Candorville by Darrin Bell


Comments (20) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. CFinFL

    CFinFL said, over 3 years ago

    “Look for higher paying jobs”—You are so funny today Mr. Bell. With realistic unemployment somewhere between 10 & 15 percent, depending on what area of the country you live in, I think most people feel fortunate to have ANY job, much less a higher paying one. Give a clue to all of those who unempoyment benefits will/have run out, where they can go for those any job, or high paying jobs openings.

  2. Sportymonk

    Sportymonk said, over 3 years ago

    Preach it Brother! I work 6 hours a day 3 – 5 days a week at major retailer. Nobody is full time except Store Manager and a handful of Supervisors. Everybody else if P/t with lousy not worth spit heath care (I declined). Work till 4 or 5. If 5 I have 30 minutes to get to next job working 5:30 – 2AM with 2 10 min breaks and 1 30 meal at 11PM. Off at 2 and in bed by 4. Again no health care there at all. (Contractor for a call center for a pharmaceutical mail order!) Have a BS in Math and Physics and 2 masters degrees. JCP is $8/Hr and the other is $11/Hr. Health Care out of my pocket for me and the wife is 945/month.

  3. wdpeck

    wdpeck said, over 3 years ago

    I’m getting that feeling of deja vu. Isn’t this strip from like six weeks back?

  4. griffon88

    griffon88 said, over 3 years ago

    Right, because obviously, this strip is talking about people getting higher paying jobs. No, this strip is talking about the government finding ways to get more income, and that includes taxes, especially on people and corporations that pay no taxes under our current system.
    “I like to pay taxes. With them, I buy civilization.”—Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

  5. redbaronss

    redbaronss said, over 3 years ago

    You’re right—it’s a commentary on raising revenue (taxes) versus cutting spending, and both sides are presented reasonably.

    Being generous, though, perhaps the commentor was just chiming in on another comment. This economy isn’t gentle on people seeking higher wages, especially older workers.

  6. Another Dave

    Another Dave said, over 3 years ago

    Sportymonk. Use

    It’s a search engine that draws off all the other search engines for job searches. It even remembers what you’ve searched and will periodically tell you how many new jobs in that search category there are.

  7. Lynxreign

    Lynxreign said, over 3 years ago

    But the government isn’t like a household, nor is it like a business. It controlls the currency and it is a fiat currency. If the government truly needs more money, it simply hits some keys on a computer and brings it into existence.
    The real constraint on the economy is the availability of resources: people. With the unemployment rate at over 7%, we have plenty of that.

  8. Nos Nevets

    Nos Nevets said, over 3 years ago

    Yet I’ll bet the guy to our right pulls in more salary than our friend Lemont.

  9. androgenoide

    androgenoide said, over 3 years ago

    A household borrows money to make major investments and when times are bad. A household that borrows money to meet daily expenses runs up against a wall pretty quickly. We have a government that has been borrowing money during boom times in order to avoid raising taxes and we have run up against that wall. Mind you, if we hadn’t been borrowing a trillion a year to fight two wars and the GDP hadn’t suddenly shrunk from the housing bust, that wall would still be in the future but, one way or another, it would still be there.

  10. mathteacher678

    mathteacher678 said, over 3 years ago

    “Get better jobs,” not “Borrow more money.”

  11. James Maxwell

    James Maxwell said, over 3 years ago

    Contrary to government figures unemployment is still around 15% to 25% depending upon where you live and your skin color. With all the “free” money the government throws at people many do not seek work but continue to live off the socialist dole. This does not help people but makes them even more controlled by the government welfare agencies. Cutting expenses, being more careful in what we buy and how we spend our money will help get our of our debt problems. Unfortunately the government does not understand fiscal responsibility or cutting its growth to get our of debt. Instead they want to raise our taxes even more and take more money out of our pocket to continue their extravagant life styles and BS programs.

  12. kerb berk

    kerb berk said, over 3 years ago

    The wise households, businesses and governments will NOT cut expenses OR increase revenue. They will do both. But our government seems to think that decreasing projected increases in spending is equivalent to cutting expenses, so that no cuts will happen. The most aggressive “cut” that I have heard would cut the rate of growth in expenses so that the budget balances in 10 years.
    This is moronic. If a household or business were to take 10 years just to stop living each day on credit, they would dig a hole out of which they would never get. There is great wisdom in making strategic cuts NOW that balance the budget NOW and then look for further opportunities for income and expense reduction to provide cash flow for the debt burden.
    Neither Lemont nor the “rich” guy on the right are correct. Both points of view are skewed.

  13. kerb berk

    kerb berk said, over 3 years ago

    (Sorry, that should have said “further opportunities for increasing income and reducing expenses”)

  14. androgenoide

    androgenoide said, over 3 years ago

    @kerb berk

    Absolutely agree that both points of view are skewed but there’s another factor that comes into play…
    Current economic models are predicated on the size of the economy (and therefore the GDP and the tax revenue) always growing with time. While this is not likely to be a sustainable model over the long haul, it does explain why they consider increasing expenditures to be consistent with a ‘balanced’ budget.
    In the long run we’ll need a more realistic economic model. In the short run, we need to tweak the current model to allow for the fact that the economy shrinks and stagnates from time to time.

  15. lmonteros

    lmonteros said, over 3 years ago


    Yeah, no kidding. When my UI benefits ran out, I had to take an early Social Security, and feel fortunate to have been able to do that. (Guvmint assistance!) No one in CA wants to hire anyone over 50, and they don’t need to with so many college grads who need jobs and can work for less.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (5).