@Intrepid_Place53900

Businesses have increased wages quite a bit, but it's not bringing enough of these people back into the labor force. Why?

If they were, across the board and in meaningful amounts, there wouldn't be a problem.

I often hear people blame "The damn unions not allowing companies to survive economically" when discussing Yellow Trucking going under recently. What these people don't recognize or acknowledge are the facts that:

• Yellow employees DID accept very substantial pay and benefit cuts when the company was in financial trouble, twice in the last dozen years
• These cuts were not "given back" to the employees once the company's finances turned around
• Yellow took on 1.5 BILLION of debt over the last several years, half of it government emergency bailout money. Employees watched executives take huge raises and bonuses, while their pay stayed flat and their equipment and facilities didn't get maintained much less upgraded
• As with UPS drivers IIRC, one of their issues was annual pay increases that lagged the rate of inflation, so they were getting less buying power over time in exchange for their work. Not sure if hyperbole but some claimed many runs balanced out to less than minimum wage
• Regardless of one's position on the entirety of socialism et al or zero sum games, Yellow stands as yet another example of money in America getting concentrated into fewer and fewer hands "at the top" to the detriment of hard working individuals in the ranks

@Lone_Ranger "There is no shortage of waiters and cooks, there is only a shortage of waiters and cooks that want to work for 2019 prices".

In the USA, definitely shortage of labor since covid especially. Its mostly in low skilled jobs, that include hospitality/travel,etc.

a lot of older people, stopped working during the VID and didn't go back.

A lot of younger people, live off their parents, who enable it.

The govt also, is happy to give money to people who don't want to work.

Businesses have increased wages quite a bit, but it's not bringing enough of these people back into the labor force. Why? I'm not sure. I have to wonder how these people are living without earning any money. Again, are they fully living off of parents and/or the govt?

It's definitely a strange environment. I talk to lots of business owners/managers and it's really tough for them to get staffing.

@Victor " Getting them was easy, what was hard for me was keeping the attraction. Which is what ultimately lead me to TRP".

Absolutely true, getting a girl is not really that hard. Keeping a girl/relationship going LTR, it takes work, on both sides. I think the younger you are, you probably are having trouble actually "finding" a girl who's worth the effort of a LTR.

"Its probably cause I'm young, and brain hasn't fully developed. I'm just hoping that it gets better with time".

that's a yes and no.

You should focus more on yourself, your goals, your view should be to be with girls, experience them, find out what you like , what you don't like,etc and don't expect a LTR. You should actually be telling yourself, this won't be a LTR, the girl would have to wow me, and that's probably not gonna happen.

As the years pass along with the girls, I think things become clearer for guys.

I mean, you should've seen a lot, you now know what you like, what you don't.

What girl is worth some effort, what girl is just for fun, right off the bat.

But, I think also you get some clarity from experience and possibly your hormones , being better able to control the urges of testosterone helps a lot.

Should help you not waste time/effort on girls not worth it.

Women go through this too, . The fun/hoe phase, bad relationships, then the wall years.

they learn, experience, get more focused on what they want. Some learn, some don't.

Yup, they can still hoe anytime they want. In terms of relationships, they trade off "hot" for "provider", etc.

So, if you are young, think about it, the girls you are also seeing are young and in the hoe phase and just want fun, they want what they want,etc. They aren't LTR material typically and they don't really want a LTR. They want a relationship and sex with a guy for fun/convenience. It's not that they want to marry that guy. Most of them actually don't realize this, then when they feel the need to move on, the create issues, and so on, to feel good about leaving that jerk. sarc

It's why guys under 30, I recommend they really don't do LTR's, or go into them with expectation it's a learning process, don't expect it to be more than one year and make sure you keep your goals moving forward. Always assume it's not going to work out and make sure you have options (lift, keep earning ,etc). Don't share purchases, don't spend money on them etc, make it easy to split.

I'm old and I'm still doing that. I'm in a LTR, we don't share purchases,etc. she wants a ring, knows it will never happen and I remind her, we keep finances split so we can easily eject. We are only here because we want to be.

@Intrepid_Place53900

don't believe the articles from the last 20 years saying C02 is the issue, it's (PAID) research.

Water vapor is much more important. Like the recent volcanic eruption that added 10% or more water vapor across the globe. But, you don't see that in the MSM, because they don't want to confuse the C02 narrative.

First off, it's C-OH-2, not C-Zero-2. Hard to come off as credible yourself when you botch the fundamentals at a middle school chemistry level like that.

Also, excess atmospheric water vapor quickly resolves itself through rain. CO2 gets removed through much slower mechanisms, and mankind is concurrently destroying mature tree stands, one of the planet's main mechanism for maintaining CO2 homeostasis. The health of ocean organisms that also perform this function is suffering human caused damage as well, though I'm not as well versed in these mechanisms. Another thing, unlike water vapor, converting billions of tons per year of sequestered carbon into atmospheric CO2 can lead to a runaway reaction where resulting higher temperatures spontaneously release more sequestered carbon without human effort (or use/benefit.)

Somewhere downthread, someone suggested looking at CO concentration in the atmosphere as if that alone proved it insignificant to climate effects. This is uncritically passing along energy interest values and memes; I'd like to hear people who assert this able to show their work to support the claim that the current concentration is actually not significant including a range of influence on greenhouse effect.

@Intrepid_Place53900

Not really, the govt has already made it clear that this is hoax. how? by censoring and/or cancelling anyone against it, and by directing $$ to it .

that's all you need to see

Classic throwing out the baby with the bathwater. Careful about that.

You can go just as wrong casually adopting the values of energy interests that push "Climate change is 100% BS" memes as people can blindly following environmentalists overselling the danger in a misguided attempt at motivation do claiming things like "Coastal towns will be underwater in 20 years."

There exist big-money interests on many sides of most "issues" that come up in mainstream news. Swallowing a different blue pill is no virtue. I observe a lot of climate change skeptics and deniers only know enough on the topic to throw out counter-memes, but not anywhere close to enough to make any kind of objective case in their own words to support their positions. Naive supporters and deniers of any cause can become equally annoying and unhelpful.