Discuss Detroit Archives - Beginning January 2007 No Worker Left Behind Proposal Previous Next
Top of pageBottom of page

Danny
Member
Username: Danny

Post Number: 5501
Registered: 02-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 10:31 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

LANSING, Mich. -- Govenor Jennifer Granholm is expected to outline a new program for unemployed workers.

It is called the "No Worker Left Behind" Initiave. The plan is to provide training for an estimated 100,000 workers who have been displaced across Michigan.

A large part of the plan would pay for schooling for workers who obtain an associates degree or get technical training.


The tuition for community college is about $4,800 per student for a two-year degree. The total cost of the program is estimated at a half billion dollars.

There are requirements for the program. Workers would have to take a skills assesment test in a chosen program, such as nursing, computer technology, or auto mechanics.

State lawmakers are divided over the plan. Most Democrats tend to back the governor, while most Republicans said the plan needs work. GOP Leaders added that the plan should include help for businesses and focus on attracting new businesses.

Source: Channel 4 News http://www.clickondetroit.com/ news/10946401/detail.html

Will her new proposal work for the unemployed Michigan workers? Or a bust.
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 577
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 10:36 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

A program like this all ready exists, a friend who is a laid off construction worker is getting assistance to finish his associates.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mrjoshua
Member
Username: Mrjoshua

Post Number: 1189
Registered: 03-2005
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 10:36 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Comrade Granholm's original program was entitled "No Workers Left to Leave Behind" but her staff decided against it as being too realistic.
Top of pageBottom of page

321brian
Member
Username: 321brian

Post Number: 315
Registered: 02-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 11:14 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Seems like a good idea. Use tax dollars to help people get more job skills so they can find work out of state.
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 55
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 11:19 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Where do we get "a half billion dollars" from? Last I heard this state was broke as a joke.
Top of pageBottom of page

Sirrealone
Member
Username: Sirrealone

Post Number: 6
Registered: 01-2007
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 11:34 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Typical tax and spend philsophy at it's best. I like the idea of this in principle but just like all the other programs, they cost money. Money that we don't have. We need to figure out how to make do with what we have coming in. Raising taxes, whether they be sales or income, to pay for all these programs is not going to help this economy in any way, shape or form.

The proposals set forth are the equivilent of someone losing their job, but saying that they should go out and buy a bigger house with higher payments....because even though they can't afford it, at least it improves their quality of life. It'd be stupid for an individual to do that, and it's stupid if our government does it too.
Top of pageBottom of page

Johnlodge
Member
Username: Johnlodge

Post Number: 57
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 11:54 am: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I have to say I do agree with Granholms idea of saving some money by letting non-dangerous criminals out of prison. Get those potheads out of there, why am I paying for them to be in prison. They can go back home and sit on their couch and play Xbox like they should be.
Top of pageBottom of page

Michmeister
Member
Username: Michmeister

Post Number: 95
Registered: 10-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 12:18 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Paying long-term unemployment bennies to people who are trained for positions that will never be filled again, is probably even more expensive. Better to get them trained for jobs with a future than sit and collect, and hope a job pops up in their field sometime down the road.
Top of pageBottom of page

Bob
Member
Username: Bob

Post Number: 1352
Registered: 11-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 12:29 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

The feds are paying for this, so its not like we are paying for this out of the state coffers. MI qualifies for this because of our high unemployment rate. This could be a good thing if it trains people for jobs that exist in this state now, like health care.

(Message edited by bob on February 07, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 578
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 12:34 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Some of those funds should come from the unemployment insurance premiums that employers pay. Only fair as while employed the employer in most cases failed to provide updated training to the employee so his skills would not be obsolete. As preposterous as it sounds the big three and suppliers are hiring all the time while they lay off. Why couldn't some of these displaced workers be trained to fill the still open positions?
Top of pageBottom of page

Warriorfan
Member
Username: Warriorfan

Post Number: 642
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 12:40 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

What's the point in re-training if there are no jobs? I have a hard time believing that there are thousands of entry-level auto mechanic and computer technician jobs available in this state, and not everyone can be a nurse.

And besides, the anti-intellectualism in Metro Detroit is so rampant that I can't imagine many of these 30-something and 40-something unskilled laborers going back to school for two years to learn a new trade, they have been raised from birth to expect a high-paying labor job with full benefits simply because they have a high school diploma. The entitlement mentality runs too deep around here. Why, we can't ask some of these guys who have only a high school diploma to work for anything less than $25 an hour with full benefits and matching retirement, that would be blasphemy! Ford had a tuition reimbursement program for their workers, how many of them actually took advantage of it? And how many just decided to milk the golden goose for as long and then bitch about how it isn't laying anymore golden eggs after they milked it dry?
Top of pageBottom of page

Patrick
Member
Username: Patrick

Post Number: 3987
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 12:40 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Ok, then when they get the training then what happens? Their arent a whole lot of trade jobs available in MI at the moment. They can take those new skills and apply them in other states.How man more mechanics do we need? How many more electricians?
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2430
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 1:32 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Smith at WJR this AM really put Granholm on the defensive about where the money was going to come from. As a result, she was uncharacteristically very quiet and didn't answer the questions well.

