Officials Say "Capes For the Unemployed" Plan Not Super

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Officials Say "Capes For the Unemployed" Plan Not Super

Posted by samzenpus on Wednesday April 20, 2011 @04:17AM from the best-and-worst-laid-plans dept.

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.

58 of 392 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Only.... by Jaysyn · 2011-04-20 04:19 · Score: 3, Informative

Only in Florida. I can say that cause I live in the crazy-ass state.

--
There is a war going on for your mind.
1. Re:Only.... by elrous0 · 2011-04-20 06:13 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  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.
2. Re:Only.... by Runaway1956 · 2011-04-20 06:39 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  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
3. Re:Only.... by Synn · 2011-04-20 06:43 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  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
4. Re:Only.... by Darinbob · 2011-04-20 07:34 · Score: 2
  
  You don't tug on Superman's cape
  You don't spit in to the wind
  You don't pull the mask of the old Lone Ranger
  And you don't mess around with your boss and his crazy ideas
5. Re:Only.... by hairyfeet · 2011-04-20 08:42 · Score: 2
  
  Oh Lord, and I thought I'd seen stupid when I had a client ask my opinion on the "new dynamic sales persons outfits" which looked like the Joker had thrown up! Hell they may have just named it MILFs for all the porn jokes they were gonna get!
  As for why this shit happens, I've usually found it is either someone who is sleeping with the boss that comes up with a "brilliant" idea, or in the case of the Joker pukes outfits it was a middle manager female that had already played the race card once and they were giving her enough rope to hang herself with.
  Needless to say after the Joker pukes outfits (they were like a puke purple and lime horror, no way you could take seriously with someone wearing this thing, they looked like a clown) they were able to fire her and when she tried playing the racism card again all it took was one showing of the joker pukes outfits with a bill on how much she spent on the things to get her charge dismissed.
  So I have to wonder if someone higher up wants to fire this moron but for one reason or another can't so they are giving him the rope and letting him do the job for them. With politics and relatives and other office bullshit I've seen it is often easier to let the stupid walk in front of a bus and write off the money they waste than try to fire them before they step off the curb. Is it wasteful and dumb? Yes but sometimes it is the only way to cut loose someone with connections or problems without having to deal with more expensive wrongful termination lawsuits later.
  
  --
  ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
6. Re:Only.... by ZombieBite · 2011-04-20 09:11 · Score: 2
  
  That's Mom I'd Like to Finance, right?
7. Re:Only.... by AK+Marc · 2011-04-20 09:35 · Score: 2
  
  My ideals line up well with libertarianism. Ever work in a large corporation? The best managers are the ones that tell you what to do, then work really hard to make sure no one else prevents you from doing your job. It's actually a lot of work in a large organization for a manager to intercept idle distractions, clear red tape, and otherwise allow those who do real work to get that done. The government should be a good manager. The government should lay down the basic framework to allow you to do the right thing, encourage you to do the right thing, then get the hell out of your way (and make sure no one else gets in your way) so you can do it.
  
  I want a small, nimble government that empowers the people without burdening them. The Libertarians said that's what they were about.
  
  Then, I went to those cult meetings. They were all Republicans who wanted the government to empower corporations, rather than people. The party platform had been pro-choice as long as I remember looking at that (which lines up with letting people make decisions for themselves and their family) but 100% of the other people in the room with me at a Libertarian Party meeting were pro-life. And so were the candidates in the area.
  
  What's all that have to do with the subject? Sometimes what the party says it is (not a bunch of racist hicks just out to start the new KKK party) is directly at odds with what one would see if they actually attended a meeting. Perhaps not everywhere. But at least in Alaska, one of the places the Teabaggers got a start, they are considered loons. Unfortunately, in Alaska, they are in good company, so that's why they are so strong there.
  
  --
  Learn to love Alaska
8. Re:Only.... by sycodon · 2011-04-20 10:11 · Score: 2
  
  "Dude" There is no "Tea Party".
  There are people who loosely organize gatherings under the label of "Tea Party" but there is no organization that can deny anyone from being in the "party". If anything it's analogous to calling yorself a Progressive.
  As for Shraia law, there are groups who's stated goal is to institute Sharai in the U.S. They are small fringe groups to be sure, but they exist.
  Your view of the people who label themselves as Tea Partiers is derived from incoherent news achors and Democrat party mouth pieces. You may want to actually look into the ideas these people have. You might find yourself agreeing with them if you truely have an open mind.
  
