Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[Wild Hoss]

I don?t know that polling bears out this narrative that Trumps policies are incredibly popular. The tax bill was gravely unpopular, as was the attempt at repeal.

His divisive rhetoric is popular with his base. But his actual legislative priorities?

I tend to look at presidential approval as being a three-factor calculation for most people; personality, policy, and the economy...the last of which is generally out of the president's control of course. The import of each vs the others varies as well.

Obama finished with high approval ratings (Mid-Upper 50s over this final 15+months according to Gallup), despite being shackled to "bad" policy, because he scored well personally with Ds and INDs, and was backed by an improving economy. Using this template, it stands to reason that, with the economy being in good shape, Trump is failing on the other two fronts with large swaths of those polled.

YMMV, as always.

[iam416]

WH:

In the case of one business, they simply chose not to expand b/c workforce issues. But for most companies it's an increased cost. They eventually fill the jobs but the process can be lengthened. Additionally, if they test during employment they will invariably end up losing employees that they've invested in.

Meanwhile, otherwise hirable folks are not taking jobs that pay, at least, ok for the cost of living.

If you are trying to "woo" any company to relocate to your state, they will want to know about workforce. In the manufacturing space, those issues are training and drugs.

[Wild Hoss]

I find this sadly fascinating...the issue itself is not a surprise, but rather the scope. This has to contribute to the hiring of illegals as well.

[iam416]

Obama finished with high approval ratings (Mid-Upper 50s over this final 15+months according to Gallup), despite being shackled to "bad" policy, because he scored well personally with Ds and INDs, and was backed by an improving economy.

Obama finished "well" and his hand-picked successor managed to lose to the most woefully unqualified candidate in the history of our fair nation. Obama also managed to go from near historic majorities to decimation.

At the same time, he managed to get re-elected without much problem. Again, that certainly suggests folks liked him, at least better than Romney.

I find it a very interesting question -- the one I raised about personal distaste vs. policy disfavor. PDJT is such an issue of first impression in every election that I'm left wondering, just a little, if the Rs might not get completely shellacked in 2018.

[iam416]

I find this sadly fascinating...the issue itself is not a surprise, but rather the scope. This has to contribute to the hiring of illegals as well.

Well, heh, I'm not sure. Companies that are willing to break federal law with their hiring practices are probably willing to turn the other way on drug-testing.

Anyway, it's a favorite topic of my boss (oversold, but still real and problematic).

[froot loops]

I've read a few different articles where they have posited the theory that companies are so used to working in a labor environment where they didn't have to compete monetarily for workers that now they would just rather not fill the job or the leave the req open indefinitely. Or they want the perfect candidate to come in. This is a little bit different than what talent is talking about but kind of in the same vein. I'll see if I can find the article, but they really focused on the tech industry.

[iam416]

Tech industry is a different set of issues. Those are largely and purely quantity of qualified employees.

Manufacturing/blue collar jobs are more of what I'm talking about. The issues are most prevalent in more rural areas.

[Kapture1]

Obama finished "well" and his hand-picked successor managed to lose to the most woefully unqualified candidate in the history of our fair nation. Obama also managed to go from near historic majorities to decimation.

At the same time, he managed to get re-elected without much problem. Again, that certainly suggests folks liked him, at least better than Romney.

I find it a very interesting question -- the one I raised about personal distaste vs. policy disfavor. PDJT is such an issue of first impression in every election that I'm left wondering, just a little, if the Rs might not get completely shellacked in 2018.

to be fair, 0bama was only good at getting himself elected.

I think we are fine for 2018, tax cuts are putting money back in people's pockets, big name companies are reinvesting in factories and jobs, fund raising has been impressive. Conversely, the dems are about to turn down a deal that would offer protections to nearly three times as many as 0bama's DACA, they strongly opposed giving working Americans a tax cut, the DNC CEO just resigned due to poor fundraising, and with 5 different responses to the SOTU, dems are pretty divided, most wanting to drag the party to the far left.


we will see. I'm not too worried, but I could be wrong.

