Workopolis advertizing 60,000 new jobs.

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Why not train the unemployed for these jobs?

with the recent economic downturn, requirements have drastically changed. Most professional level jobs have gone from wanting 3-5 yrs experience to 10-15 minimum and a whole gambit of certifications.

In any economic downturn higher education (even if you go into debt) is always the best alternative to unemploymnet
 

Liberalman

Senate Member
Mar 18, 2007
5,623
35
48
Toronto
Tyr

Thats true because there are more people looking for work in a shrinking job market an MBA will get you a job as a dishwasher in a fancy restaurant as opposed to a dive in a greasy spoon.
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
Tyr

Thats true because there are more people looking for work in a shrinking job market an MBA will get you a job as a dishwasher in a fancy restaurant as opposed to a dive in a greasy spoon.

to a dive in a greasy spoon

How do you dive in a greasy spoon? Why would you dive in a greasy spoon? How big's the spoon anyways? Big enough for diving? Could one just jump instead of diving?

Whew.... I gotta go lie down :roll:
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
I don't know if it's a gimmick, but there it is. So why does the government not work with Workopolis to find out? Find out the qualifications needed. If the person can pay for his training, great. If for some reason he's already in debt, either due to divorce or whatever problem in life and lacks qualifications, then just train him for the qualifications that woudl get him the job the quickest. This could create jobs itself by causing a boom in the education sector too.
 

Tyr

Council Member
Nov 27, 2008
2,152
14
38
Sitting at my laptop
The problem with training people for specific jobs is by the time they are trained, the vacancies are gone and you have a glut of trained unemployed people.

Most jobs on Workopolis require quite a bit of experience and advanced certifications. Quite a few of the older listings are filled and just haven't been removed.

More than half are contractor/consultancy positions which means you have to be incoprorated or a limited partnership (costs about $500-600)

Entry level jobs with minimal training requirements are usually found in the local newspaper
 

Machjo

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 19, 2004
17,878
61
48
Ottawa, ON
The problem with training people for specific jobs is by the time they are trained, the vacancies are gone and you have a glut of trained unemployed people.

To a certain degree, you're right. Another problem is to maintain educational standards. As the system grows, corruption risks crawling in too.

Another system I could see as far as stimulous is concerned is to make all personal taxes deductible through charitable contributions on a 1-1 basis.

Just to take one example of how it could work. Right now in Canada we have a shortage of 15,000 qualified mechanics. So if I'm a local mechanic and we're having a hard time finding qualified people in town, I could decide to start up a local charity to train the unemployed to become mechanics. So local mechanics organize to st this up. We build a dormitory, common kitchen bathroom and living room, all upstairs, and downstairs a school. Other businesses suffering fromthe same problem might join in too. So we could be training the local unemployed for local jobs. This way it cuts out the buraucracy. It's direct, efficient and democratic.

This could work in other fields too. If an export company has concerns over the safety of its freight, it could give to the military to build military escort ships, etc.

Truckers might want to earmark their funds to road improvements, etc.

So essentially, money would be going right where it's needed while bipassing government buraucracy.

And if you want immediate stimulous, you tell me which is faster between the money going from your pocket to government, be debated, decide what is needed, travel the country to figure out all the problems, try to sort them all out in their minds, decide how much money goes where, give the money out, and then try to control it for corruption as the money filters down from department to department a few months later. Would it not be faster for the money to go straight from your pocke to a local charity that targets a concrete local, national or international problem that you understand? And sinse it wants your money, it will be responsive too. They'll show you their financial statements on request. You can instec their sight as you wish. You could even volunteer and participate. Tough to get involved in corruption there. Not impossible, but tough. And if they're too secretive, then you don't give to them, simple as that.

Seriously, how could we argue with that?