Auspicious title for a first thread, eh?
There's often the phrase 'Get a job' and an impetus associated with that.
But look at the word 'get'. If you want, you can get a rock or twig off the ground. That is something you can do, because you can simply physically act upon it.
Can you just act upon another person, or do you need their consent? (and by need I mean a nod toward holding a perhaps a common pattern of morality)
So you can't just act upon an employer and make/force him in order to obtain a job, as he is a person and not a rock or twig.
So this person has a choice about giving you a job. It is up to their whim.
"No, they need employees otherwise their income will suffer so...", perhaps you say?
But wait, isn't he or she supposed to have a choice? A genuine choice? Take this, for example: If you wanted to sleep with someone, and they would suffer income loss if they don't sleep with you, does that seem right? Or wrong? If that seems wrong, why is this any different?
"But this is a job, it's different, it can be more..."
More cut throat? You can start leaning on other peoples choices more and applying pressure so they don't really have a genuine choice? Would you like that happening to you? Is it already happening to you and reducing your quality of life?
Perhaps you've believed you could get, in the same way as you can get a rock or a twig, a job. Perhaps you've implied other people are able to, and so should. Perhaps you feel empowered to be able to get a job.
But it's not really compatable with the idea of letting others make genuine choices about their lives, is it?