Smith mentioned that he, as a college student, took out some loans and maxed his credit cards and worked instead of having the state bail him out for college tuition and was incensed that the state would embark on paying for college for others with his tax dollars and those from other taxpayers.
Top of pageBottom of page

Jdkeepsmiling
Member
Username: Jdkeepsmiling

Post Number: 173
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 1:33 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Warriorfan,
There are thousands of unfilled jobs out there. My father runs a body shop at a dealership and always complains about how hard it is to get quality bodymen. They either flunk their drug test or do not have the skills to work on todays cars. There is also a SEVERE shortage of workers in the health care industry. Nurses in Metro Detroit often get signing bonuses and incentive packages you would think they are professional athletes. There is a need for this retraining, and if we can shift around how money is spent to better address this problem, I cannot see a downside.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 237
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 3:41 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

As a laid off worker attending college, I think I have to support this plan. right now, my former employer will pay for this semester, but after that, I have to get a student loan. Not that I have a problem with that, but any help is welcome.

I wonder are they going to pay the worker directly, or just give the money directly to the school? Frankly, I'd rather have the cash. I'd go to school full time if I knew I didn't have to worry about my bills. Even if I still had to work part-time to cover some, I'd rather get school done as soon as possible instead of only taking 7-8 credits a semester, and taking 4 years just for an associates. And considering i plan on getting at least a bachelors, i could end up going far longer than that.
Top of pageBottom of page

Track75
Member
Username: Track75

Post Number: 2482
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 3:53 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Some of those funds should come from the unemployment insurance premiums that employers pay. Only fair as while employed the employer in most cases failed to provide updated training to the employee so his skills would not be obsolete.

This is a good example of the entitlement mentality that pervades Michigan. Cambrian's natural inclination is to see the company as the one responsible for a worker's skills.

Most people take it upon themselves to keep their work skills up to date. Why would an employer want to do business here if the workforce expects such an overly paternalistic employer? As an employer I'd prefer employees with more self-initiative.
Top of pageBottom of page

Cambrian
Member
Username: Cambrian

Post Number: 584
Registered: 08-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 4:12 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Right! we only exist just to provide low wage help that somehow has the money left to purchase products from these companies, this mentality hasn't worked out to good for the companies around here has it? They all ready do so much for our community, let's let them off the hook all together and raise the state income tax so individuals are responsible for everything. Smart one!
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1710
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 4:22 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So lets see, I am going to pony up more of my tax dollars to support someone going to school and still support the local Community College. Or even worse still paying off your college loans.

Make great sense me.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 239
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 4:44 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Consider the alternative, sj - Your tax dollars would go increasingly to welfare programs. Our cities decline even further, lowering property values. More companies leave, or don't come here at all, because of our untrained workforce. Retail stores, restaurants, etc, close because less people are able to afford such things unless it's on the clearance rack at wal-mart. With people's income decreasing, the state brings in less tax money, putting the state further in debt, forcing them to raise taxes even further, or cut services more, making it even less attractive to new companies.

So yes, it does make sense. Being surrounded by thousands of unemployed workers, regardless of your particular situation, is NOT good for you.
Top of pageBottom of page

Supersport
Member
Username: Supersport

Post Number: 11216
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 4:58 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

I'm sorry, but the fact that our governor believes you can turn people working in the manufacturing industry into health employees shows just how incompetent she really is.

Now granted, there are some who could make the switch via an education, but the vast majority could not. It's like saying you're going to turn your GM certified, top notch, able to fix anything mechanic into a brain surgeon.

A good number of people working in the manufacturing industry are doing so because college wasn't their thing, perhaps they are more of a hands on type of person. Everybody has their skills, and not everybody is able to learn skills to fill the need of every job. Has she ever taken into account that maybe a lot of these people are in the manufacturing industry because that is what they are best at?

Let's not forget, educated people are leaving this state left and right. Say this program moves forward, a decent number get the education they need, where are the jobs? There are quite a few openings in the health industry right now it seems, but hardly enough for the 10's of thousands out of work. This is just more fluff by our governor, the same shit everybody bought into that voted for her, believing she's doing the best she can....in 5 more years, blah, blah, blah.

