Slashdot Mirror
Officials Say "Capes For the Unemployed" Plan Not Super
After what must have been an epic marketing meeting, a Florida unemployment agency decided to give 6,000 red capes to the jobless as part of its "Cape-A-Bility Challenge" public relations campaign. The capes cost $14,000 (not a bad price for 6k capes actually) and featured a cartoon character named "Dr. Evil Unemployment." As one might imagine, officials are calling for an investigation to be launched. It's a good thing there are an abundance of caped do-gooders without jobs in the area who should be able to help.
a Florida unemployment agency decided to give 6,000 red capes to the jobless
To simplify the task of acquiring targets to point and laugh at? This is as brilliant as having children at school that can't afford lunch stand in a line to get lunch tickets/vouchers so the other kids know who the poor ones are to ridicule.
I'd be opposed to it for another totally obvious reason: The cape manufacturer probably is either a committee member's brother-in-law, or bribed the committee to spend public money on their company's stupid product.
Although I guess the cape could help the unemployed stay warm and dry when they're thrown out onto the street.
I am officially gone from
Maybe but its not Government's job to make you feel empowered. The Government should not be in the business of self esteem you precious little snowflake.
Someones tax dollars however few went to buy what are basically tchotchkes for the unemployed and not even good ones like a paper weight or something most recipients could make use of. Its simply irresponsible. If that tax (read other peoples hard earned money) money was going to be allocated to the unemployed it should been something useful like a card with some interview tips on it in their mailbox, or at the very worst an extra few dollars on their unemployment checks.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Crazy as that state is, there had to be at least *one* sane person in the room when that was pitched. Surely to god, there had to be one person there who saw the disaster coming. My question is "What kind of environment was so toxic that he wouldn't or couldn't speak up and challenge such an obviously FUCKING INSANE idea?" How beaten down and scared do you have to be before you let something like that slide by without comment? How crazy does a boss have to be before his subordinates are so tired that no one even bothers to say "I think this might be a bad idea."?
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
You seem to be making an assumption here. I have actually been the only sane person in a room - and, when I walked out, that left no sane people. Now, when you get a group of nutcases together, without any oversight at all - shit just happens. Take a look at both the Republican convention, and the Democratic convention. Go on - tell me that any of that crap makes sense to a sane person. I mean, ANY sane person - male, female, gay, bi, old, young, healthy, decrepit - even a sane retard would barf on anything that comes out of either of those conventions.
So, yes, I can easily imagine a bunch of crazies buying capes for the unemployed just as soon as the last sane person has walked out of the room.
What I'm really wondering is, how many of the unemployed actually wore the capes to fill out an application, or to an interview? And, how many of them got the job? Most likely, those capes were used for wiping rags, unless some Suzy Homemaker type used them to make something for her kids.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Sometimes people don't want to hear things or don't put a lot of value on underling opinions.
Was in a meeting when a client wanted a website called "Busted Moms" for a financial thing and just couldn't get the porn reference. The site got designed, published and everything, THEN taken down after all the work got done.
http://www.adrants.com/2009/03/sears-appeals-to-techie-moms-with-new.php
The conservative preference for letting private agencies compete to provide such services is such because that way idiotic contractors like this bunch can get thrown out, and the contracting agency can choose from others that will compete to show they're more serious about how they put taxpayers' money to work. If this had been a government agency, the people in it couldn't be fired, and would have little to no incentive for doing a better job.
Except that in practice, that doesn't happen - governments are consistently really bad at choosing competent private contractors, signing sensible contracts with them, holding them to account when they screw up, and kicking them out to replace them with a more competent contractor when it turns out the original couldn't run a piss-up in a brewery. Conservative governments are if anything slightly worse at this. Meanwhile, actual government employees are often far more competent.