Obama Pushes States to Cover More Unemployed

[TheoPetro]

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: TheoPetro

Originally posted by: mugs

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123125893419357707.html

Ive got a great idea... lets take money away from the things that create jobs (businesses) and create an incentive for people to stay out of work longer! I sure hope this is a huge F-ing joke.

Yeah, those huuuuuuge unemployment checks are a big incentive to stay out of work. :laugh: It varies by state, but here in NJ unemployment covers 60% of your previous pay, up to a maximum of $584/week (equivalent to roughly $30k salary).

So if you were poor before you were on unemployment, you're even more poor on it. If you made plenty of money before you were on unemployment, unemployment pays a small fraction of what you previously made. Unemployment is not an incentive to not work. It keeps your head above water long enough to find another job.

The problem is that there are many adults who rely on income from part-time jobs just as much as people with full-time jobs rely on their income. They need unemployment benefits just as much as anyone else.

you have got to be kidding me. Heres a story from experience. A plumber's assistant here earns about $15/hr so he brings home about 480 a week. He QUITS (not fired) and applies for unemployment compensation. He gets it and gets about $360 for sitting on his ass when theres work available.

Should not have even received unemployment. States make it worthwhile for companies to contest invalid unemployment claims. I have no idea why the plumber didn't contest it.

There is another lady who worked as a secretary for about 4 months before we couldnt take any more of her and let her go. She applied for unemployment. Understandable, she was fired. Looking back through her resume her past jobs were all for about 4-6 months with a month gap between of all of them. She had about 4 jobs on there.

I have no idea what you're point is here. 1 month is a reasonable amount of time to find a job. If she wanted to milk unemployment, she would have waited until the end of the second month to start looking. I don't think I've ever even had a job where there was less than a month between my first interview and the offer.

Were a small ass company and I know of 2 other examples just off of the top of my head. Out of ~20 people who have been involved with the company there were at least 4 of them who got unemployment benefits and didnt need them. Thats a pretty large percentage if you ask me.

What is your basis for saying they "didn't need" unemployment benefits?

we did contest it. They said that we wouldnt have to pay for it but there still giving it to him and either the state was going to pick it up or the previous employers were (i dont remember the details)

My point in the second thing is she would work somewhere, get fired for "poor performance" or w/e, sit on her ass for a month or two, and then get another job and repeat.

They wouldnt have needed them if they could do an honest days work. They had trouble grasping the idea that you work for a living.

In fact I can think of only 1 case, out of the 4-5 I know of, that actually deserved unemployment. You can say "well you only get it if you were fired and youre looking for work and you need it and bla bla bla." I have seen people who break all of those rules still get unemployment.

I have ZERO problems with people who actually deserve it getting it but that seems to rarely happen.

As far as using this as a "stimulus" I hope you can at least agree that it is a poor plan to stimulate an economy.

 

[Elias824]

I really dont think unemployment needs any more help, its silly to give unemployment to people with part time jobs, perhaps unless they are working two? That means bum college kids like me can quit their job, and collect money for doing nothing.
Normally unemployment inst that bad, it offers normally working people a bridge to find a new job, although a smart person should just save money incase something like that happens. In Utah you do have to prove that you are actively looking for a new job to continue to collect unemployment, there is a time limit too but not sure what it is.

 

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: Elias824
That means bum college kids like me can quit their job, and collect money for doing nothing.

I think your reading comprehension skills need some work.

 

[HardcoreRobot]

Originally posted by: Farang

Originally posted by: HardcoreRobot

Originally posted by: PrinceofWands

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123125893419357707.html

Ive got a great idea... lets take money away from the things that create jobs (businesses) and create an incentive for people to stay out of work longer! I sure hope this is a huge F-ing joke.

That would be true, IF businesses were there to provide decent jobs. But they're not. They've become a vessel to make the rich richer for doing next to nothing, and hire as few people as possible at the lowest wages allowed by law with a complete lack of meaningful benefits. Until businesses start caring about the employees they don't deserve any support.

The only flaw in your reasoning is that you neglect to mention that ANYONE can start their own company, and all employment is voluntary. Employees are truly the ones in power, not the other way around. There is no basis to have sympathy when both parties are operating voluntarily.

Employment is voluntary just like taking a shit is voluntary. Sure you make a voluntary decision to do it, but good luck trying to live your life without shitting.

This makes no sense... you can live without working, ask any housewife, minor or college student. No one can live without defecating. In fact, your body may even force you do it against your will if it has to (I am not a doctor). Even if you feel employment is a need, or necessary evil (in fact is not - food/shelter/defecation are needs, employment is the common way of meeting those needs, but it is a small stretch), choosing *how* to support yourself is entirely voluntarily. maybe you have to shit, but you do get to choose if it is in a public toilet, porta-potty, or on the hood of some car. learn some skills. get educated. start a business. people get put into unfortunate circumstances no doubt, but it is ultimately their OWN responsibility to figure things out and adapt.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
I have ZERO problems with people who actually deserve it getting it but that seems to rarely happen.

According to your anecdotal evidence but that's probably a bunch of bullshit. Most who get it deserve it and most who get it would prefer to work and make their previous wages. It's just a stop gap until they can find another job. Sure there are some who abuse it as in don't look for work in their field but it's up to the state to make sure they are out trying to procure employment ion their field.

 

[RichardE]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: amdhunter
I am a Democrat and I think Obama will be the biggest douchebag President ever. He will make it so that the crackheads and poor in this country live better than the people who work for a living.

I swear, sometimes I think Democrats do nothing more than try to keep the poor [people] stupid and happy, while punishing the working class.

How else would they stay in power? They need the "poor" to get elected.

Didn't the wealthy and educated vote for Obama on masse? Dems need the poor, wealth and educated, repubs need the religious, rednecks and .... poor?



This is sucks btw

 

[dartworth]

Originally posted by: TheoPetro
I have ZERO problems with people who actually deserve it getting it but that seems to rarely happen.

:roll: