On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 07:35:38 GMT, sf > wrote:
> On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 06:20:54 -0700, The Ranger > wrote:
> > On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 04:19:51 GMT, sf > wrote:
> > > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 06:41:46 -0700, The Ranger > wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 14 Oct 2004 05:07:25 GMT, sf > wrote:
> > > > > On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 12:13:20 GMT, baker > wrote:
> > > > > > They chose to work there.
> > > > > >
> > > > > Said like a holier than thou person with job choice.
> > > > >
> > > > Everybody has choices...
> > > > >
> > > Their choice is between a rock and a hard place.
> > >
> > > Your choice was to turn a blind eye to the truth of the
> > > situation. None are so blind as those who will not see.
> >
> > You don't know me.
> >
> > I've [repeatedly] witnessed the go-get'em spirit
> > of people that refuse to give in to [the] apathy of being
> > "stuck in a job" and/or [the] self-loathing from a supreme
> > lack of confidence.
> >
> That is not the type of situation we were talking about.

Then explain it better.

You stated I turned a blind eye to someone being stuck because they
don't have any choices in a flat job market. I say that there are
always choices available, and used actual people I know as my
examples.

In every example I've ever met, where the "employee" felt trapped
in a job or was unwilling to improve their lot, it was solely their
private cell of apathy and/or self-loathing. "I can't afford to,"
"What if they catch me," "It's not so bad," "I'll never find," "I
can only do"... The excuses provided on why the person will not
move on are often only limited by their imagination.

> > Not one of those people, all socio-economically challenged,
> > felt "stuck" in some job or lacking in the number of choices
> > available to them in a given week while they took their run
> > at the brass ring.
> >
> > As I said, "Everybody has choices..."
> >
> Suuuuure, Ranger, you're right - I'm wrong.

I'm glad you're willing to admit it. It's a start.

> Non English speakers and people with severe mental
> or physical disabilities can succeed by sheer grit and
> determination.

And do succeed with surprising regularity. Are they all
Rockefellers or Stanfords or Morgans? Not hardly. But that's not
what we're talking about. We're talking about having choices on
where to work and the opportunities available to those that do.

> Ignore the fact that hard working people often have more
> than one (undesirable) job, but aren't getting ahead and
> will never be ahead.

I haven't ignored this or sluffed it off as you seem to think.

> Fortunately, some of them have children who are a
> success in anyone's book and should be able to take
> care of them in their old age

Non sequitur. This has NOTHING to do with making choices in any
type of job market.

> but others have children who are just like any other
> work-a-day folks who "man" the service oriented
> businesses near you.

Again, non sequitur. We're not talking about children. Stay focused
on the issue: choices people make about jobs.

[snip of sf's OT rant]
You let your bias get in the way of your reading comprehension
again. Do stay focused.

> The people YOU choose to denigrate are the very
> people who make your life easier!

And where, exactly did I denigrate these downtrodden people in my
previous passages?

> You need an attitude an adjustment.

Take your glasses off, Virginia. It's not my attitude that's so out
of whack with reality.

ObFood: The last Winchell's Donuts (around me) closed down about
five years ago. About the same time Krispy Creme opened out on the
northern coast of the PRC. Neither chain provide a very good
products; Winchell's were always greasy and Krispy's are
sickeningly sweet. "Happy Days Donuts," OTOH, are some of the best
I've enjoyed.

The Ranger