19
   

How do you feel about congress cutting unemployment benefits?

 
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2014 06:27 pm
This just out:

Senate Fails to Advance Bill Extending Benefits for Long-Term Unemployed

The vote was 55-45 against.

At least one Republican Senator voted for the extension.

Given that Dems hold the majority, what does this say?

(Surely, someone will wander into this thread and tell us that it means the Republicans hate America)

Reid offered consideration of GOP amendments, but only if they passed by a super majority. What an offer!

Here is the practical consequence of Obama's constant extra-Constitutional fiats that play loose with laws enacted by Congress: Republicans are going to be even less ready to compromise because they, rightly, fear that the president will shrug off their side of the compromise with an Executive fiat.



Jack of Hearts
 
  2  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2014 06:35 pm
@Miller,
Miller wrote:
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.

Yes, recall the demonstration he/she made, (I also can't remember, and can't even seem to find the year this urban legend began), But I do remember that unemployment always preceded the checks, not the other way around.
The Nobel Prize should go to the one who proves suitable employment comes quicker to those who stop getting checks, than to those who find proper employment while still getting compensation.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 14 Jan, 2014 09:04 pm
@Jack of Hearts,
Isn't it amazing how so many believe people prefer unemployment checks over pay ā°checks.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  2  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2014 08:37 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Have you ever witnessed what happens when a college-educated person applies for a job like "this?"

Yes.

Finn D'Abuzz wrote:
Anecdotal evidence, I know,

Exactly.

Finn D'Abuzz wrote:
So MM's upbringing that led him to believe that working, at any job, is better than accepting a handout is because he is incurious?

The grammatical structure of your question is difficult to parse, so I'll just answer the question I think you're asking.

I think if Mysteryman was more curious and less prejudiced, he would have figured out that anectdotal evidence, even evidence from the entire Kentucky trucking industry, is not representative of all sectors of the job market in all states of the US. Consequently, he wouldn't have suggested that the US job market has problems because US workers typically weren't raised the way he was. US workers six years ago were raised pretty much the same way as today's US workers are --- for the most part, they're the same people. And yet, long-term unemployment in the US was rare six years ago; it's pervasive today. So while something must have changed, and while something that changed pushed up long-term unemployment, it wasn't the way US workers were raised. And a more curious person would have figured that out.
Thomas
 
  4  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2014 08:54 am
@Finn dAbuzz,
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
The vote was 55-45 against.

False. The vote was 55-45 in favor, but fell short of the 60-40 that were needed for the bill to advance.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
At least one Republican Senator voted for the extension.
Given that Dems hold the majority, what does this say?

Nothing about the Democrats. If you think it does, you need to brush up on your arithmetic. A 55-45 vote in favor is pretty much what you expect from a party-line outcome.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:
(Surely, someone will wander into this thread and tell us that it means the Republicans hate America)

And surely, someone will wander into this thread and jump right from faulty arithmetic to paranoid rant about Obama. Oh, wait! You already have!
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2014 08:31 pm
@Thomas,
You're right. I misread the article in the Washington Post.

I stand corrected.

How is it paranoid that Republicans are going to be less likely to come to compromises because of Obama's infringing upon the role of congress?

It's not like's he's taken it upon himself to unilaterally make changes to the ACA.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Wed 15 Jan, 2014 08:39 pm
@Thomas,
Thomas wrote:

Finn D'Abuzz wrote:
Anecdotal evidence, I know,

Exactly.
Such as your must be
Finn D'Abuzz wrote:
So MM's upbringing that led him to believe that working, at any job, is better than accepting a handout is because he is incurious?


The grammatical structure of your question is difficult to parse, so I'll just answer the question I think you're asking.

...he wouldn't have suggested that the US job market has problems because US workers typically weren't raised the way he was.


We'll have to ask MM but I don't believe that his comment was intended to address the job market, but rather today's "job seekers," nor do I think he is suggesting that all "job seekers" are not willing to take a job they believe is below their station or not appropriate to their level of education.

0 Replies
 
 

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
 
Copyright © 2019 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/23/2019 at 09:35:29