Ask HN: Laid off folks, are you getting hired?

My guess is you disagree because you don't understand how bad working class jobs pay. In my experience this is generally because I'm talking to someone who is middle class or wealthier and is largely out of touch. Please correct me if I'm wrong though. And no, your dad once being on benefits for a week a decade ago doesn't count.

Here's a real world example for you – my sister is a single mum with no qualifications. Were she to get a job and work her ass off the most she'll realistically make is about £20,000. Some of this will be taxed and she'll no longer receive state benefits. But if you're a single mum on benefits you make around £2,000 a month tax free and have housing provided. The fact you think she can work to afford a house and a better quality of life than this is almost laughable.

But to your point if you're a median earner, say someone who's middle class and you work your ass off, then yes, you'll probably make a bit more – maybe £28,000. But keep in mind you'll have to work every day of your life and struggle for that privilege.

Point is the statistics suggest something that isn't true – that most poor people in the UK are better off working.

To give another example, my girlfriend's mum is a single mum of 5 children. Last year she decided she wanted a part time job because she's getting bored sitting around doing drugs and drinking all day (this is actually what she said). My girlfriend was obviously really happy about this and went with her to the job centre to help her find work for the first time in her life. But guess what happen? The job centre advised her not to get a job because she would be financially worse off for doing so. Unlike the link you provided this isn't some hypothetical calculation based on median UK salaries verse some hypothetical entitlement to state benefits, is a real example of what happens when you're poor. And I could cite you more examples like this from real families I know. So I respectfully I don't think you know what you're talking about here.

And I'm sorry if I'm coming off as defensive, but I need you to understand I feel people like yourself are in part responsible for the crap I have to deal with on daily basis. This single mum I'm citing just this week went to hospital for liver failure. Had she got a job last year this probably wouldn't be happening. And almost all of the kids in my family end up on drugs, in prison or in gangs. In my opinion this is largely because they have no reason to work. It's fucking hard watching people you love in pain constantly and encouraged to fuck their lives up by the state.

I know I won't change your opinion, but I guess just question some of what you read and ask if the statistics are painting a representative picture. Maybe ask why so many people aren't getting jobs and choosing to live on benefits if what you're saying is correct – do you think they're just too stupid to understand that working would be better or something?

But you see, every time without fail I try to have this conversation someone like yourself pops up citing me stats trying to disprove things which I have direct experience with and it's frustrating because I just don't think this this can be resolved until more people suffer and understand what's happening to poor families.

Anyway, to be clear, because I wasn't in my last comment, I actually don't think benefits are generous enough, which might surprise you? The problem we have in the UK is that the majority of our tax gets allocated to boomers in one way or another, mostly via the NHS and pensions. Boomers as the wealthiest generation shouldn't be the largest beneficiary of state support at the cost of young workers. What we should do is keep all of the support currently offered but stop making that dependent on not having a job. What should be conditional is benefits like pensions and free healthcare to those with wealth (not income). Tax should be more dependant on wealth and not income. This would allow those trying to build wealth an easier path to do so while also taxing those with the most, not just those earning a lot but poor because they're single parents and need to pay for a house and two kids.

To your point on UK income tax rates being low relative to other European countries, I believe what I'm describing is a problem elsewhere in Europe too.

> For the vast majority of people in the UK, all the stats evidence that your life is likely to be way more pleasant if you’re earning.

I agree, but we're not all middle class.

> Salaries are lower than USA, the taxes are ridiculous, (progressive up to 50%), reasonably new house prices in reasonable locations are in millions.

Marginal tax rates in California are also around 50% as well (above or below, depending on income). Houses are certainly in the millions.

But on top of this you get to pay separately for extremely expensive health insurance and education, things that in most countries are very reasonably priced or even "free" (not free since it's paid for by the taxes, but at least you get services in exchange for your taxes, unlike in the US where you pay the taxes and have to pay separately for all the services).

Which is why the company works hard to convince someone who should be fired to quit. If they fire someone and don't mention that fact they can be sued for withholding information, but if the person quit on their own terms.

Note that there is a difference between being sued and losing in court. Even if you win you still need to pay your lawyers. I've had one lawyer tell me about spending nearly a million dollars in court for a case that was about $100,000 in asked damages that the lawyer knew based on facts they would lose - but [I can't talk about this part] made it impossible to figure out how to settle out of court.

Thanks that's what I figured.

Who would hire an employee they can't fully own.

A better answer might be to try to set up a phone call/email/etc with the other person and then you can back up your claim of 'no time' with real data, like "I have all this other background in networking and operating systems or whatever, and I also already know how to program in languages X,Y, and Z, and wrote these pieces of code at companies A,B, and C, so Python should be much easier for me than someone who just left university and meanwhile I bring all these other things to the table."

Remember: people don't (always) hire resumes. People hire people.