|
A thought on unemployment benefits
YukonBound wrote:
"nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Charles C." wrote in message ... While watching Keith Olberman's "Countdown" show last evening in which he featured a segment on a couple who had lost their jobs, I had a thought on how the unemployment insurance programs might be modified. The husband had worked in the auto parts industry all his adult life but his job was eliminated. Despite efforts to find a new, similar job he, like many, had found that his job was gone, not to return. He acknowledged finding a new job, requiring him to start over in a new career and at a low starting wage. He freely admitted that it did not make sense for him to take the new job because he was better off financially collecting unemployment benefits. He wants to work, but has to do the best thing money-wise to keep his house, etc. Many are in the same boat. Since many jobs are gone for good and people are going to have to start new careers with lower pay due to little or no experience, my thought was this: Rather than continue to extend full unemployment benefits during this critical economy, structure the unemployment funding as a subsidy to the new, lower pay scale common to a new job in which one has no experience. Benefits would be tied to the last year's earnings before being layed off. The combined new job pay and the subsidized income from the unemployment fund would equal some percentage (say 75-90 percent) of the previous income. This benefit would last for a period of 2 years ... sufficient time to become trained and knowledgeable in the new job. This would cut the amount of money currently being paid out in unemployment benefits, provide an incentive for new jobs resulting in lower unemployment. Note: This is a totally non-partisan idea. No blame cast on the left or right. This basic concept has been talked about for a long time. I find it truly loony that if you say you're in school, e.g., training for a new career, you're unemployment benefits suffer. Of course, this would be unpopular, mainly because it's a complicated explanation... not that it doesn't make some sense. Welcome back Ms Plume. Your legion of admirers sure did miss you..................... you are all they could talk about. Did you buy a boat? I probably won't see your reply until late Monday. We're taking mom and my oldest sister to beautiful Cape Breton. My youngest sister and her husband will meet us there as we visit my #3 sister. Gag |
OT Solar water heaters (was unemployment)
wrote:
On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 15:29:20 -0500, Jim wrote: wrote: On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 07:19:30 -0500, Jim wrote: According to the site they sell for Florida homes too. http://solarroofs.com/index.html#customers Browse at your leisure. I browsed and I see the "certifications" I still do not see a NRTL listed and there are a lot of building departments that will not issue you a permit without one. This is what the Florida IAEI (electrical inspectors) has to say about it. the consensus is "It needs to be certified by a NRTL." http://www.iaeifl.org/forums/ubbthre....html#Post7273 You have to read the whole thing. The inspector from Cape Coral said he'd pass an FSEC approved system. FSEC has tested and approved the Skyline systems. The pool system they were arguing about had components with no ratings at all, and the system wasn't FSEC approved. Looks like those inspectors don't have their act together. They should straighten themselves out, get with the new technology, and get the definitive answer about what FSEC system approval means. Yet the city of Northport says no (Bryan Holland) No, he was talking about a non-FSEC approved pool system. It had components with no certs, and wasn't an FSEC approved system. The Cape Coral inspector butted in with FSEC approved systems. Which he said he passes, and he laid out the rules. Seemed clear to me if FSEC approves a system the inspectors should have no problem with it. But except for the Cape Coral guy, nobody was talking about an FSEC approved system. Florida is spending a lot of money for FSEC testing and certification of these solar systems. And they are being installed throughout the state. I highly doubt an inspector would buck FSEC certification. Wouldn't add to his job security. If you are climbing around on your roof with these collectors and don't have a permit, you are just trusting none of your neighbors are mad at you about anything or just condo commander types who want to do the right thing Building departments are really looking for work these days. Some are just driving around looking for violations, simply to keep their job. If there's a chance of getting caught, get the permit. Simple as that. And if you do that, you talk to the inspector about the system first so you're in sync and there's no surprises. The problem is if your BO is a guy who thinks you need NRTL listing and that is more common than not. If an inspector doesn't know about FSEC certification he should be fired. And jailed. You also notice it is only the collector that is certified, not the controller or the pump. No, looks to me that all collectors have SRCC certs. FSEC probably requires that before they'll test for their system cert. That's a guess. The Skyline system came to FSEC with a SRCC collector cert, then FSEC issued its cert after system testing. I saw somewhere FSEC also tests the PV's during their system test. For the Skyline the PV runs a 12v pump. You can see the extent of the FSEC program and testing regime by googling for it. Here http://www.fsec.ucf.edu/en/certifica...ards/index.htm You can also find the FSEC system certs for the Skyline systems. ACR International. That is why I say they really need a federal program, endorsed by OSHA (the people who certify a NRTL) to get system certifications without kicking that $100,000 U/L tar baby. Why complicate things? You remind me of a worry wart. Sounds like you just want to make trouble. Act like a damn Floridian. We don't need fed interference for solar hot water heater certification. In fact, FSEC is the most important solar hot water cert nationwide. You should be proud. I am. And tell your inspector compadres to listen up. FSEC is the new sheriff in town. Jim - Damn, I wish I had an FSEC badge and a gun. And a hat. I'd show them inspectors a thing or two. Especially the ones hanging around in that biker bar in Bartow. And gfretwell too if he's in there. |
A thought on unemployment benefits
"Larry" wrote in message