  --
  When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Don't like it by geek · 2011-04-20 04:21 · Score: 4, Interesting

I'm not opposed to the price tag. I think that's reasonable if spent on something motivational. What they did however, was in my opinion, demeaning to the unemployed. It's akin to your boss walking around the office and passing out candy bars for effort. Treating adults like little children is ridiculous. Lift them up, don't hold them down. The last thing these people needed while down on their luck and possibly in dire straits was for some jackass marketing person dressing them up like super heroes and playing fucking games with their self esteem. The people who thought this up should be fired in my opinion.
1. Re:Don't like it by j00r0m4nc3r · 2011-04-20 04:24 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  The people who thought this up should be fired in my opinion.
  
  Well that will help the unemployment problem for sure.
2. Re:Don't like it by residieu · 2011-04-20 04:26 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The people who thought this up should be fired in my opinion.
  Do they get one of the capes?
3. Re:Don't like it by dkleinsc · 2011-04-20 04:34 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  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 /. Long live http://www.soylentnews.com/
4. Re:Don't like it by Thud457 · 2011-04-20 04:45 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Edna Mode does not approve of this hair-brained government idea.
  
  --
  the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
5. Re:Don't like it by Joce640k · 2011-04-20 04:56 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  You think it's easier for older people?
  
  --
  No sig today...
6. Re:Don't like it by wiedzmin · 2011-04-20 05:05 · Score: 2
  
  I think the Slashdot repost is missing the point in the article:
  
  It's calling on its inspector general to expand an investigation launched into Workforce Central Florida last month. WFTV prompted that investigation when it reported the agency spent $250,000 tax dollars on staff cars.
  Now there's the overspending for you. Unless you call this motivation for their own staff, in which case never mind.
  
  --
  Bow before me, for I am root.
7. Re:Don't like it by MBGMorden · 2011-04-20 05:06 · Score: 2
  
  ... plus free lunches for everybody involved.
  Not all government agencies work that way. I work in government myself, and if a vendor or contractor that is displaying a product offers to provide lunch we're specifically instructed to refuse. We can go to lunch with them, but are required to pick up our own tab. The reasoning is simple: we want to avoid any possible accusations that purchasing decisions were based on "wining and dining".
  As a matter of fact, I'd say that the free lunches thing is probably way more prevalent in the private sector, where it might be frowned upon (by outsiders), but isn't actually illegal. When you're spending public money if one contractor loses a bid they can sue you if they think you had non-objective reasons for going with someone else.
  
  --
  "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
8. Re:Don't like it by JackieBrown · 2011-04-20 05:30 · Score: 2
  
  It is illegal in a lot of the private sector as well. There are a lot of regulations on lunches and gifts at least in the DME industry.
9. Re:Don't like it by darkwing_bmf · 2011-04-20 05:31 · Score: 2
  
  Eventually the old people will die off or be shipped to retirement homes. Then it will be your turn to call 30 somethings kids.
10. Re:Don't like it by NevarMore · 2011-04-20 05:33 · Score: 2
  
  Because when you're on unemployment your full time job is looking for another full time job. Being unemployed, in prison, or on welfare does not make you a slave of the state.
11. Re:Don't like it by hoggoth · 2011-04-20 05:38 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Watch as UnemployedMan steps into this phone booth, dons his bright red cape and emerges as... UnemployableMan!
  
  --
  - For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat /dev/random (may take some time)
12. Re:Don't like it by hedwards · 2011-04-20 05:47 · Score: 2
  
  So, my brother who just got laid off by his employer due to downsizing and has been working his butt off to find a new job, is being childish? Because clearly the money that he's getting which barely pays for health coverage and has a huge number of strings attached is conducive to his finding gainful employment which would allow him to get of government assistance.
  News flash, before I went back to school I was making a lot more than minimum wage and I could barely afford to pay my bills. Let alone the small fraction of my wages that I would have gotten from unemployment.
13. Re:Don't like it by macs4all · 2011-04-20 06:04 · Score: 2
  
  How about getting a job and earning money so you can take care of yourself?
  I believe the US is down to 4 job seekers for every opening from the recession high of 6 or 7, so clearly something is being done.
  In the meantime, you can go take remedial kindergarten math, since you apparently can't count.
  Yeah, I can tell you what is "being done": The people who are falling off the end of their unemployment benefits are simply "giving up" and going on Food Stamps and Welfare. So, not only do they no longer count as being "unemployed" (a statistic that ONLY counts people who are actually still receiving benefits), but are likely not being counted as "job seekers", because they technically AREN'T.
  
