PDA

View Full Version : Hire Veterans, Get Tax Credit?



djones520
07-06-2011, 02:38 PM
President Obama just said he'd like to be able to offer tax credits to businesses that hire honorably discharged veterans.

Given that veterans have a high unemployment number, this could help boost hiring for them, but does it give them an unfair advantage over the unemployed who have not served?

What say ye?

fettpett
07-06-2011, 02:42 PM
sure, why not? one of the few things I agree with that he's suggested and/or done

lacarnut
07-06-2011, 05:21 PM
I think it is a great idea. For those soldiers that have a disability, the tax credit should be doubled.

Rockntractor
07-06-2011, 07:07 PM
Since Obama is doing the offering I would be careful of what might be attached.

Bailey
07-06-2011, 07:39 PM
Can we disagree with this and not get timed out?

Vets get many benefits as it is (and much deserved) but jobs are scarce as it is and you run the risk of hiring a less worthy employee just for the sake of a tax break.

djones520
07-06-2011, 07:41 PM
Can we disagree with this and not get timed out?

Vets get many benefits as it is (and much deserved) but jobs are scarce as it is and you run the risk of hiring a less worthy employee just for the sake of a tax break.

This isn't DU. We don't post polls to find people to ban.

Bailey
07-06-2011, 07:42 PM
This isn't DU. We don't post polls to find people to ban.

Just checking....

Kay
07-06-2011, 07:55 PM
I say yes it's a good idea. When I'm looking through resumes I always give preference
to those with military experience. What that person might lack in educational degrees
compared to other applicants, they more than make up for in discipline and leadership
skills that the average kid right out of college just doesn't have (in general).

When my son got out last year, he lucked into a great job opportunity by chance.
He noticed an add for an opening that had listed as a requirement "honorable
discharge from military service, preferably within the last 6 months". He applied
and got the job. The company - Chevron USA. In their recruiting program (the
same that they use to hire new college graduates), they require that 10% of all
new hires come from the military. It's an awesome policy. I'd have no problem
with them getting a tax credit for this.

Kay
07-06-2011, 08:09 PM
Vets get many benefits as it is (and much deserved) but jobs are scarce as it is and you run the risk of hiring a less worthy employee just for the sake of a tax break.

I don't agree that you run the risk of getting a less qualified employee. They still go through
the same interview process and background screening as any other applicant. Any company
that hires a less qualified applicant just for the tax credit would only hurt their own business;
plus that's part of doing business in a free capitalist society - the right to set your own hiring
practices and run your business into the ground chasing tax credits over qualified applicants.
If they are that dumb to do that, it's their right and they deserve to go out of bidness.

Yes, jobs are scarce in a lot of the country right now. But I have no problem giving preference
to veterans, especially in this day and time when they voluntarily signed up knowing two wars
were going on. They have more of a stake in this country if you ask me, over the kid that that
doesn't serve.

CueSi
07-07-2011, 03:20 AM
Depends on the job, I think. Sometimes an honorably discharged vet is a plus. Sometimes it's a neutral.

~QC

NJCardFan
07-07-2011, 09:35 AM
I vote other and here's why. Discrimination by any other word is still discrimination. Isn't something like this the main argument against Affirmative Action? When you start giving preferential treatment to one group or another, it excludes another group. We have this provision where I work. Military are given extra points when it comes to taking promotional tests meaning I can take the sergeants test and score a 93. Someone who served in the military can take the test and score 87 but they get 7 points due to military time so this puts them ahead of me by 1 point. Is this fair to me? Does simply being in the military guarantee that this person would be a better supervisor than I? I'm not saying discount military time completely but when it comes to an out and out advantage, this is something we as conservatives have been fighting against for decades with AA so simply saying it's OK and giving incentives to hire only military personnel is disingenuous.

lacarnut
07-07-2011, 10:46 AM
I vote other and here's why. Discrimination by any other word is still discrimination. Isn't something like this the main argument against Affirmative Action? When you start giving preferential treatment to one group or another, it excludes another group. We have this provision where I work. Military are given extra points when it comes to taking promotional tests meaning I can take the sergeants test and score a 93. Someone who served in the military can take the test and score 87 but they get 7 points due to military time so this puts them ahead of me by 1 point. Is this fair to me? Does simply being in the military guarantee that this person would be a better supervisor than I? I'm not saying discount military time completely but when it comes to an out and out advantage, this is something we as conservatives have been fighting against for decades with AA so simply saying it's OK and giving incentives to hire only military personnel is disingenuous.

Adding points to some one's score does not mean that they will get preferential treatment in the hiring process. Civil service takes the 5 top scores and ties. Hiring can be made from the top to the bottom of those 5. I worked with a guy at the Revenue department that scored over a 100 points because of the 10 points added to his test score for being a V.N. veteran . He applied for quite a few management positions and never got one. Having worked when affirmative action was in full force, I experienced the wrath of affirmative action. When a company decides that they will hire a woman or a black regardless of qualifications that is what I call discrimination. I don't think that Obama''s proposal does that. Plus, we are talking about apples to oranges when it comes to the the public vs the private sector. Management wants to hire the best employee in the private sector while in the public sector the worst gets the promotion in quite a few cases. Consequently, a company wants to hire the best employee because of the profit motive which is non existent in the public sector. I see nothing wrong in giving the veteran preferential treatment if two applicants have similar background and work experience. Plus, I do not think a company would give a veteran preference because of the tax credit if the company did not think he or she would be a beneficial addition. Now, maybe a union outfit like GM would but most of the jobs are being created by small business owners.

noonwitch
07-07-2011, 01:04 PM
If a business can get a state tax break for hiring parolees, they certainly should be able to get a federal one for hiring veterans.

MountainMan
07-07-2011, 11:50 PM
As a vet myself, I voted no. Veterans already get preference points when hiring on at almost all levels of government and at many large companies already.

This is pandering plain and simple from Obama, nothing more, nothing less.

lacarnut
07-08-2011, 12:14 AM
As a vet myself, I voted no. Veterans already get preference points when hiring on at almost all levels of government and at many large companies already.

This is pandering plain and simple from Obama, nothing more, nothing less.

80% of the hiring is being done by small business owners. Government hiring is going south. Plus, I am not aware of large companies giving preference points. FYI, Washington State is the only state in the US to give veterans preferential hiring over civilians.

AmPat
07-09-2011, 10:46 AM
I said no. I will be looking for a job soon. There are many out there that deserve the same job and I want to compete against them on my merit, not anything else. If part of that merit is my 26 years of service then that should be enough to get me hired. If the employer doesn't value my service then I'll keep looking. I'm ok with that.:cool:

Kay
07-09-2011, 01:32 PM
I think the last few posts are getting off track a little.
This is not about giving a preference for veterans in the
hiring process. It's about whether or not a business should
be given a tax credit for the vets they do hire. I still maintain
that businesses are not going to cut their own throat by
hiring less qualified people just for the tax credit. The job
will still go to the best qualified. As with all government
programs, the burden of filling out the paperwork to claim
the credit will keep a lot of companies from even bothering
with it anyway.

Molon Labe
07-09-2011, 01:47 PM
If a business can get a state tax break for hiring parolees, they certainly should be able to get a federal one for hiring veterans.

Wow.. didn't know that. Absolutely we should take care of veterans over frigin' criminals.