% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

HP Inc. Message Board

  • unclefulbert unclefulbert Apr 10, 2006 4:55 PM Flag

    What's full employment?

    Annual average unemployment rate, civilian labor force 16 years and over (percent)
    Year Ann Avg
    1948 3.8
    1949 5.9
    1950 5.3
    1951 3.3
    1952 3.0
    1953 2.9
    1954 5.5
    1955 4.4
    1956 4.1
    1957 4.3
    1958 6.8
    1959 5.5
    1960 5.5
    1961 6.7
    1962 5.5
    1963 5.7
    1964 5.2
    1965 4.5
    1966 3.8
    1967 3.8
    1968 3.6
    1969 3.5
    1970 4.9
    1971 5.9
    1972 5.6
    1973 4.9
    1974 5.6
    1975 8.5
    1976 7.7
    1977 7.1
    1978 6.1
    1979 5.8
    1980 7.1
    1981 7.6
    1982 9.7
    1983 9.6
    1984 7.5
    1985 7.2
    1986 7.0
    1987 6.2
    1988 5.5
    1989 5.3
    1990 5.6
    1991 6.8
    1992 7.5
    1993 6.9
    1994 6.1
    1995 5.6
    1996 5.4
    1997 4.9
    1998 4.5
    1999 4.2
    2000 4.0
    2001 4.7
    2002 5.8
    2003 6.0
    2004 5.5

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • Hi Z,

      "" dont u think illegals have the ability to acquire false ids ... ""

      Absolutely right, but that's not the problem. If an old guy with a beard comes in with a drivers license for a teenage girl, he's busted. But if someone walks in with your SSN nobody knows it's not you. As I understand it, right now, if you were a prospective employer and I gave you a SSN, you have no way to find out if it is even a real SSN, let alone if I have a legal right to use it.

      The problem is (as it often is) that the Federal government chooses not to have a clearing house to verify ID. For example, if the Social Security Administration required that you place on file valid picture ID, then anyone applying for a job could have his SSN and driver's license compared to the SSA data base. If the person looks like the person in the ID, if the ID matches the SSN data then the ID is either valid or a well researched forgery.

      This would not cure 100% of identity theft/fraud, but it would sure catch a lot and take the burden/excuse away from employers. The current system (which is largly uninforced) places the burden of ID verification on employers but gives them no legal means to comply.

      This proposal would would only stop some of the fraud. Many people would learn to get around such a simple screen. So, if it olny caught ...say 30%, that would only get rid of . . . . 4MILLION illegal workers?

      A few other simple checks that catch "SOME" of the illegals, cumulatively, will eliminate most of the problem. The big guns can spend their time on the mop-up.

      Personally, I am not particularly concerned about the 11-12 million that are in the country now. I am concerned about the next 12 million and then 25 million and then 50 million who decide to throw in the towel where they were born and move to the USA.

      I think that their answers lie in fixing their own country and the USA can do a lot to help build sound democracies instead of promoting bananna republics. Fixing NAFTA/HAFTA would be a good start. Managing our borders would be another. Allowing the USA to act as pressure relief for the stinking economy in Mexico is just subsidizing and prolonging its existence.

      Where are the demonstrations in Mexico complaining about all of the nation's wealth ending up with a small number of corrupt families? Illegal aliens complain that they are not being treated fairly in the USA, but who do not complain that they are treated poorly in Mexico, where they can live legally??? I don't buy it. Sounds racist to me.

    • > I don't check contractors credentials beyond license and insurance.

      Would you if the law threatened you with a year in jail and a $50,000 fine if you didn't? I'm just saying that if you want to stop the illegals, you will need a law with some teeth that isn't filled with loopholes.

    • There is a simple solution to the employer's problem that Z could have easily employed but didn't, which makes Z responsible for hiring an illegal. Z could have requested to see all documentation, made copies, put them on file and then made her 'gardener' and his cohorts all sign affadavits swearing, under penalty of law, that they were in the country legally. At that point, the responsibility would have gone from Z to verify, because Z would have made all necessary inquiries. I vote that we all turn Z into the INS today. Any takers?

    • >>If you were in the house and wanted to get re-elected, which would you do?<<

      The right thing. You see, you hit the nail on the head about what is the problem with politicians today. All they see is 'wanting to get reelected'. That right there negates any incentive to act on principle or make tough choices. They are so bent on getting reelected that they don't realize that by using the finger in the wind test, they not only hurt the country but look like willow branches and could lose anyway. Z hates my senator, but I can say one thing about him, he does what he knows to be right and stands on principle even when it isn't the popular stance. He is a bulldog about fiscal responsibility and is giving his own Republicans fits right now. He does no earmarked for our state..sigh..and is sickened by the use of earmarking by others. His book ,Breach of Trust, is a must read. And ignore Z's opinion of him..she's just jealous. :-)

    • Lucky, actually, there's another option: Make speeches about how the Homeland Security Dept. is not doing its job. Fire the leadership, cut funding and layoff 10% of the employees. And order them to take care of the 12 million illegals immediately, according to existing laws.

    • Those like Z saw no difference when Linda Chavez, who was nominated for labor secretary, was found to supposedly have an illegal housekeeper. The law is the law. If I were to take Z's position Skakel would not have been held accountable for a crime committed many, many years before after which he supposedly became a "productive" member of society. He is now serving 20 years. If we go down this road, the question becomes, "If I don't like a law, do I have to obey it? Why can't I just pick and choose what I want to obey?"

    • I think we agree. If there's a problem, those in Washington write legislation. That's all they know how to do. The only other option is to fund the agencies that enforce existing laws, letting them know that that's what they need to do? If you were in the house and wanted to get re-elected, which would you do?

    • > I would not hold a homeowner responsible for contracting
      > for a service from a company/individual.

      If you don't then you are opening such a wide loophole that you would effectively make any law holding employers responsible for the citizenship of their employees completely ineffective. Everyone would simply make contracts with individuals for services.

    • Sessions was pointing out that new legislation is going to cost even more money that isn't being talked about. What about enforcing what is already on the books? That's my point. I don't mean round up 12 million people, but just start doing the checking that should have been going on all along..and no holding tanks, no months of limbo but fines for employers and deportation of illegals. The arguments I hear could be easily said for law enforcement anywhere. Why bother arresting murderers or thiefs or Lay or Schilling or Martha Stewart? It costs money and takes time, so why make the attempt?

    • <<i have had the same *mexican* gardener for well over 30 years ... he has 2 mexican workers

      he is extremely loyal, trustworthy, and good at what he does ... he owns a home and has a family >>


      How can a "Mexican gardner" own a home and raise a family? You people have been making propaganda for the last five years about how impossible it is for American workers to find decent paying jobs that pay them enough money to enable them to own homes and raise families.


      Shame, shame, shame on you for diluting your Liberal propaganda of economic doom-and-gloom with stories of success and prosperity

    • View More Messages
9.19-0.18(-1.92%)Feb 9 4:00 PMEST