Staff Shortages at stadium

[3-7-77]

Straight forward question, straight forward answer.
If true, how much is ENOUGH?

 

[EverettGriz]

Maybe the forestry dept and administration could hire some of those eco terrorists they hosted back in the 80's and 90's to help out..
Wups , I forgot they work for the federal government nowadays. :lol:

Others of us went into teaching/indoctrinating the next generation of leftist tree huggers. Course in southern Saskatchewan you have to explain to the kids what a tree is first.

:lol:

 

[Grizzlies1982]

Uhh, what now again?

I think he is confused. When you receive your vaccine 2nd dose or J&J single you are not considered fully vaccinated until 14 days after the shot. As it takes that amount of time for your body to produce antibodies in significant volume. If you are hospitalized 13 days or less after the shot you are considered unvaccinated technically. He seems to think it is the opposite way around that after 13 days the shot is no longer effective.

Ray is exactly right. It takes a couple weeks for your body to build up antibodies after getting the shot. So the infected "unvaccinated", who have had a shot, are those who just got their shot.

You don't have to believe it, but I wish you would. Getting the damn shot just makes sense.

The fact is 90% of those hospitalized are folks who have not been fully vaccinated. The numbers are even more drastic on those currently dying of Covid, that is over 95% of the mortalities are the unvaccinated. Getting vaccinated does not guarantee your safety but it dramatically improves the chance you'll survive if you do get infected.

 

[futuregrizer]

Maybe the forestry dept and administration could hire some of those eco terrorists they hosted back in the 80's and 90's to help out..
Wups , I forgot they work for the federal government nowadays. :lol:

Others of us went into teaching/indoctrinating the next generation of leftist tree huggers. Course in southern Saskatchewan you have to explain to the kids what a tree is first.

Yes, there are many things that need to be explained to Canadian children.

 

[Grizzlies1982]

Trash the Governor if you want but the extra benefits hurt the labor market. Our son's former girlfriend was a waitress. Last year when the restaurants had to cut tables she took unemployment. Once they allowed the return of the tables she didn't go back because her unemployment with the extra $350 / week was well above what she'd receive working. The extra benefits were her inducement not to return to work. That is a fact.


Simple economics 101 dude: I can pocket $X if I go to work, or I can pocket $X and just hang with my friends.

Guess which one most 21 year olds will opt for?

Now it is a chicken or the egg situation. Our other son works in a restaurant. He never took unemployment or stopped working. Initially he endured greatly shortened hours because of the reduced capacity. Though that changed. He is now about fried because of the labor shortage. He worked 12 hour shifts for five & six days a week because they're perpetually short staffed. People will eventually come back into the work force but many younger folks were sent away. It is taking time to get them back.

If his hours were shortened due to Covid, why in the world didn't he take the enhanced unemployment offered from the government to cover his lost wages, which he very likely qualified for?

I guess he wasn't a typical 23 year old. Last summer as his hours shrunk away and he was financially starving, he left the food service industry and took another unrelated job (which allowed him full time hours). Then a couple of months ago he returned to cooking at another restaurant. So he is back to doing what he wants. However, the labor shortage is taking a toll on him and those who are working at almost all these small businesses which are now perpetually under staffed.

Help Wanted signs are everywhere, here in Montana and over in Seattle when we attended the game. So it is not a Governor, as those are two polar opposites. This is a wide spread problem and I will welcome our eventual return to normal.

 

[uofmman1122]

I guess he wasn't a typical 23 year old. Last summer as his hours shrunk away and he was financially starving

I'm not trying to slight your son here, but honestly this is just silly. I'll never understand certain Americans' aversion to taking help from the government, especially when they very obviously need it and it's due to no fault of their own.

This is a wide spread problem and I will welcome our eventual return to normal.

This is just such a telling quote about the situation.

Your idea of "normal" is very likely "I can go and get service at all the places I used to before", while for a lot of the workers at these places "normal" means miserable working conditions where they are treated as completely disposable, coupled with insane hours, and poverty wages that barely pay enough for them to even survive, let alone live comfortably.

Whether you like it or not, the pandemic assistance provided for many people in this situation the first time in their adult lives where they didn't have to slave away in a meaningless, underpaid job in order to survive (Pandemic Aid Programs Spur a Record Drop in Poverty), and we're suddenly super surprised that these same people aren't rushing to go back to the way things were?

Anyways, I've already blown past my monthly quota for political posts on here, so carry on.