It will be interesting to see just how she plans to invoke this "fair tax." It will be even more interesting to see how she plans to draw in new companies to the state if she gets this new tax, which will likely be most directed at big business.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2432
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:13 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Granholm's quite the cost cutter. She plans to cut two areas and increase spending in three dozen others, according to her speech.

Does she has the votes in the legislature to pull that off? Even her party isn't that stupid, isn't it?
Top of pageBottom of page

_sj_
Member
Username: _sj_

Post Number: 1711
Registered: 12-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:15 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Don't even get me started on welfare programs and those issues.
Top of pageBottom of page

Mthouston
Member
Username: Mthouston

Post Number: 705
Registered: 01-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:27 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Granholm's quite the cost cutter. She plans to cut two areas and increase spending in three dozen others, according to her speech.


Yup, (won't happen)

quote:

Does she has the votes in the legislature to pull that off?


Nope.
quote:

Even her party isn't that stupid, isn't it?


Some of them are.
Top of pageBottom of page

Scottr
Member
Username: Scottr

Post Number: 241
Registered: 07-2006
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:37 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

So you'd rather have thousands of people homeless or living in squalor because of corporations bent on making an instant buck, sj? Here's an idea to help avoid that, and you're worried about paying a couple extra bucks in taxes. I'm not thrilled about tax increases myself, and we can't tax ourselves into prosperity, but the fact is that we need something to improve this economy, and here's a plan to actually train people rather than just give them money, which is a sure way to continue the problem indefinitely. This is certainly better than welfare.

Many with similar feelings as you would be the first to bring up her 'blown away' speech, but then when a plan comes about to actually do something about all this, the only one you're worried about is you. that's just great. I sure hope you never have to face what so many of us already are.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2434
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 5:51 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

...and here's a plan to actually train people rather than just give them money, which is a sure way to continue the problem indefinitely. This is certainly better than welfare.


Only two states (of which, Michigan is one) still do not have time limits on welfare. Without a steady welfare income, some recipients might get off their asses and look for work--maybe out of state.

So, how does providing education "free" (meaning: either paid out of tobacco settlement money [which could be spent in a better way, BTW] or by taxpayers) help the situation when the jobs are a state away. They'll just be trained on my and your dimes and leave about as soon as they're trained.

We're already doing just that with our college and high school grads at present, when they leave the state. It's counter productive--worse than doing nothing...

(Message edited by LivernoisYard on February 07, 2007)
Top of pageBottom of page

Fnemecek
Member
Username: Fnemecek

Post Number: 2354
Registered: 12-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 6:52 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Comrade Granholm's original program was entitled "No Workers Left to Leave Behind" but her staff decided against it as being too realistic.


quote:

Typical tax and spend philsophy at it's best.


quote:

Granholm's quite the cost cutter. She plans to cut two areas and increase spending in three dozen others, according to her speech.


Brilliant! President Bush proposes 10 times more government spending than Governor Granholm and no one on the right bats an eyelash.

Nice to see everyone is so intellectually consistent.
quote:

Raising taxes, whether they be sales or income, to pay for all these programs is not going to help this economy in any way, shape or form.


Yes, because all of those states with higher taxes than us are do so much better.

Minnesota? Ohio? They'll close any day now.

Illinois? Massachusetts? New York? No businesses are locating there.
Top of pageBottom of page

Livernoisyard
Member
Username: Livernoisyard

Post Number: 2436
Registered: 10-2004
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 7:47 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

quote:

Brilliant! President Bush proposes 10 times more government spending than Governor Granholm and no one on the right bats an eyelash.

Nice to see everyone is so intellectually consistent.


Just why do you think the GOP lost the last election?

It surely wasn't due that much to the Democrats, but instead it was due to many fiscal conservatives who stayed home on that day last November when they couldn't see much difference in government spending between Bush and the Dem's tax and spenders.

And BTW, your gestimate of "10 times" more spending proposed by Bush is spread over all 50 states and the District of Columbia, whereas Granholm's proposed spending stays almost all within the confines of Michigan.

Again, your slow math apprehension let you down.
Top of pageBottom of page

Iseries840
Member
Username: Iseries840

Post Number: 338
Registered: 08-2005
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 7:47 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Where does personal responsibility come into play here?
Top of pageBottom of page

Patrick
Member
Username: Patrick

Post Number: 3995
Registered: 10-2003
Posted on Wednesday, February 07, 2007 - 11:35 pm: Edit PostDelete PostMove Post (Moderator/Admin Only)

Off-topic: Scottr,if you are short on time look into taking the CLEP exam at your school. Every college has it. You can take these exams, up to 30 some credits. if you pass you get the credit for the class. Every college has a limit to the number of credits though. If you know a thing or two about English or History I suggest you take one. They do cost $50 plus and you dont get a refund if you fail. It does save a lot of time and money if you do pass.

Add Your Message Here
Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.