19
   

How do you feel about congress cutting unemployment benefits?

 
 
2tfx
 
Reply Sat 28 Dec, 2013 04:17 pm
The tea baggers consider the unemployed as lazy and comfortable with getting federal money. That they are unwilling to get a job. This also applies to social security and medicare. Anyone getting so-called "entitlements".
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Question • Score: 19 • Views: 7,756 • Replies: 166

 
Jack of Hearts
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 05:39 pm
@2tfx,

Entitlements ARE - they are not "so-called".
I agree teabaggers do consider these people as such; thankfully, very few of them actually fit the description.
They would have 92 people go hungry as to stop 8 from milking the system.
No fraud should be tolerated whatsoever, and tens of millions should not go hungry.
I find it curious that so many claim widespread fraud, yet almost no one has somebody to which they can, (or are willing to) point a finger.
0 Replies
 
Jack of Hearts
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 06:45 pm
How do you feel about congress cutting unemployment benefits?

I see it as an unfortunate necessity.
IMO, too many are finding ways to sustain themselves on UI, and so the benefits must, in time, come to an end. I would think a combination of stepped lower benefits and less extensions - determined by the regional rate of unemployment - be utilized until all benefits expire in 24 months.
I acknowledge that this will have many become eligible for, not entitlements, but "welfare" benefits, such as housing subsidies and food-stamps. And while it seems most teabaggers would have these programs also cut; I would not have workers, now unemployed, go homeless, nor hungry.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 06:48 pm
@2tfx,
Not good.

Billions for war, and so on. Where is care for the people? This is crushing for many. The shape of the economy is not their fault. Neither are changes in out industrial capacity, and neither are imports from abroad, some of which I like - but I usually can't get because of worries about italian production of stuff in caves, and similar. Some I don't like, all the baddies re chinese dog food and tooth paste and who knows what else.

There was a craft era with the hippies, even I did macrame (yuck), but we don't seem to have many going into craft as a trade. This is too bad.
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 07:03 pm
It's time to limit unemployment to 6 months. The longer a person stays on unemployment compensation, the more likely it is that he/she will remain unemployed.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 07:32 pm
@Miller,
Miller wrote:

It's time to limit unemployment to 6 months. The longer a person stays on unemployment compensation, the more likely it is that he/she will remain unemployed.


Madel, there are no jobs out there. Some people are over qualified for any job, and won't get hired. The system benefits on doing more with less human intervention. Computers/robots have automated many functions, or possibly replaced five people with one person manning a computer/robot.

Only when there are jobs to be had, can one claim there should be a limit on the governmental safety net. Otherwise, an argument can be made that one is being less than ethical, or perhaps doing a Marie Antoinette, since there was no bread nor cake for the peasants to eat.

There are people with big hearts; what is one called with a small heart?

RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 Dec, 2013 08:27 pm
@Miller,
Are you as adamite about business entitlements? Or is it just the poor you enjoy kicking in the balls?
0 Replies
 
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:09 pm
@2tfx,
They are not cutting anything. They are returning to the original intent of the benefit.

See, this is what happens when Government stops doing what it is supposed to do, which is help expand the economy and help create jobs.

But the idiots in Congress think it is better to hand out tax dollars and buy the votes of the lazy rather than do their job.

I suppose we can cut unemployment benefits in the form of the pay checks for every Congress Person and President. They really are not doing their job.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:15 pm
@woiyo,
Quote:
when Government stops doing what it is supposed to do, which is help expand the economy and help create jobs.


Do you really think that the Government is responsible for expanding the economy and helping to create jobs?

And here, all this time, I thought you were a conservative.
woiyo
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 02:53 pm
@maxdancona,
Government helps spur economic growth by tax and monetary policies.

Federal Reserve policies as well as tax and budgetary policies effect economic growth.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 04:03 pm
@Foofie,
Foofie wrote:

Miller wrote:

It's time to limit unemployment to 6 months. The longer a person stays on unemployment compensation, the more likely it is that he/she will remain unemployed.


Madel, there are no jobs out there. Some people are over qualified for any job, and won't get hired. The system benefits on doing more with less human intervention. Computers/robots have automated many functions, or possibly replaced five people with one person manning a computer/robot.

Only when there are jobs to be had, can one claim there should be a limit on the governmental safety net. Otherwise, an argument can be made that one is being less than ethical, or perhaps doing a Marie Antoinette, since there was no bread nor cake for the peasants to eat.
There are people with big hearts; what is one called with a small heart?




Sorry to inform you , that heart size has no influence on economics. Recall, if you take the time, that at least one (1) economist recently won the nobel prize for demonstrating the relation between length of time spent receiving employment compensation and duration of unemployment. He/she demonstrated that the longer an individual received unemployment compensation, the longer that individual would remain unemployment.

The nobel prize in economics did not mention size of the human heart or for that matter, the size of any human organ, large or small.
Foofie
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 06:56 pm
@Miller,
Naturally the longer one remains unemployed, the less chance of being hired. But that is because the old job is just not there. Only retraining gets people hired. And, organizations want young people, so they get the best years out of an employee. Like the marriage market for Orthodox women, many employees "age out" of the job market quite early (unless they have a profession). The jobs available for many a person over 40 is either part time, or a half pay cut. Employers take advantage of the supply and demand. In my opinion, you are not really qualified for this thread, at least in an ethical sense, since you are functioning in the job market way above most employees.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 07:14 pm
@Foofie,

Quote:
Madel, there are no jobs out there


Thats not true.
There are jobs out there, but so many people are unwilling to do them. They consider those lobs "beneath them".
The trucking industry needs about 200,000 new drivers every year, just to keep up with demand.
Why wont anyone do that.