 

[ilovethecats]

I guess he wasn't a typical 23 year old. Last summer as his hours shrunk away and he was financially starving

I'm not trying to slight your son here, but honestly this is just silly. I'll never understand certain Americans' aversion to taking help from the government, especially when they very obviously need it and it's due to no fault of their own.

This is a wide spread problem and I will welcome our eventual return to normal.

This is just such a telling quote about the situation.

Your idea of "normal" is very likely "I can go and get service at all the places I used to before", while for a lot of the workers at these places "normal" means miserable working conditions where they are treated as completely disposable, coupled with insane hours, and poverty wages that barely pay enough for them to even survive, let alone live comfortably.

Whether you like it or not, the pandemic assistance provided for many people in this situation the first time in their adult lives where they didn't have to slave away in a meaningless, underpaid job in order to survive (Pandemic Aid Programs Spur a Record Drop in Poverty), and we're suddenly super surprised that these same people aren't rushing to go back to the way things were?

Anyways, I've already blown past my monthly quota for political posts on here, so carry on.

It doesn't have to be political. You are exactly right. Covid was really just an eye-opener for those working these service industry jobs. And no one else cared about those jobs until we got to where we are today. Businesses can't be open all day every day like before because they don't have the staff to operate. Now it is inconvenient for the rest of us, but no reason whatsoever for those to rush back to those kind of jobs.

It's a mess that I don't see changing for awhile. I think we're all better off just knowing that our leisure activities that involve eating out and having drinks aren't going to look like they did before. Prepare for long waits to be seated, food and drinks to take longer than before, service to not be as good as it once was, and bars and restaurants to not be open as often as they used to be.

 

[SaskGriz]

Others of us went into teaching/indoctrinating the next generation of leftist tree huggers. Course in southern Saskatchewan you have to explain to the kids what a tree is first.

Yes, there are many things that need to be explained to Canadian children.

True, you guys down there do keep us entertained.

 

[zengriz]

...there is not a shortage of workers...
...there is a shortage of good jobs...
...america created this over time...
...could be a permanent problem...

... :shock: ...

 

[SoldierGriz]

i highly doubt that is an accurate synopsis of what any young people said or think. all you old people are just like all the old people before you, whining and bitching about the 'kids', i.e. what you used to be. egriz takes it to a new level, with a bunch of entitled old men who think they are better than everybody else, and that the kids should get back to serving them, rather than doing what they want to do. no twenty year old to deliver your geriatric meds? i'm so sorry.

:clap: I don't want to wade too far into this, but I posit that the generation above is the most entitled generation in the history of the United States. Buy a house for $35k at 22, retire at 62, and wonder why the youngsters can't just do the same. That said, I know quite a few hard-working and impressive people in that generation.

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

 

[horribilisfan8184]

I guess he wasn't a typical 23 year old. Last summer as his hours shrunk away and he was financially starving

I'm not trying to slight your son here, but honestly this is just silly. I'll never understand certain Americans' aversion to taking help from the government, especially when they very obviously need it and it's due to no fault of their own.

First misunderstanding. It's not the Government's money. Government can't give away to anyone that which it hasn't taken from somebody else. We are all better off when we are all self-sufficient. Devaluing currency by giving away printed money (or providing for the people what they should provide for themselves) has lead to the downfall of every society before us. It's in the history books, just look it up. (https://phys.org/news/2020-10-history-societies-collapse-leaders-undermine.html) Right now the government is taking (ok borrowing) this money from your grandchildren not even born.

Second misunderstanding. Government cannot provide as well as family and community charity can for those who cannot provide (notice I didn't way will not provide) for themselves. The generational damage to families that comes from the government being the bread winner is the lasting disgrace of the Great Society programs

This is a wide spread problem and I will welcome our eventual return to normal.

This is just such a telling quote about the situation.

Your idea of "normal" is very likely "I can go and get service at all the places I used to before", while for a lot of the workers at these places "normal" means miserable working conditions where they are treated as completely disposable, coupled with insane hours, and poverty wages that barely pay enough for them to even survive, let alone live comfortably.

Whether you like it or not, the pandemic assistance provided for many people in this situation the first time in their adult lives where they didn't have to slave away in a meaningless, underpaid job in order to survive (Pandemic Aid Programs Spur a Record Drop in Poverty), and we're suddenly super surprised that these same people aren't rushing to go back to the way things were?