  I know that I, as an unemployed embedded developer with over THIRTY YEARS' of employment in that field, am pretty disgusted at having to face the prospect of "Would you like fries with that?"
14. Re:Don't like it by Chris+Mattern · 2011-04-20 06:05 · Score: 2
  
  What would YOU do for a Klondike Bar?
15. Re:Don't like it by Seumas · 2011-04-20 06:05 · Score: 2
  
  When they are ready to act like adults by getting jobs, we'll treat them like adults.
  When you are ready to act like an adult by acknowledging that most unemployment is a result of deliberate public policies meant to keep wages low and profits high, and not of some immaturity on the part of the unemployed, we'll treat you like an adult. Until then, go away, the big people are talking now.
  The potential of getting a job should be all the motivation necessary to utilize services that help you find jobs. Jobs are not plentiful and unemployment agencies do a terrible job at matching you up with positions for your experience and they can certainly be demoralizing places for demoralizing experiences. However, that doesn't change the fact that a potential job should be all you need to encourage you to try and get a job. If that's not enough, then any sort of gold star behavior rewarding treatment isn't going to help you, either.
  In this incident, I think that the intention was absolutely to replicate that same first-grade mentality of your teacher rewarding you for doing something you should do or your parents rewarding you for using the toilet or brushing your teeth. Of course, any reasonably intelligent person sees the action as demeaning. As if, again, they're children that need to be coddled and encouraged to do the things that are basic to their very own well-being and continued survival and self-sufficiency.
16. Re:Don't like it by Martin+Blank · 2011-04-20 06:08 · Score: 2
  
  I work for a contractor to a government entity functioning essentially as government staff. I have to adhere to both ethics policies, relying on the stricter of the two if there is overlap or conflict. This means that vendors can take me to lunch and can pay for it, but to a maximum of $5. One can barely get a fast food meal for $5. Since I work for a contractor, I am myself technically a vendor representative, and I cannot pay more than $5 for government employees' lunches. They, however, can buy me lunch.
  However, they can pay for lunch if we are already a customer, there is no sales pitch going on, and the meeting is primarily about business. This allows a vendor to cater a lunch if they're providing training, reviewing roadmaps, or holding user group meetings, though they are encouraged to keep the cost relatively low, and so we often end up with $3 Subway sandwiches and generic chips.
  There are a number of other requirements just around lunch, let alone all the other possible times when a gift could be exchanged or perceived to be exchanged. I avoid it just by paying my own way all the time and letting everyone else do the same.
  
  --
  You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
17. Re:Don't like it by Thud457 · 2011-04-20 06:20 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  It'll open up a job for someone in marketing who isn't a jackass .
  That umpossible.
  
  --
  the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
18. Re:Don't like it by Hazel+Bergeron · 2011-04-20 06:27 · Score: 2
  
  Have your own motivation, like being able to pay your rent and bills and feed yourself?
  Escape from total destruction, otherwise subtitled Arbeit macht frei, is the worst possible motivation for work. Also, work done out of desperation never sets you free.
  The only truly productive motivation for work is enjoyment of the work on offer. There are sufficient resources in the Western world to keep everyone fed and sheltered. Work only needs to be done out of enjoyment, becoming a synonym for productive leisure. The initiation of force by hoarders against people who want access to available resources stops this.
  Not enough jobs? Technology is serving its purpose. Cut the working week to four days.
19. Re:Don't like it by tjb · 2011-04-20 06:33 · Score: 2
  
  Here's the real kicker: When someone falls off the end of their UI benefits (the so-called "99-ers"), they are no longer counted in the statistics of "unemployed".
  That is not even remotely true. Why do people believe this lie?
  Educate your dumb ass here.
20. Re:Don't like it by RussellSHarris · 2011-04-20 06:44 · Score: 2
  
  So... I'm confused. Assuming you're actually an interviewer, are you disqualifying them from getting the job because they actually need a job, or are you disqualifying them because they were following the rules?
21. Re:Don't like it by Duradin · 2011-04-20 06:49 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  "And what is amazing is that, I'd be willing to bet that you wouldn't be willing to pick up that shovel yourself."
  Them picking up a shovel would destroy job opportunity. If they pick up a shovel it'd be silly to hire more "people" to do it for them, now wouldn't it? It's not laziness, its a strong desire to stimulate the economy.
22. Re:Don't like it by StikyPad · 2011-04-20 06:59 · Score: 2
  
