, don't try and argue.
Click to expand...

Oh don't give me that bullshit. Lack of governmental oversight is what caused both depressions. Again, who should I believe: reputable economists or a pouty conservative on an internet forum?

And don't try to shift the blame. You used a poor example to support your point; don't try and blame me for not understanding your shitty examples. Your example clearly implied that something new would come out of the failing industries.
 
Kinslayer said:
Oh don't give me that bullshit. Lack of governmental oversight is what caused both depressions. Again, who should I believe: reputable economists or a pouty conservative on an internet forum?
Click to expand...

Freidman, Rothbard, Hayek and Mises are all reputable economists
 
If you had I would have brought you the finest muffins and bagels in all the land.
 
Kinslayer said:
Oh don't give me that bullshit. Lack of governmental oversight is what caused both depressions. Again, who should I believe: reputable economists or a pouty conservative on an internet forum?
Click to expand...

There are a huge number of reputable economists who believe in the importance of the free market, and believe that using non-market forces to affect changes in the market are bad ideas.

Also, at what point did I say I was conservative??

Kinslayer said:
And don't try to shift the blame. You used a poor example to support your point; don't try and blame me for not understanding your shitty examples. Your example clearly implied that something new would come out of the failing industries.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I should have used the word 'suceeded' instead of invented. I'll concede that.
 
Mr Stabby said:
Freidman, Rothbard, Hayek and Mises are all reputable economists
Click to expand...

Friedman was way too static and closeminded. He received considerable criticism from his colleagues for this, even those that respect him as a great economist. He refused to change and evolve his views to fit changing situations.

Rothbard is an anarchist. I don't see how anyone could take his views seriously myself, but whatever. I'd rather have higher quality goods with a pretty good market than an excellent market with shitty goods ("Made in China", anyone?).

Hayek believed in the free market, but he also believed it must adapt to any challenges it faces. The current market has not.

I haven't heard of Mises, so I looked up his blog and it looks like he's the Rush Limbaugh of economics, or at least he hangs out with the same crowd. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

ComradeBadger said:
There are a huge number of reputable economists who believe in the importance of the free market, and believe that using non-market forces to affect changes in the market are bad ideas.
Click to expand...

So two depressions caused by a free-reign on the market aren't enough for them? Sure, there was unbelievable prosperity before both of these periods (both now and Great Depression), but I'd rather have a steady upwards slope than something that looks like a line graph with no correlation. Spending may not be the answer; nobody knows the "answer". But sitting by and "letting the free market run" certainly is not the answer.

Free market is all well and good until it collapses.

By the way, this wouldn't have been such an issue had the government interceded sooner. Of course, we had a conservative "free market" president in office at the time.

ComradeBadger said:
Also, at what point did I say I was conservative??
Click to expand...

Contrary to popular belief, being "conservative" or "liberal" depends on your ideas, not what you say you are. Your opinions are decidedly conservative. I didn't mean it as an insult if it came off that way, nor should it be so I don't know why you're commenting on it.
 
Kinslayer said:
Contrary to popular belief, being "conservative" or "liberal" depends on your ideas, not what you say you are. Your opinions are decidedly conservative. I didn't mean it as an insult if it came off that way, nor should it be so I don't know why you're commenting on it.
Click to expand...

No, it wasn't taken as an insult - it's just I don't really perceive myself as one. I suppose my views on the generation of wealth and my objection to the re-distribution of it are conservative :p And generally speaking, I'm not a fan of any political party, but at the minute I'll vote for the most buisness-friendly one, as that is what will benefit me personally the most.
 
Lol, at comparing Mises to Rush Limbaugh, Mises shouldn't have a blog, he's dead.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ludwig_Von_Mises

As for Freidman being too stubborn and Rothbard being an anarchist, I'm sure many leading keynesian economists are stubborn too and being an anarchist doesn't make someones opinion invalid, Noam Chomsky is an anarchist but I wuldn't dismiss what he says, ust because he's an anarchist . Hayek wouldn't call what we have now a free market.
 
Economists are to accurate economic forecasting as meteorologists are to the weather.
 
The only people I know of calling this recession before it happened are Ron Paul and Peter Schiffer. Both people believe the root cause of the problem was bad monetary policy by the fed rather than a lack of regulation of mortgages.
 
They should just legalize weed and tax it.

There, recession solved.
 
Mr Stabby said:
The only people I know of calling this recession before it happened are Ron Paul and Peter Schiffer. Both people believe the root cause of the problem was bad monetary policy by the fed rather than a lack of regulation of mortgages.
Click to expand...

The best of British private equity saw it coming, and wound things down before things started kicking off.

However, things are looking up again, huzzah :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top