SENATE BILL: Long-term Unemployment Relief Act (Law'd)

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: shua

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The sponsor has 24 hours to begin advocacy.


My PPT slot plan for next two weeks has now been wrecked thanks to the in order slots catching up to the bills on my radar.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

There are many long-term unemployed in the current economy, and they can feel like they are stuck in a harsh trap.  The very fact that they have been out of work for so long can make them appear unattractive to employers and erode their confidence, and with fast changing technology their skills can become outdated.  Even as the economy may improve we are in danger of having a large number of people who are in effect permanently unemployed.



This is a step to help with that, to make the long-term unemployed appear more attractive to employers, at least so that the presence of a blank period on the work resume does not mean the applicant is automatically dismissed at the beginning of the process.   6 months is the standard definition of long-term unemployment, within the range of about 4-8 months that sees the greatest drop in who gets call-backs for interviews.  The final sentence of the bill is just to clarify that if for whatever reason an unemployed person did not seek or qualify or unemployment benefits from the government, their employer is still eligible for this benefit.

[TNF]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

Sir TNF, may I ask you a question?
How would a seven-hour day, as proposed,
As pleasing as it is to pinkos' ears,
Be beneficial to the working class
In areas of unemployment and
Obtaining jobs from hirers who refuse
To hire said workers even as of now?
The people do need help, yes, but like this?
Perhaps a better way to go about
This unemployment crisis on our hands
Would be free training for the unemployed
(And benefits most generous to help
Them as they stumble through a crumbling market,
Though I assume, Atlasia being what
It is we've taken care of things like those)
To give them skills required* for a job?
A decent one, too, and well-paying,
With the promise of a happy, fulfilled life?
And in addition, I see no inherent
Problem with a tax break that will serve
As an incentive for the common good
(In this case, hiring of the unemployed),
Regardless of the benefits the rich
Will reap inevitably from their kindness -
Philanthropy's philanthropy no matter
The income of the person who performs it.
This bill and benefits for our workforce
Aren't mutually exclusive on their face,
And while I stand with all the working men
And women who do make this nation great,
I think that we can spare some change that otherwise'd
Be taken from the rich to give incentives for th'employment of those who've been there
For far too long a time I'll stand to stand.

[TNF]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

If introduced, a 7-hour-long day
Would lower workers' wages, would it not?
And therefore we'd be forced to multiply
The minimum wage by one over seven
To better parity achieve between
The old day and the new in wages' sphere.
Now, I'm not saying this is a bad thing,
I would just like to note that we would have
To increase wages just to keep the same
Appropriate level for our garbage-men
As we had had before, Sir TNF.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Or you could see employment as it is
Instead of basing everything on models.
The rate in here would probably be low,
More so than the United States even,
If not for that god-damned* Western hellhole
The rate of which sticks out like a sore thumb.

*((Three syllables are in god-damned here))

[President Tyrion]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Or you could see employment as it is
Instead of basing everything on models.
The rate in here would probably be low,
more so than the United States even,
if not for that god-damned* Western hellhole
The rate of which sticks out like a sore thumb.

I resent this, good sir.

[H.E. VOLODYMYR ZELENKSYY]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Or you could see employment as it is
Instead of basing everything on models.
The rate in here would probably be low,
more so than the United States even,
if not for that god-damned* Western hellhole
The rate of which sticks out like a sore thumb.

I resent this, good sir.

Well, don't just stand there, do something! Fix it!
If you resent my calling out of your
Brothers in arms in the Pacific region
Then work to change the situation there
And let your people earn back my respect.

[President Tyrion]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Or you could see employment as it is
Instead of basing everything on models.
The rate in here would probably be low,
more so than the United States even,
if not for that god-damned* Western hellhole
The rate of which sticks out like a sore thumb.

I resent this, good sir.

Well, don't just stand there, do something! Fix it!
If you resent my calling out of your
Brothers in arms in the Pacific region
Then work to change the situation there
And let your people earn back my respect.

I plan on continuing to do just that, good sir!

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So where are we on this?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Would you be interested in removing some of those later stages of the unemployment increase as a part of this bill? It is presently at $14 as I recall.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I would support an amendment to that effect.
I can't find the law that raised the minimum wage by that much. The last thing I see on it is the Living Wage Act last May that raised it to $12.50.

[President Tyrion]

It may not be on the wiki yet, but I certainly recall passing it.

[TNF]

The Fair Labor Standards Act of 2013 raises the minimum wage to $14 an hour on July 1. Thereafter, it increases by one dollar at the beginning of the year until 2018, whereby it tops off at $18 an hour. However, these are the absolute lowest adjustments proscribed by law, as the FLSA also requires the minimum wage to adjust annually for inflation and increases in worker productivity.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Wow, that bill is a headache for economic activity in so many ways. It amazes me sometimes the things even the Atlasian right goes for that most European Social Democratic parties would think twice about.  It even makes it illegal for kids to make and sell lemonade!

What's up with this part?:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Seems like it would make it hard to dismiss a new employee that didn't work out. What's the deal with saying they can be dismissed after two and a half years but not before?
And Section 2 gives an incentive to let go of people before the first 180 days are up because otherwise the company is stuck with them.

[Fed. Pac. Chairman Devin]

This bill is going to make it easier for employers not to pay taxes while offering no relief to the employed. If anything, a better way to reduce unemployment is to zero out the payroll tax responsibilities of the lowest earners. This will put more money in their wallets which will be spent and force hiring in other sectors of the economy.

Of course, if we *really* want to be serious about lowering unemployment, we need to talk about moving to a 7 Hour Day, rather than just talking about giving tax relief to corporations.

Do you realize a 7-hour day will mean more people will take on second jobs? And if they don't, they'll have less money for having worked fewer hours.  Anyway, the long-term unemployed face unique challenges that persist even when the general unemployment rate drops.  This is a policy to address that problem.

Do you realize that the minimum wage is already set to adjust to $18 an hour by 2018? A 7 hour day combined with that, or combined with an even higher minimum wage, would make up for any losses that might accompany such a change. Plus, more people, not fewer, are going to be employed with people working less hours because there's going to need to be more workers hired to make up for less workers being able to work without hitting overtime pay. So any purported changes are going to be offset by wider employment, which will lift overall wages and reduce hours in the long run.

$18/hour???
Goodness Atlasia's policy-makers have bought into uneconomical utopianism even more than I realized.  All the more reason we need policies to help the long-term unemployed, since otherwise we can expect even more of them in the future.

Or you could see employment as it is
Instead of basing everything on models.
The rate in here would probably be low,
more so than the United States even,
if not for that god-damned* Western hellhole
The rate of which sticks out like a sore thumb.

I resent this, good sir.

Well, don't just stand there, do something! Fix it!
If you resent my calling out of your
Brothers in arms in the Pacific region
Then work to change the situation there
And let your people earn back my respect.

The Council is making progress. Since we started, we have slashed unemployment by a fourth.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

I would support an amendment to that effect.
I can't find the law that raised the minimum wage by that much. The last thing I see on it is the Living Wage Act last May that raised it to $12.50.

The minimum wage is one that people seem to never be content to leave as it is for any long period of time. Aside from what TNF siad, there is also another schedule of minimum wage increases for tipped employees as well that needs to be considered for it gets up into those double digits as well in the out years.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

So where would you like to start shua?

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So where would you like to start shua?

I'm trying to figure out what sections of the FLSA are detrimental to the long-term unemployed. Could someone explain how Section 4 works?

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The best one would be Senator TNF, but he seems less than interested in responding. Perhaps you might want to PM him directly.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Have you tried my suggestion Senator?