  Im educated in the top 8 percent of US citizens since I have a MS in Applied Mathematics, and I have 4 years work experience in IT and scientific research. Why shouldn't I be able to get a job after applying to over 100?
  Because you're overqualified and you'd either cost more than a fresh, young graduate, or else you'd shortly move on to greener pastures.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
23. Re:Don't like it by mini+me · 2011-04-20 07:00 · Score: 2
  
  Yes, I do. A hobby is a business is a job. There is no difference. If you market yourself in such a way that an HR drone can tell the difference, you might want to rethink your presentation.
24. Re:Don't like it by jdgeorge · 2011-04-20 08:33 · Score: 2
  
  Most people now consider 18, 19, 20 year olds as "kids".
  Age of majority has been 21 in many countries for centuries. Your impression that there is a "new" effort to deprive people younger than 21 years of historical rights is not founded in fact.
25. Re:Don't like it by Gilmoure · 2011-04-20 10:24 · Score: 2
  
  Not to mention, goes off to war, or runs for local or state government. Sure, we'll trust you with human lives, public funds, etc. but no, we won't let you have a beer at the end of the day.
  I was two months shy when they raised the drinking age in Fla (yeah, I grew up in that screwed up state) and totally sucked that, after joining the military, I was entrusted with the means to blow up a city (gotta' love SAC) but not with a beer.
  'Course, a few years later, I got transferred to a base set in a dry county in North Carolina. WTF?
  
  --
  I drank what? -- Socrates
Missed opportunity by ZaMoose · 2011-04-20 04:22 · Score: 2

Let’s face it, they missed out on a real opportunity to establish the Green Jobs Lantern Corps.
Did the recipients have to pay cape-ital gains taxes?

--
I wish I had a kryptonite cross, because then you could keep Dracula and Superman away.
1. Re:Missed opportunity by dr_dank · 2011-04-20 04:40 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  I'm surprised they went public with this. Usually, these things are cloaked in secrecy.
  
  --
  Where does the school board find them and why do they keep sending them to ME?
2. Re:Missed opportunity by CarlDenny · 2011-04-20 05:40 · Score: 2
  
  This sort of thing shawl not be allowed to stand!
Targets For Ridicule by crow_t_robot · 2011-04-20 04:22 · Score: 4, Insightful

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.
1. Re:Targets For Ridicule by StikyPad · 2011-04-20 04:33 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  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.
  Right, because without explicitly pointing them out, the poor kids might simply be mistaken for very young hipsters.
  
  --
  https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
2. Re:Targets For Ridicule by MBGMorden · 2011-04-20 05:18 · Score: 2
  
  That's not exactly a new idea. I'm 29 and even when I was in middle and high school we used a "lunch card" system. EVERYONE used a lunch card with 10 strips on it (so 2 weeks worth of lunches) to get their lunch (there was a machine that shaved a strip off each time the lunch cashier checked you out). You would visit a desk in the lunchroom in the mornings before school started to get your cards. Just tell them your name. If they checked the chart and you were full price, it was $10 for 2 weeks. If you were at "reduced" price it was $4 for 2 weeks. If your name was free they simply issued you your card without charging on the same interval. I typically was on the "reduced" price lunches (semi-poor :)) until my last 2 years of high school when my dad's salary finally topped the bracket and pushed me into full price.
  Overall it was a good system, and heck even for the kids eating at "full price", and even 16-18 years ago, $10 for 2 weeks worth of meals wasn't a bad deal at all.
  
  --
  "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
At least Slashdot did it right by mangu · 2011-04-20 04:25 · Score: 5, Funny

Putting a story about the unemployed on "Idle"...
Even worse? by ShavedOrangutan · 2011-04-20 04:39 · Score: 4, Interesting

I wonder if the capes were made in China.

--
Godaddy is a scam and a ripoff.
1. Re:Even worse? by Rob+the+Bold · 2011-04-20 05:45 · Score: 2
  
  I wonder if the capes were made in China.
  Probably. It's been years since I've seen a cape factory in this country.
  
  --
  I am not a crackpot.
Better than their last idea by daremonai · 2011-04-20 04:43 · Score: 4, Informative

This is not as bad as Workforce Central Florida's previous idea: Careereoki.
I wish desperately I could say I was making this up, but I am not.
$14,000 for 6,000 capes? by sseaman · 2011-04-20 04:45 · Score: 2

I guess that didn't create any American jobs.
1. Re:$14,000 for 6,000 capes? by Antisyzygy · 2011-04-20 04:49 · Score: 2
  
  Neither do US corporations who are sitting on 10 trillion dollars of cash they will not spend on jobs.
  
