Would a program like the CCC be possible today?

[MtnMan]

Work? you mean actually show up every day and work? Why the hell would I do that, I'd rather just sit in my government supplemented housing and watch soaps all day and collect my check.

 

[Jhhnn]

This thread exemplifies the prejudice & delusion of Righties.

It's easy to talk shit & say it wouldn't work when congressional Repubs make sure it'll never happen, because that'd just be more ebil big gubmint, after all, even as it might reduce the chances for more tax cuts for the sacred Job Creators to, uhh, create jobs, as if cutting their taxes ever accomplished that in the first place. They already have all the employees they need & want. If they didn't, they'd hire more.

 

[BoberFett]

This thread exemplifies the prejudice & delusion of Righties.

It's easy to talk shit & say it wouldn't work when congressional Repubs make sure it'll never happen, because that'd just be more ebil big gubmint, after all, even as it might reduce the chances for more tax cuts for the sacred Job Creators to, uhh, create jobs, as if cutting their taxes ever accomplished that in the first place. They already have all the employees they need & want. If they didn't, they'd hire more.

Do you have anything of substance to say?

 

[EagleKeeper]

This thread exemplifies the prejudice & delusion of Righties.

It's easy to talk shit & say it wouldn't work when congressional Repubs make sure it'll never happen, because that'd just be more ebil big gubmint, after all, even as it might reduce the chances for more tax cuts for the sacred Job Creators to, uhh, create jobs, as if cutting their taxes ever accomplished that in the first place. They already have all the employees they need & want. If they didn't, they'd hire more.

The intention of the original CCC was to put people to work on useful projects.

Why can that premise be done again?
I can see the unions more than business opposing it.
Obama tried partially with the original stimulus; but it was flawed and not well thought out

 

[Moonbeam]

The intention of the original CCC was to put people to work on useful projects.

Why can that premise be done again?
I can see the unions more than business opposing it.
Obama tried partially with the original stimulus; but it was flawed and not well thought out

How do we put it to the test?

 

[Jhhnn]

Do you have anything of substance to say?

The intention of the original CCC was to put people to work on useful projects.

Why can that premise be done again?
I can see the unions more than business opposing it.
Obama tried partially with the original stimulus; but it was flawed and not well thought out

What a pair of twits. Ol' Bobber was naysaying it in the opening post, but not for the right reasons, and tweetiekeeper chimes right in along with the rest of the usual denialists.

Go ahead, tell us that such a proposal would have a chance of a snowball in Hell with the smaller gubmint Teatards & their fellow travelers in the HOR. Do it with a straight face- try not to laugh at he absurdity of your own proposition coming up against their Job Creator headsets.

Confronted with that reality, the rest of the discussion is totally absurd, just another attempt to deflect the blame for our current economic malaise away from the Repub perps & their ideology of failure.

Why did we need the CCC, the WPA & a host of other New Deal programs in the 30's, anyway? Oh, yeh, it was because Repubs crashed the economy back then, too, except that the Treasury & the FRB didn't step in to keep the bottom from falling out like they did recently. For Righties, what that action gave them was wiggle room for denial, which runs through this thread the same way a big river runs through Egypt.

 

[Jaskalas]

Go ahead, tell us that such a proposal would have a chance of a snowball in Hell with the smaller gubmint Teatards

Labor camps will get the lazy welfare recipients off their lazy !@#$ and put them to work. Tea Party will love it. They'll think of it as the elimination of the welfare state. Like sending Democrats and poor people to a sort of prison. Victory!

Get the picture?

 

[Jhhnn]

Labor camps will get the lazy welfare recipients off their lazy !@#$ and put them to work. Tea Party will love it. They'll think of it as the elimination of the welfare state. Like sending Democrats and poor people to a sort of prison. Victory!

Get the picture?

In your dreams. It's just more ebil big gubmint, and they'll have no part of it. Hell, they're trying to tear down what government we already have. Faced with massive unemployment, they force layoffs of govt workers & people in the private sector who supply govt with everything it uses.

They're waiting on the fabled Job Creators to step up, until Hell freezes over if necessary. And it just may before that happens.

