Just asking. I wouldn't have ragged on you for that opinion in either case, as it is the normal, mainstream perception. :)
Also, thanks for being civil - some folks (mostly on other forums, mind) don't seem to have that ability. I'm glad you stopped lurking and started posting more often, you seem to be adding quite a bit to the discussion.
Thanks for the compliment.
I think with regards to your situation and the many others in your situation we have three choices. These three choices speak to a lot of our choices about everything else as well.
1. Employment is free market. Employers can discriminate against anyone for any reason. It's their money to spend.
2. Control that market. Discrimination against certain groups (hopefully not for ability, at least not yet) is illegal. Credit checks should be controlled. Only for financial and other fiduciary positions say. No discrimination against disability if you can do the job.
3. Just pay everyone who needs work and is ready, willing and able to work a sustenance salary until they find work.
In addition to any other consideration the problem with choice #2 and #3 is fraud. The cost of checking up on this is greater than the cost of just sending everyone a check. You'd almost need to assign everyone their own personal government minder.
So what happens is that the canard of disability, or so called "means testing" is created. What it really ends up being in reality is just the shutting up and warehousing of the loudest of our non-contributing members of society. Imagine the pain in the ass Baby-Man was to his minders before he was approved for SSI. How'd you like to spend years of your life as his social worker?
Reading about your interview process PTK, I personally feel for your situation. It sucks. If the employment situation in the US wasn't so FUBAR all of this would be a lot easier.