Here in Union County, the coal mines are begging for people. Its a good job with excellent benefits, and the starting pay is about $25 an hour

Someone with a college degree thinks that those type of job are beneath them, because they consider them a waste of their education.

It seems to me, and its the way I was raised, that when you need a job you take any job you can get.
To many people expect to start as the CEO of the company, instead of starting in the mailroom.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 11:26 pm
This is a tough one for me. I think there should be a limit on people living in the public trough, and that there is definite fraud happening. However, I think there is better places to start cutting funds then cutting unemployment benefits.

Seems that our current govt wants to pick at the tiny little pieces that have big headlines associated with them instead of tackling the big budget items like defense waste and spending. It's crazy to me how our leaders pick and choose their targets.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  0  
Reply Mon 30 Dec, 2013 11:48 pm
@McGentrix,
What is it now? 99 weeks?

Almost two years on the dole?

Yes, times are tough, but they have been tough (and tougher) before.

Even if we strip The Rich of all of their immorally obtained wealth we cannot support a nation of people who do not work and yet demand all of the benefits accrued from wages.

Not extending unemployment benefits is not cutting unemployment benefits.

Everyone cannot win and some will lose. Even the few principled progressives cannot establish an Eloi society in America. The rest are just trying to create a reliable voting base.

I've been unemployed and I've collected unemployment benefits. I was glad they were there but I always wanted to not need them.

We can't afford to guarantee the unemployed a livelihood through taxes.

Foofie
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 31 Dec, 2013 07:27 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:


Quote:
Madel, there are no jobs out there


Thats not true.
There are jobs out there, but so many people are unwilling to do them. They consider those lobs "beneath them".
The trucking industry needs about 200,000 new drivers every year, just to keep up with demand.
Why wont anyone do that.

Here in Union County, the coal mines are begging for people. Its a good job with excellent benefits, and the starting pay is about $25 an hour

Someone with a college degree thinks that those type of job are beneath them, because they consider them a waste of their education.

It seems to me, and its the way I was raised, that when you need a job you take any job you can get.
To many people expect to start as the CEO of the company, instead of starting in the mailroom.


By using the term "beneath them" you are dismissing the fact that when people spend time and money to get an education they are not going to take a job that historically went to a totally different demographic. For example, when many people in the rust belt become unemployed you do not see them pack up to go to urban centers. Possibly that has to do with the fact that the urban centers connote a lifestyle and people they want little to do with. I do not blame them. Anyway, you are just taking a close-minded opinion, in my opinion, that the onus should not be on the economy, and those that affect it.

Your suggestion is like, in my opinion, telling a Jew, in 1939 in some countries, that anti-Semitic acts would cease towards them, if they just converted. Your compassion is lovely; I hope no one in your family ever gets advice from you.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Tue 31 Dec, 2013 07:32 pm
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:

We can't afford to guarantee the unemployed a livelihood through taxes.



However, the people that made the decisions that priced our labor out of the job market, due to overseas cheap labor, effected a fait accompli. And, the people that moved the factories overseas effected a fait accompli. So, the poor unemployed guy with a wife and children to feed is up the creek without a paddle. As long as you had a good Christmas dinner is what counts. I understand how far your Christianity goes.
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Dec, 2013 08:15 pm
@ossobuco,
I am still for craft as necessary. Craft has worked in its way in silicon valley, but that is just a part of interest.

The slick part.



I have never had unemployment, over something like 50 years. But I get the need.


Teach craft.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Dec, 2013 08:41 pm
@Foofie,
Quote:

By using the term "beneath them" you are dismissing the fact that when people spend time and money to get an education they are not going to take a job that historically went to a totally different demographic


If the job is there and you refuse to take it, that tells me that you dont want a job. And if you dont want a job, why should you get unemployment benefits.
Foofie
 
  0  
Reply Wed 1 Jan, 2014 11:34 am
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

Quote:

By using the term "beneath them" you are dismissing the fact that when people spend time and money to get an education they are not going to take a job that historically went to a totally different demographic


If the job is there and you refuse to take it, that tells me that you dont want a job. And if you dont want a job, why should you get unemployment benefits.



Because even the military "matches" the person to his/her aptitude. They have people doing what they are best suited for. So, your approach just lets a person waste his/her life not using their mechanical/administrative/etc. skills, just because there is a job that is available. In other words, we are only young once, and this economy is just taking a generation of young people and thumbing its nose at them, in my opinion. The Soviets were no better, in my opnion, in that Communism promised everyone a job, even if it was a street sweeper (that majored in mathematics).

And to personalize your response by posting, "that tells me that you dont want a job" is sort of pompous, in my opinion. You are not the person to stand in judgement. Just make a cogent argument. Please take the ego out of it.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » How do you feel about congress cutting unemployment benefits?
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/17/2019 at 02:34:34