 

[blankslate]

Today's conservatives wouldn't fund it unless the participants were also required to be drug tested, forced to attend religious services, gave up their rights to vote, and paid about $2.00 an hour.

 

[poofyhairguy]

Would such a program even be viable today?

Not only is it viable, but it happened. What else do you call all those auto-workers that got bailed out by Obama? Just like the CCC boys the federal government is subsidizing those who do a blue-collar job but won't do it for the price that the global labor market demands (which was free back during the Great Depression).

And honestly doing it through private companies is the better way. Then the jobs won't be so cushy and the company will be charged with enforcing the employees to minimum standards (like showing up, drug testing, etc.). The problem is it needs to be a universal policy that benefits all regions and not just the regions/industries that support the current leadership the most politically.

A modern CCC that subsidizes the American worker might be the answer of how to deal with the chunk of America that isn't competitive in a global market. Might be the way to rebuild the pride of the working class.

 

[BoberFett]

What a pair of twits. Ol' Bobber was naysaying it in the opening post, but not for the right reasons, and tweetiekeeper chimes right in along with the rest of the usual denialists.

Go ahead, tell us that such a proposal would have a chance of a snowball in Hell with the smaller gubmint Teatards & their fellow travelers in the HOR. Do it with a straight face- try not to laugh at he absurdity of your own proposition coming up against their Job Creator headsets.

Confronted with that reality, the rest of the discussion is totally absurd, just another attempt to deflect the blame for our current economic malaise away from the Repub perps & their ideology of failure.

Why did we need the CCC, the WPA & a host of other New Deal programs in the 30's, anyway? Oh, yeh, it was because Repubs crashed the economy back then, too, except that the Treasury & the FRB didn't step in to keep the bottom from falling out like they did recently. For Righties, what that action gave them was wiggle room for denial, which runs through this thread the same way a big river runs through Egypt.

And again you have nothing to say, you worthless fuck.

 

[Joepublic2]

Huge unemployment problem, crumbling infrastructure... doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what to do...

Is it possible, probably not. Not because poors are lazy (some are; most aren't at least around here) but because the govt is unwilling to do anything to improve the average citizen's lot in life these days.

 

[videogames101]

Great idea, too bad most people under 30 don't feel obligated to work a day in their lives.

 

[rudeguy]

Great idea, too bad most people under 30 don't feel obligated to work a day in their lives.

any proof at all to your claim?

On point: The CCC did not bring us out of the depression. Its still debatable if it did anything other than make people feel good. The war brought us out of the depression.

So...if we are looking to history for how to fix the economy, Iran better watch its ass.

 

[videogames101]

any proof at all to your claim?

On point: The CCC did not bring us out of the depression. Its still debatable if it did anything other than make people feel good. The war brought us out of the depression.

So...if we are looking to history for how to fix the economy, Iran better watch its ass.

proof? No, just anecdote - I'm 21 and the work ethic of many of the people I know (possibly including myself) is decidedly lacking... (Which while good enough for me) I don't pretend to think it should convince anyone else, it is anecdote after all.

Certainly this may not be anything new, maybe this age group always lacked this thing, but still I can't imagine a re-imagined CCC getting many volunteers.

I don't attribute the end of the great depression to the work of the CCC. However I have great respect for the kind of work they performed regardless of the era it was performed in. That is why I support the idea of a modernized entity in its likeness.

 

[EagleKeeper]

proof? No, just anecdote - I'm 21 and the work ethic of many of the people I know (possibly including myself) is decidedly lacking... (Which while good enough for me) I don't pretend to think it should convince anyone else, it is anecdote after all.

Certainly this may not be anything new, maybe this age group always lacked this thing, but still I can't imagine a re-imagined CCC getting many volunteers.

I don't attribute the end of the great depression to the work of the CCC. However I have great respect for the kind of work they performed regardless of the era it was performed in. That is why I support the idea of a modernized entity in its likeness.

If a CCC type program can pay more than a general worker's unemployment check - say $10-15/hr as well as provide new skills; it could work.

Even if the program supplements existing Federal type programs that are short on manpower.

 

[poofyhairguy]

any proof at all to your claim?

