In that specific case I'd agree with you. However I've seen Anglo
Americans begging for change outside shops with 'help wanted' ads in
the window, and all minimum wage service positions seemed to be held by
Hispanics.

Anyone physically capable who won't take a job because it's beneath
them has abrogated any claim to public support IMO. First you get a
job, any job, then you chase your aspirations. A boring dirty job is a
wonderful incentive to get your ass into gear.

Bit late in replying but I've been playing with big ships.

PDW

In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote:

So did I but you can't really expect someone who was employed for
30 years as a master machinest to take a farm laborer or burger flipping
job. They're probably not physically capable of the former, nor hireable
as the latter.

Most people want to work, even kids in the innercity ghettos. There is
no work for them either, not even in Burger King.

"Peter Wiley" wrote in message
. ..
In article , Jonathan Ganz
wrote:

Sorry, but you're talking about a specific case in a specific state. I
don't
know anyone who really wants to be a farm laborer. It's a dangerous,
dirty job. In general, people want to work. They don't want handouts.

Bwahahahahahahaaaaaa. What Jon's arguing, in effect, is that a person
is entitled to only work at those jobs that fit their percieved station
in life, and if they can't find one, they're entitled to be supported
by the taxpayers until they can.

You end up with a lot of wannabe lion tamers that way :-)

When I was a *lot* younger I took any job I could get that paid while
looking for a better one. Wanting to do a dirty, tiring job isn't
relevant if you can't get another one.

PDW