[Wild Hoss]

Obama finished "well" and his hand-picked successor managed to lose to the most woefully unqualified candidate in the history of our fair nation. Obama also managed to go from near historic majorities to decimation.

At the same time, he managed to get re-elected without much problem. Again, that certainly suggests folks liked him, at least better than Romney.

I find it a very interesting question -- the one I raised about personal distaste vs. policy disfavor. PDJT is such an issue of first impression in every election that I'm left wondering, just a little, if the Rs might not get completely shellacked in 2018.

Golfclap at "hand-picked successor".

IMO, the jury is out on the impact of presidential coattails or lack thereof. As you mention, Obama's didn't carry far...neither did Ws in good economic times (with war on the front burner). Both were re-elected. External events loom large as always.

The question as to whether the past provides much guidance at all in the current environment hovers overhead as well.

[Wild Hoss]

Well, heh, I'm not sure. Companies that are willing to break federal law with their hiring practices are probably willing to turn the other way on drug-testing.

LOL. Good point.

There probably is a subset that is more concerned with folks losing fingers because they are all reefered-up. Or, I'd hope so.

[iam416]

The question as to whether the past provides much guidance at all in the current environment hovers overhead as well.

Correct. As I said:

PDJT is such an issue of first impression in every election that I'm left wondering, just a little, if the Rs might not get completely shellacked in 2018.

The standard conclusion based on past results is that the Rs get whipped. Only a remarkably favorable Senate map gives them much hope. But, I've yet to be right about an election involving or relating to PDJT.

[iam416]

kapture:

As I've said before, I think PDJT could cure cancer and not get above 45%. He is THAT dislikeable.

However, I'm not entirely sure the electorate will take the Rs to task for PDJT's perceived (IMO, real) personal failings. If shit is good and they like the policies the Rs may be able to avoid a total asswhipping.

I rather doubt that scenario. I think the Rs are going to lose a fair number of gubernatorial races and at least one of the Senate or House and maybe both.

[Wild Hoss]

I have a hard time seeing a Blue Tsunami!!!!1...but I am in a state that elected Sam Brownback twice (I eschewed his call to fast on his behalf yesterday, and took the family out for chinese), so my perspective is skewed. There is literally nothing worse than a Democrat out here, and there are a lot of "out heres".

JMO, but the ideal result would be for the Senate to flip and the House to be close enough as to be contested on most issues...as so we have to see some actual governing done. I don?t have much interest in seeing so much legislative power go Blue as that the next two years are a complete shitshow of revenge committees.

[Da Geezer]

Trey Gowdy just announced he was not going to run again. He wants to go back to the Justice system. A good place to start would be as AG.

As to drug testing in blue-collar employment, some mention of the "why?' must include civil liability in litigation and workers comp cases. We always drug-test when hiring loggers not only for safety, but because worker comp rates skyrocket unless you test. There is no question that it has become harder to find workers in the past 6 months or so.

[Hannibal]

I have zero personal experience with a shortage of labor. The job openings that I have been exposed to -- either when I was searching for a job or when I have seen the hiring process from the inside -- always have been the labor buyer's market. In my profession, there has never been a time where you have to throw money at mediocre engineers and Plan C guys because there has been a shortage of qualified engineers. We don't get MIT and Stanford grads, but my company consistently hires intelligent, Grade B+/A- college graduates and we don't pay them more than our competitors. We reject lots of Grade B folks. Grade C folks never get a screening interview. If you haven't interned for at least two semesters before you apply for a permanent position, then you have next to zero chance of getting a job anywhere in the field on graduation.

It's pretty much like that for every profession that we hire in my company -- we can afford to be very picky.

On the flip side, I have never had an easy job search. I have never applied for a job where I didn't face stiff competition from good people. If there has been a labor shortage in my working life, then I have not seen it up close. How many people here in this forum, if they got laid off tomorrow, feel confident that they could find a comparable job in six months or less?