Here:

The researchers surveyed about 400 human resources professionals about their experiences recruiting and hiring recent college graduates in a variety of industries and roles. More than a third report that the level of professionalism among new hires has decreased in the last five years. Nearly 45% said that employees’ work ethic has worsened.

Young employees often appeared arrogant, either during job interviews or on the job, according to those surveyed, with 52% of respondents reporting more new employees arriving at the office with an air of entitlement.

http://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2013/03/12/professionalism-at-work-the-kids-are-not-alright/

 

[fskimospy]

Here:

http://blogs.wsj.com/atwork/2013/03/12/professionalism-at-work-the-kids-are-not-alright/

What I would be most interested to see is a survey like that every five years. I have a strong suspicion that each and every time similar numbers of people would deride new employees as compared to the wonderful five year ago employees.

It's sort of related to how every generation thinks the Kids These Days are particularly arrogant, undisciplined, ignorant, whatever, despite that being what every generation has thought about the next generation for thousands of years. It's just a quirk of human psychology.

 

[BoberFett]

What I would be most interested to see is a survey like that every five years. I have a strong suspicion that each and every time similar numbers of people would deride new employees as compared to the wonderful five year ago employees.

It's sort of related to how every generation thinks the Kids These Days are particularly arrogant, undisciplined, ignorant, whatever, despite that being what every generation has thought about the next generation for thousands of years. It's just a quirk of human psychology.

Is it possible that every generation has been correct? How can you simply write that off as a "quirk of human psychology"? What are metrics?

 

[zinfamous]

I'd love it but that's commie/big government speak and we can't have that today.

nosir.

 

[BoberFett]

I'd love it but that's commie/big government speak and we can't have that today.

nosir.

Another useless reply.

 

[poofyhairguy]

What I would be most interested to see is a survey like that every five years. I have a strong suspicion that each and every time similar numbers of people would deride new employees as compared to the wonderful five year ago employees.

It's sort of related to how every generation thinks the Kids These Days are particularly arrogant, undisciplined, ignorant, whatever, despite that being what every generation has thought about the next generation for thousands of years. It's just a quirk of human psychology.

I think that Gen Y employees are actually enthusiastic about work and have a decent work perspective, but are held back by managers from earlier generations that are looking for more superficial cues:

However, while Gen Y workers have a positive view of their managers, believing that their managers can offer experience (59%), wisdom (41%), and a willingness to mentor (33%), managers have an overall negative view of their Gen Y employees. They feel said employees have unrealistic compensation expectations (51%), a poor work ethic (47%), and are easily distracted (46%).

http://millennialbranding.com/2013/09/gen-workplace-expectations-study/

I for one work in a metropolitan area that has a tradition of a more relaxed dress code and I don't hear many complain about work ethic. I think because managers are judging by the work done and not that they are wearing a proper button-down and tie because that is not gonna happen in my city.

 

[fskimospy]

Is it possible that every generation has been correct? How can you simply write that off as a "quirk of human psychology"? What are metrics?

My argument would simply be scale. If every 20 years or so we observed this generational damage to work ethic, increased sloth, whatever, then the trend that Socrates observed in ~400BC would have cycled about 120 times by this point.

Considering the dramatic decline that is consistently noted by these observers, allow me to register my large degree of skepticism that after so many repetitions that human society would be very functional at all, much less have leapfrogged prior generations so completely.

Isn't the far more likely explanation that people view the past more favorably than it actually was?

 

[poofyhairguy]

Isn't the far more likely explanation that people view the past more favorably than it actually was?

No I think the standards change. In Socrates era respect was not praying to the wrong god. In my parent's area it was "no sir, no maam." In my era its don't cuss out people on Facebook.

 

[fskimospy]

No I think the standards change. In Socrates era respect was not praying to the wrong god. In my parent's area it was "no sir, no maam." In my era its don't cuss out people on Facebook.

Here is the quote:

Our youth now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for their elders and love chatter in place of exercise; they no longer rise when elders enter the room; they contradict their parents, chatter before company; gobble up their food and tyrannize their teachers.

I don't know about you, but that complaint rings pretty eternal to me.