... YukonBound wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Charles C." wrote in message ... While watching Keith Olberman's "Countdown" show last evening in which he featured a segment on a couple who had lost their jobs, I had a thought on how the unemployment insurance programs might be modified. The husband had worked in the auto parts industry all his adult life but his job was eliminated. Despite efforts to find a new, similar job he, like many, had found that his job was gone, not to return. He acknowledged finding a new job, requiring him to start over in a new career and at a low starting wage. He freely admitted that it did not make sense for him to take the new job because he was better off financially collecting unemployment benefits. He wants to work, but has to do the best thing money-wise to keep his house, etc. Many are in the same boat. Since many jobs are gone for good and people are going to have to start new careers with lower pay due to little or no experience, my thought was this: Rather than continue to extend full unemployment benefits during this critical economy, structure the unemployment funding as a subsidy to the new, lower pay scale common to a new job in which one has no experience. Benefits would be tied to the last year's earnings before being layed off. The combined new job pay and the subsidized income from the unemployment fund would equal some percentage (say 75-90 percent) of the previous income. This benefit would last for a period of 2 years ... sufficient time to become trained and knowledgeable in the new job. This would cut the amount of money currently being paid out in unemployment benefits, provide an incentive for new jobs resulting in lower unemployment. Note: This is a totally non-partisan idea. No blame cast on the left or right. This basic concept has been talked about for a long time. I find it truly loony that if you say you're in school, e.g., training for a new career, you're unemployment benefits suffer. Of course, this would be unpopular, mainly because it's a complicated explanation... not that it doesn't make some sense. Welcome back Ms Plume. Your legion of admirers sure did miss you..................... you are all they could talk about. Did you buy a boat? I probably won't see your reply until late Monday. We're taking mom and my oldest sister to beautiful Cape Breton. My youngest sister and her husband will meet us there as we visit my #3 sister. Gag Really. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a Mac, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a Mac, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his own ID. |
A thought on unemployment benefits
"Larry" wrote in message ... YukonBound wrote: "nom=de=plume" wrote in message ... "Charles C." wrote in message ... While watching Keith Olberman's "Countdown" show last evening in which he featured a segment on a couple who had lost their jobs, I had a thought on how the unemployment insurance programs might be modified. The husband had worked in the auto parts industry all his adult life but his job was eliminated. Despite efforts to find a new, similar job he, like many, had found that his job was gone, not to return. He acknowledged finding a new job, requiring him to start over in a new career and at a low starting wage. He freely admitted that it did not make sense for him to take the new job because he was better off financially collecting unemployment benefits. He wants to work, but has to do the best thing money-wise to keep his house, etc. Many are in the same boat. Since many jobs are gone for good and people are going to have to start new careers with lower pay due to little or no experience, my thought was this: Rather than continue to extend full unemployment benefits during this critical economy, structure the unemployment funding as a subsidy to the new, lower pay scale common to a new job in which one has no experience. Benefits would be tied to the last year's earnings before being layed off. The combined new job pay and the subsidized income from the unemployment fund would equal some percentage (say 75-90 percent) of the previous income. This benefit would last for a period of 2 years ... sufficient time to become trained and knowledgeable in the new job. This would cut the amount of money currently being paid out in unemployment benefits, provide an incentive for new jobs resulting in lower unemployment. Note: This is a totally non-partisan idea. No blame cast on the left or right. This basic concept has been talked about for a long time. I find it truly loony that if you say you're in school, e.g., training for a new career, you're unemployment benefits suffer. Of course, this would be unpopular, mainly because it's a complicated explanation... not that it doesn't make some sense. Welcome back Ms Plume. Your legion of admirers sure did miss you..................... you are all they could talk about. Did you buy a boat? I probably won't see your reply until late Monday. We're taking mom and my oldest sister to beautiful Cape Breton. My youngest sister and her husband will meet us there as we visit my #3 sister. Gag We don't want to know what you're gagging on... really! |
A thought on unemployment benefits
On Sat, 14 Aug 2010 12:13:42 -0500, Jim wrote:
My wife just got cold called to go sell road signs for $70,000 a year plus expenses and benefits so some people can still find work. Sure she did. And I just got a cold call offering me a great opportunity to sell phone booth services to local merchants. There are definitely jobs out there for people with the right skils and are willing to work. I was talking on the phone today with a Marine Refrigeration and Air Conditioning company in Naples, FL about a repair and parts issue with our trawler. Apparently they thought I knew what I was talking about since they offered me a job sight unseen. I politely declined and money was never discussed. Around here A/C and refrigeration guys charge about $85/hour, same as diesel mechanics which are also in short supply. |
A thought on unemployment benefits
|
A thought on unemployment benefits
|
A thought on unemployment benefits
"Wayne.B" wrote in message
... On Mon, 16 Aug 2010 22:53:32 -0400, wrote: I have people trying to get me back into the computer business from time to time but I would rather do just about anything else. There is certainly a lot of opportunity but it is not hardware, it is just integrating PC software. Plenty of windshield and telephone time, frustrating support structures and buggy applications. I would rather work on a shrimp boat. ;-) Maybe. :-) My diesel mechanic used to own a small fleet of shrimp boats at FMB but gave it up mostly as a result of low priced imported shrimp taking the profit out of it. I think the best computer opportunities are with networking and security but I'm kind of enjoying retirement. My loving 48 year old bride won't let me retire until she does, dammit. -- I'm the real Harry, and I post from a Mac, as virtually everyone knows. If a post is attributed to me, and it isn't from a Mac, it's from an ID spoofer who hasn't the balls to post with his own ID. |
A thought on unemployment benefits
|
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:38 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2014 BoatBanter.com