Community Chat

[Cakers3]

---

@Cindy-QVC wrote:

@Cakers3 When I clicked the link there were political sidebars. Cindy

---

@Cindy-QVC   Thank you Cindy.  I carefully checked the article before I posted.  My issue now is that a link to the same article is on another thread with other links and that thread remains.

I just want to clarify the link issue.  It seems to be confusing.  I just checked my link again and there were no sidebars.

Is it possible links can be directed differently?  LOL  I'm not sure.

[Cakers3]

@Cindy-QVC   Anyway not the end of the world.   Thank you for answering I appreciate it.

The other thread has a link to the article I posted and it has political sidebars.

Links within links are not always in line with standards.

That is my question.

[Cindy-QVC]

@ Try editing the link back in and I'll take a look again. Also feel free to flag the post with the same link and we'll look at that also. Cindy

[suzyQ3]

---

@Anonymous032819 wrote:

---

@suzyQ3 wrote:

---

@Anonymous032819 wrote:

---

@Pook wrote:

I haven't noticed any shortages.  If employers would pay a decent wage and treat their employees better and if there were more child care options there would be no problems.  

---

@Pook 

Exactly.

The mantra of, "People would rather be in unemployment than work, because they are lazy do-nothing bums" is old.

Fact is, if they could, they would prefer that unemployment didn't exist at all for anybody.

---

I suppose that you don't believe in the old "Welfare Queen" mantra either, @Anonymous032819 

---

So therefore everybody is "abusing" it, and nobody deserves it. Everybody is a user?

Wow. Way to paint with a very broad brush.

---

Did you miss my sarcasm, @Anonymous032819 

[Silkeej]

@songbird  So far I have counted over ten items that our store is not carrying and these are everyday items. Many are saying Covid but it seems we have never recovered from the first time when we were locked down. I also will mention these items are available at other grocery stores, so I think our store is deciding what they will and will not carry and it has nothing to do with a shortage. We are changing where we shop. 

[Kachina624]

@NYCLatinaMe    Perhaps in NYC you are not familiar with the community College system.  A large percentage who choose this low-cost type of education are not seeking bacculaurate degrees.  Community colleges typically offer the best vocational training available outside of the military, and that's what many young people should be considering to improve their employability and ultimately their standard of living. 

[dooBdoo]

---

@Cakers3 wrote:

---

@Cindy-QVC wrote:

@Cakers3 When I clicked the link there were political sidebars. Cindy

---

@Cindy-QVC   Thank you Cindy.  I carefully checked the article before I posted.  My issue now is that a link to the same article is on another thread with other links and that thread remains.

I just want to clarify the link issue.  It seems to be confusing.  I just checked my link again and there were no sidebars.

Is it possible links can be directed differently?  LOL  I'm not sure.

---

@Cakers3 and @Cindy-QVC,  

I didn't see the link in question but wanted to offer a possible explanation.  
The way the sidebar articles are coded on some websites, at times they function like sidewall pop-ups or ads.  
They will appear to some people and not to others often because of our browser, browser settings, and/or use of ad blockers and/or pop-up blockers which sometimes suppress display of sidewall articles or headlines.  
(eta:  Cookies on our device also can affect display.)
Hope that makes sense...  foggy migraine brain for several days but wanted to try and offer a possible clue to the mystery.  Take care.😊

[Kachina624]

---

@Anonymous032819 wrote:

---

@Sooner wrote:

---

@Greeneyedlady21 wrote:
Yes of course the narrative from some posters about people on unemployment always applies. My comment wasn't a narrative-it logically applies if you are opposed to government "handouts". Send it back to the govt.

---

@Greeneyedlady21 We should provide a structured safety net for people unable to work, for areas hit by natural disasters, and such but not enable people able to work to not do so.

People need help and deserve help.  People like to not work and don't. 

---

So if people loose their job because they were laid off, downsized, or because of illness, they're just s.o.l., right? 

---

@Anonymous032819   @Sooner   @Greeneyedlady21

When unemployment insurance was first established after the Great Depression, it was never intended to provide living expenses for recipients.  It was designed to merely provide job-hunting expenses.  It has ballooned to far beyond its original purpose.  As an eye-opener, Google "unemployment insurance maximum benefit amount by state".

Then add to that the original $600/wk subsidity generously allotted by Congress in March of 2020 (now reduced and expiring in September), and I think you'll agree that the total a person could draw went far beyond job-hunting expenses.  The amount, in many cases, were so high that its no wonder workers weren't eager to return to their jobs. 

[Sooner]

---

@Kachina624 wrote:

---

@Anonymous032819 wrote:

---

@Sooner wrote:

---

@Greeneyedlady21 wrote:
Yes of course the narrative from some posters about people on unemployment always applies. My comment wasn't a narrative-it logically applies if you are opposed to government "handouts". Send it back to the govt.

---

@Greeneyedlady21 We should provide a structured safety net for people unable to work, for areas hit by natural disasters, and such but not enable people able to work to not do so.

People need help and deserve help.  People like to not work and don't. 

---

So if people loose their job because they were laid off, downsized, or because of illness, they're just s.o.l., right? 

---

@Anonymous032819   @Sooner   @Greeneyedlady21

When unemployment insurance was first established after the Great Depression, it was never intended to provide living expenses for recipients.  It was designed to mere provide job-hunting expenses.  It has not ballooned to far beyond its original purpose.  As an eye-opener, Google "unemployment insurance maximum benefit amount by state".

Then add to that the original $600/wk subsidity allotted by Congress in March of 2020 (now reduced and expiring in September), and I think you'll agree that the total a person could draw went far beyond job-hunting expenses.  The amount, in many cases, were so high that its no wonder workers weren't eager to return to their jobs. 

---

@Kachina624 The message is you can't fix everything, and you have to encourage people to do the right thing. 

[Kachina624]

@Sooner    The corruption involved with that legislation was unprecedented.  Fraud investigations will continue for years.  It was a money grab by the morally corrupt.