  --
  That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
2. Re:$14,000 for 6,000 capes? by Antisyzygy · 2011-04-20 05:34 · Score: 2
  
  We are upset at this because CEO's and other board members are getting record breaking bonuses, corporations are getting major tax cuts, the wealthy has continued to have major tax cuts on capital gains and income, and all of it is sold as "Trickle down economics" which is supposed to create jobs for us peons in America. Its obvious it doesn't work in our present situation. If CEO's would take 2 million instead of 8 million as a bonus they could create 120 jobs. You can't blame a person for wanting to better their situation, but you can blame the government for being full of incompetent tools who don't try to curb this problem. America is on its way out because of greedy politicians who coddle the wealthy and throw bread and circuses for the masses of undereducated citizens. They would be better off investing in science and technology projects which create jobs as well as funding the people's education rather than cutting out their revenue from the wealthy and giving whats left to the masses of poor while racking up major debts that make our dollar collapse. Our purchasing power today is the reason gas prices are so high today, and thats because the dollar is weakening, and thats because corporations are artificially deflating their stock prices while sitting on masses of cash on the order of 10 trillion while over 10 percent of the population can't find a job or gave up and defaulted to social security.
  
  --
  That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
3. Re:$14,000 for 6,000 capes? by geekoid · 2011-04-20 05:55 · Score: 2
  
  'trickle down' never worked. Companies run as lean as they can, regardless of cash reserves.
  " government for being full of incompetent tools who don't try to curb this problem."
  The government is not full of incompetent tools. the US government is more efficient and productive them almost every corporation.
  Look at the numbers.
  What the hell is the government supposed to do about wealth on hand? How a companies chooses to pay t's CEOs?
  As far as taxes go, tax people not entities. When a CEO gets a a bonus, tax it at 75%
  
  --
  The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
4. Re:$14,000 for 6,000 capes? by Antisyzygy · 2011-04-20 06:21 · Score: 2
  
  They are not invested back into the market, its being paid out to CEO's and other board members, thats the point. In fact there would be way more cash reserves if CEO's and board members were not getting record bonuses. However, I do think my number was wrong. I heard it on the news the other day but I cannot find a reference so it must have been some kind of fuzzy number. I stand corrected, its only 1.6 trillion dollars, enough to create 32000 well paid jobs or almost 50000 mediocre ones.
  
  --
  That brings me to an interesting point, / . is just "the ramblings of socially-inept, technology-literate news-mongers".
Re:It's just a marketing by jittles · 2011-04-20 05:09 · Score: 3, Interesting

Did you RTFA? They are already under investigation for using $250,000 of government money to provide "company cars" to employees and had to repay over $3M to the Federal government after they were found to have mismanaged federal unemployment funds. Something tells me this isn't just a marketing campaign. They were doing someone a favor.
Re:I Do like it by DarkOx · 2011-04-20 05:12 · Score: 5, Insightful

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
This will be as effective as "WIN" buttons! by walterbyrd · 2011-04-20 05:55 · Score: 2

In the 1970s, Gerald Ford attempted to fix the US inflation problem by handing out "WIN" (Whip Inflation Now) buttons.
Yeah, that'll do it.
Ahem...NOT a government agency, folks by Radical+Moderate · 2011-04-20 06:08 · Score: 2

Workforce Central Florida appears to be a private, possibly "non-profit" (hard to tell from their website) agency that contracts with the state to provide unemployment services. You know, the Republican wet dream of privatizing government functions. Working out real well, isn't it? The Agency for Workforce Innovation, which IS a government agency, are the ones putting the kibosh on this ass-hattery.

--
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
1. Re:Ahem...NOT a government agency, folks by makomk · 2011-04-20 09:56 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  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.
They just didn't want to risk losing their jobs... by mmell · 2011-04-20 06:33 · Score: 3, Funny

...someone might make them wear some idiotic cape!
Re:I Do like it by bradk500 · 2011-04-20 07:20 · Score: 2

I'm sorry, did you actually say "not even good ones like a paper weight"? I'm 36 and have never once used or needed a paper weight in my life, but I do find capes are terrific for making grand entrances and exits!
Capes are Dangerous! by Tehrasha · 2011-04-20 14:29 · Score: 2

Did the lessons of The Incredibles fall on deaf ears? How many people might have been injured or killed wearing those capes?!