Its stunning the babble of recent generations that do not value a days pay for a days work, don't recognize the value of esteem taking a paycheck has over taking a handout, how working consumes 1/3 or more of each day that won't be spent sitting around, not expending energy, consuming excess calories, and getting so bored one turns to alcohol and drugs to cope with an unfulfilling life. Every ranch hand I know complains of long hours, terrible work conditions, low pay, demanding bosses, no vacations, and wouldn't consider giving up what they do. The perks aren't always in the paycheck, no matter how meaningless and beneath them the bourgeoises snobs think the job is. "“Winners embrace hard work. They love the discipline of it, the trade-off they’re making to win. Losers, on the other hand, see it as punishment. And that’s the difference.” – Lou Holtz"

Next misunderstanding. Poverty is a political position, not economic, in the US. Third world countries have economic poverty. The "poverty" level politicians set today would include everyone in the middle class in the 50's and 60's Try to find a family on public assistance that only has one car, one phone, one radio, one TV, one bathroom, and the 3rd kid of each sex still wearing clothes the previous kids wore at their age, takes "vacation" one day at a time going to relatives for holidays, and eats out only one meal a month. Ever take a moment to look at the obesity rate of children in "low income" areas and compare their pictures to that of the street children in Calcutta? Perspective is everything and the idea we have it bad in any part of the US is only because conditions that used to be considered very good are now labeled bad. The biggest problem with being "woke" is that crowd is incapable of realizing they are not.

Anyways, I've already blown past my monthly quota for political posts on here, so carry on.

Mods, you have my permission to grant him one more post for his political post quota so we can see where this goes

 

[CDAGRIZ]

:clap: I don't want to wade too far into this, but I posit that the generation above is the most entitled generation in the history of the United States. Buy a house for $35k at 22, retire at 62, and wonder why the youngsters can't just do the same. That said, I know quite a few hard-working and impressive people in that generation.

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

Nope. I didn't say that. Some can. Some will. It's just a lot more difficult to do so now than it was a generation ago. Many olds think it's simple because it worked for them in a much different era. That's what I was saying. I don't really think it's up for debate that it's more difficult to buy a home now than back then.

 

[ilovethecats]

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

Nope. I didn't say that. Some can. Some will. It's just a lot more difficult to do so now than it was a generation ago. Many olds think it's simple because it worked for them in a much different era. That's what I was saying. I don't really think it's up for debate that it's more difficult to buy a home now than back then.

It's not at all. Look at median income in say, 1990. Then look at median house prices.

Now, look at median income today. Then look at median house prices.

No need to make this more complicated than it needs to be.

 

[Ursa Major]

Nope. I didn't say that. Some can. Some will. It's just a lot more difficult to do so now than it was a generation ago. Many olds think it's simple because it worked for them in a much different era. That's what I was saying. I don't really think it's up for debate that it's more difficult to buy a home now than back then.

It's not at all. Look at median income in say, 1990. Then look at median house prices.

Now, look at median income today. Then look at median house prices.

No need to make this more complicated than it needs to be.

If you’re still in a researching mood, take a look at college expenses for that same period.

 

[IdaGriz01]

An interesting (but still relevant, IMO) side note, based on a few personal encounters and much more "conversations" that I've observed on Facebook. Not too surprisingly, some people discovered during the pandemic shutdowns: "You know, I don't need to be out buying 'stuff', and I can get by on a lot less than I used to think."

And, to get right down to the nitty-gritty, some (maybe a lot, but they're quiet about it) are taking short term gigs that they find interesting and pay in cash. Based on history (NO hard numbers) I'd be willing to bet that the "underground economy" (some would call it the "black market") has grown a bunch in this country.

 

[argh!]

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

Nope. I didn't say that. Some can. Some will. It's just a lot more difficult to do so now than it was a generation ago. Many olds think it's simple because it worked for them in a much different era. That's what I was saying. I don't really think it's up for debate that it's more difficult to buy a home now than back then.

baby metal, or shonen knife?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAIHvMeQAfA



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ro-_cbfdrYE

 

[ilovethecats]

It's not at all. Look at median income in say, 1990. Then look at median house prices.

Now, look at median income today. Then look at median house prices.

No need to make this more complicated than it needs to be.

If you’re still in a researching mood, take a look at college expenses for that same period.

Exactly.

I’ve been around at least long enough to know how it goes. You get older and think everything is the same as when you were growing up, and kids today just don’t have drive. They’re lazy. Etc.

But you don’t have to research too hard to see it was FAR easier going to college, paying off loans, buying a car, buying a house, hell, buying a vacation house than it is today. Of course it’s still possible for some today. But it was possible for far more people 30 years ago when wages were more in line with expenses. That’s not the case today, and maybe never will be again.

 

[argh!]

