First: My thanks to my good friend Keri for Facebook-ing this article. It started me thinking (always a dangerous thing). And, even though I know she probably doesn’t share my political beliefs, she reads articles that contain facts. She is a kindred spirit.<smile>
My comments here don’t focus on the article, however. They focus on the Fair Employment Act of 2011 that is highlighted in that article. Before you read further, read the friggin’ Act If you’re not going to do your homework then go watch Deal or No Deal. It’s not that long and it’s written to a third grade level, so go for it.
Brian whistles for about 10 minutes and then says, “Have you finished reading it ? Good.” Now read on:
I’ve asked myself rhetorically, “How many times in my life have I seen this act or that act that is supposed to fix a problem, but didn’t or made it worse?” My issue here is that 98% of the time, these “Acts” do one of three things:
- Unintentionally miss the mark completely, having nothing whatsoever to do with the problem at hand.
- Have a hidden agenda: purporting to fix one problem while setting up something favorable for the sponsors (such as buying votes, or protecting someone’s phoney-baloney job).
- Have unintended consequences.
After reading the Act, the first thing to pop into my head was “more regulation, just what every business in the US could use right about now”. I also thought that anyone stupid enough to make having a job a prerequisite to being eligible for a job either is stupid or doesn’t really want to hire anyone in the first place.
The article had a lot of good data in it but ruined it for me (and this happens a lot, unfortunately) by concluding with “Sadly, as over 14 million Americans are kept out of the job market through discriminatory hiring practices, they find themselves trapped in a cruel catch-22.” That remark is not only is unsubstantiated & pure supposition, it is an attempt at over-simplifying a complex situation; especially as it relates to the black community (see my reading assignments, below).
The sum total of its effect on discrimination of anyone by this method will be ZERO. Laws that do no real good should never be enacted because it just adds more noise and contributes nothing to the tune.
This particular law will only do three things IMHO:
- It’ll cost money in time and labor to integrate into HR departments. Costs that are forwarded to consumers, of course.
- It will give the sponsors something to hold up to their liberal constituents and say, “See, we did something! Please let us keep our jobs!”
- It will make bleeding-heart liberals feel good about themselves and their country.
And isn’t that the most important thing? Not whether employable people get jobs but that people who already have jobs feel like they did something tangible to help the situation?
Yesssirrr…nothing like a false sense of self-worth of an employed liberal vs. an empty stomach of someone on the down & out.
I say again: Anyone STUPID enough to require current employment as a prerequisite for hire likely doesn’t really want to hire anyone or is not someone you would want to work for in the first place. There’s no law that fixes stupid. One look to liberal Democrats who write this crap will prove that out.
One last parting shot…and there’s a bit of anger behind this one: If you want to lower unemployment, start by removing all of the CRAP regulations like this one you put on businesses. You pretend to protect employers or consumers when all you’re really doing is surgically removing a political contributor’s competition in the marketplace. Oh God I hate Congress!!!
For those brave souls out there: Especially liberals who have an open mind and don’t mind reading material that may contain facts that disable their pre/ill-conceived notions of reality, I offer a few articles that discuss these topics and topics surrounding these issues.
- The role of internalized oppression.
- This article discusses various reasons for economic disparity among cultural groups. Toward the end, it concentrates on American blacks.
- This article talks about the “disparate impact” of any job requirements and goes on to discuss the role of fact and fiction in social engineering.
- In Forbidden Grounds: The Case Against Employment Discrimination Laws , Epstein examines laws like the Act proposed above and the consequences (good & bad) of enacting them.
- A surprising amount of clarity from (GASP) an HR perspective. Naw…honestly. I joke a lot about Human Resource departments, but ...I really mean most of it. <evil grin>