So apparently this is what -at least one- prospective employers think...

[CommonSensePLZ]

I was remembering a question I answered on Yahoo! Answers a while back and I remembered a line one other answerer said, if the question hadn't been deleted I'd probably link it, but in a response to a frustrated teenager trying to get a job he said something like "listen to that sense of entitlement, no one owes you a job" (no, this kid never made any sort of claim to imply he felt like the world owed him a job he was just wondering why it was so hard and if other users were having trouble also). In my response I offered some tips and discussed how snobbery has tainted the American job market, a sideways insult to the guy I mentioned and even more well-deserved than that considering his assumption that the asker had lip rings and such.

But it wasn't until a couple of days ago I realized what that guy was really getting at: Apparently prospective employers are a bit disconnected. It seems that, if they think like this guy does, that they don't understand why people apply for jobs. Instead of understanding how people are willing to sell their time and knowledge to make their businesses function so that we can get money to buy food, pay bills, seems this guy and probably other neocons out there think it's a privilege to do spend hours and days out of the week doing their grunt work for a couple of bucks!

What will we do when simply having a job in this country becomes a luxury and status symbol? How deep will the divide between the upper and lower classes become? What can be done NOW to reverse this?

Not to be alarmist, just thought this was an interesting observation to share. :)

[bluesbassman]

1. It's the "haves" vs the "have not" mentality.

The vast majority on the right, whether they built a business from scratch or worked for a wage all their life, feel in any case that they, and they alone are responsible for their level of success. Never mind that the business they built more than likely benefited from some form of government (read societal) contribution, and the wage earners job most certainly did through corporate tax breaks and so on. They see anyone not at their level as a slacker.

No, it's not a right to have a job in this or any other country, but it's not a privilege either. When you accept a job you are trading hours and skill for compensation. The problem in our new reality is that the "haves" don't want to pay a living wage for those hours and skill anymore. That is unless you're part of the club.

[CommonSensePLZ]

5. Something about the Bush tax cuts

Business went down after them and the wealthiest people got richer. My thinking is that this led to them not caring about the business of the US, since they'd now gotten richer faster. Thus business need not boom as much, they don't need to hired and attract customers to businesses as much. BUT if they didn't have as much and had to be more afraid for the enormity of their wealth they WOULD need to ensure that there was hiring and that American business was booming, thus they'd be making more money.

As far as I know this is just a theory of mine though.

No, not a right, but generally speaking A NECESSITY, at least at long as everything is dependent on money and getting a job remains the general way to get some. If some rich guy has an idea how I can get money legitimately some other way if I'm to be barred from work I'd LOVE to hear it.

In fact, fuck it. It IS a right. We as human beings have a right to decency and fairness from other human beings and we have a right to be able to take care and provide for ourselves. Playing games and barring people from work like what is currently going on in the job market however should be a crime, and what gives them that right to do that? A person has a right to say 'nah, I don't want this individual working in my establishment' but all individuals should be allowed to do what they legally have to do to get their needs taken care of, and there are such things as workers' rights.

I'm super-cereal it IS a right:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_of_human_rights#Human_rights_set_out_in_the_Declaration

[bluesbassman]

8. It's the 21st century version of alchemy.

Although in this version the gold is real and the lead is the reduction in quality of life for the average human being.

And though the quality of life may be improving in some third world countries due to the influx of jobs and capital, ponder this; what happens when their costs become too much to sustain corporate profits?

[pacalo]

2. They are just *full* of paradoxes. Working is a luxury (?) but they don't want to

help the unemployed?

[CommonSensePLZ]

7. It scares me, but it looks like that's where trends might be heading

Suppose the difficulty with hires doesn't change and we just accepted it. Not having a paid labor force would be fine if only the only you could have housing, get food, get rid of debt without money, but that seems to be what's happening. The greedy and evil have twisted the game to give themselves all the advantages.

[riderinthestorm]

3. Goes along with the new paradigm of employers only wanting applicants who are already employed!

The unemployed need not apply. It widens the gap considerably for the unemployed who are faced with the double whammy of trying to get their foot in the door for an interview - not only are they competing against many others for the same position but they aren't even going to be considered at all if they have that gap.

Honestly, as a small corp, I've been tempted to ask any DUers if they need a reference that they are "working" for me so they don't have the dreaded gap. My corporation name is not the same as my farm name and just about any job could be made to fit for that umbrella corp. It's just insanity that you have to be employed to even be considered.

[CommonSensePLZ]

6. Don't hire the unemployed but then they whine about "the welfare state"!

That stupidity is precisely the opposite that lead to America becoming a rich as it currently still is. If they'd been doing that back in the early 1900s this would be a very different country, probably more like Africa currently is.

[Pacifist Patriot]

4. Very interesting observation indeed.