:clap: I don't want to wade too far into this, but I posit that the generation above is the most entitled generation in the history of the United States. Buy a house for $35k at 22, retire at 62, and wonder why the youngsters can't just do the same. That said, I know quite a few hard-working and impressive people in that generation.

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

you seem to be tying owning a home to retiring in one's 60's, recognizing that they have become the same goal. why?

 

[Grizzlies1982]

I guess he wasn't a typical 23 year old. Last summer as his hours shrunk away and he was financially starving

I'm not trying to slight your son here, but honestly this is just silly. I'll never understand certain Americans' aversion to taking help from the government, especially when they very obviously need it and it's due to no fault of their own.

This is a wide spread problem and I will welcome our eventual return to normal.

This is just such a telling quote about the situation.

Your idea of "normal" is very likely "I can go and get service at all the places I used to before", while for a lot of the workers at these places "normal" means miserable working conditions where they are treated as completely disposable, coupled with insane hours, and poverty wages that barely pay enough for them to even survive, let alone live comfortably.

Whether you like it or not, the pandemic assistance provided for many people in this situation the first time in their adult lives where they didn't have to slave away in a meaningless, underpaid job in order to survive (Pandemic Aid Programs Spur a Record Drop in Poverty), and we're suddenly super surprised that these same people aren't rushing to go back to the way things were?

Anyways, I've already blown past my monthly quota for political posts on here, so carry on.

There is nothing wrong with accepting help when you really need it. I'm sure my son agrees with you too. It's a damn good thing we have a safety net.

However, in his case he lost hours in the food service industry and was left with little more than rent money. He was "starving" financially. He was never starving physically. His choice was to leave the business he loved and take a job in another business. He never "Needed" help. He took another job which gave him full time hours, problem solved.

You and "love the cats" make a hell of a lot of assumptions here. Horribilis addresses some of your economic misconceptions.

The pandemic has been a blessing for some of the starting wage workers, as wages have gone up almost everywhere. No you're not supporting your family at Taco Bell but the high school kid at the till is pulling in higher wages than before. This is good.

Over paying someone not to work (as in the case of my other son's girlfriend) is not good. She decided to go back to work after the extra unemployment kicker went away. Disincentive to working is bad.

Anyway, I'm done too. Nobody is changing anyone's minds tonight. Go Griz!

 

[AZGrizFan]

Such nonsense CDA. Do you contend that current 25-35 year olds cannot accumulate the right skills to own a home, and retire in their 60s? Why?

Nope. I didn't say that. Some can. Some will. It's just a lot more difficult to do so now than it was a generation ago. Many olds think it's simple because it worked for them in a much different era. That's what I was saying. I don't really think it's up for debate that it's more difficult to buy a home now than back then.

I disagree. It’s certainly more difficult if you’re not working, or flipping burgers, yes. But starting (STARTING) pay in San Antonio for a teller is $38,000/year. So, lets say you and your spouse are BOTH tellers. These jobs require NO college degree. No experience. They are ENTRY LEVEL jobs. Combined you make $76,000/yr. You qualify for approximately a $450,000 mortgage (assuming the old standard 28% of income to a mortgage). There are currently 4,025 houses in the greater San Antonio area for sale UNDER the price of $450,000. Same applies in Dallas. There are 4,289 houses for sale currently UNDER $450,000. 5,976 are available in Houston. The list goes on and on.

Is it difficult to buy a house when you’re just starting out if you live in places like California and won’t move? Sure.
Is it difficult to buy a house if you have zero skills or drive and don’t want to do anything but flip burgers? Yep.
Is it difficult to buy a house when you’re just starting out if you don’t have two incomes coming in? Sure (but it was in 1980 and 1990 and 2000 as well).
Is it difficult to buy a house when you’re just starting out if you expect to be able to buy the same level of house you grew UP in, that was probably your parents’ 3rd or 4th or 5th house? Sure.

It’s called sacrifice. And honestly, most people don’t want to have to do it to get ahead. Relocate. Improve yourself. Enhance your skills. Get educated. Hold off having kids for a while. Prioritize your expenses. But no, they’d rather just bitch about “the system” and how it’s broken.

Edit: My company currently has 110 job openings, STARTING at $18/hr up to about $140,000. Every employee gets their health insurance paid for, HSA with $1200/yr funded by employer, 6% 401k match, short term AND long term disability paid for, 2 weeks vacation to start, sick leave accrues at 80 hours a year, in-house (Golds Gym-level) gym with personal trainers provided, in-house cafeteria, 70% havre Work-From-Home capability and career pathing for every position.

Guess what? Can’t fill ‘em.

OK, I’ll get off MY soap box now.