Rep. John Shadegg: 'Unemployment recipients sit on money'

[Bird222]

Ok, now I have heard it all. In making the case for why extending the Bush tax cuts is more important for the economy than extending unemployment benefits; he actually said unemployed people will hold on to the money. WOW!!! Yeah, hold on to it long enough to drive to the store for some food. How many unemployed people do you know that can afford to actually sit on those checks and NOT pump that money right back into the economy?

 

[feralkid]

I put my unemployment checks into gold. Live off Glen Beck's tears and free market air.

Everyone knows this.

 

[bamacre]

I put my unemployment checks into gold. Live off Glen Beck's tears and free market air.

Everyone knows this.

Looks like Soros has been listening to Beck...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...nding-as-etps-hold-9-years-of-u-s-output.html

 

[Fear No Evil]

Looks like Soros has been listening to Beck...
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-...nding-as-etps-hold-9-years-of-u-s-output.html

Wow. Beck really is one of the most powerful people on the planet. No wonder why Obama is so afraid of him.

 

[boomerang]

Ok, now I have heard it all. In making the case for why extending the Bush tax cuts is more important for the economy than extending unemployment benefits; he actually said unemployed people will hold on to the money. WOW!!! Yeah, hold on to it long enough to drive to the store for some food. How many unemployed people do you know that can afford to actually sit on those checks and NOT pump that money right back into the economy?

A link would give your post more credibility.

 

[xj0hnx]

A link would give your post more credibility.

Well, this thread is the number 1 Google result when you Google "John Shadegg Unemployment recipients sit on money"

 

[halik]

Ok, now I have heard it all. In making the case for why extending the Bush tax cuts is more important for the economy than extending unemployment benefits; he actually said unemployed people will hold on to the money. WOW!!! Yeah, hold on to it long enough to drive to the store for some food. How many unemployed people do you know that can afford to actually sit on those checks and NOT pump that money right back into the economy?

Lulz the max in Michigan is 1350/mo or 16K a year. That leaves a lot of disposable income...

 

[drebo]

Lulz the max in Michigan is 1350/mo or 16K a year. That leaves a lot of disposable income...

When you're not paying your mortgage because the banks can't evict you, it probably does.

 

[halik]

When you're not paying your mortgage because the banks can't evict you, it probably does.

Do a budget on 1350/mo before tax and see how much that leaves you even when your housing is free. Not exactly making it rain.

 

[JeffreyLebowski]

Them sitting on it or spending it isn't helping anything. They are spending the money on necessities that they would be spending money on if they had a job.
To keep extending unemployment is to extend leeching off of the government tit. Some people are looking for work, but others aren't looking for work because they have a free ride now.

 

[Dr. Zaus]

Drebo is clearly a single male; most likely a university student.

Further, there is no such thing as sitting on money! If you don't spend it then it is in a bank and becomes lower interest rates for others. If it isn't in a bank then it is in investments and directly becomes expansion funds for corporations.

That the unemployed will allocate more of the nations resources to the demand side and less to lowering costs is something that we may need right now; but looking at both sides of where government debt goes is important when doing voodoo economics.

Some people are looking for work, but others aren't looking for work because they have a free ride now.

This is why unemployment should keep paying you for as-long as it lasts until you have a job that matches or exceeds your previous income.

 

[halik]

Drebo is clearly a single male; most likely a university student.

Further, there is no such thing as sitting on money! If you don't spend it then it is in a bank and becomes lower interest rates for others. If it isn't in a bank then it is in investments and directly becomes expansion funds for corporations.

That the unemployed will allocate more of the nations resources to the demand side and less to lowering costs is something that we may need right now; but looking at both sides of where government debt goes is important when doing voodoo economics.

I would have to agree. It's unrealistic to expect that an average family that loses 1 stream of income can immediately downsize to the new budget constraint. Most people have fixed overhead that takes time to lower (houses, cars, food, healthcare, school etc. etc)

 

[sandorski]

lol. Someone is out of touch with the Common Man.

 

[JSt0rm]

so lets see we have 25 million unemployed and 3 million open jobs. It's looking scary out there. Of course we should cut unemployment benefits and give tax breaks the the top .10%. That will go over well.

 

[Siddhartha]

Are the unemployed are the 21th century welfare kings and queens?

 

[sactoking]

so lets see we have 25 million unemployed and 3 million open jobs. It's looking scary out there. Of course we should cut unemployment benefits and give tax breaks the the top .10%. That will go over well.

You know what we shouldn't do? Extend unemployment benefits.

I live in the state with the worst unemployment in the nation. Unemployment had not gone down since 2005 until last month when it went down .2% only because more people moved out of the state than filed for benefits. Yet still I see lots of jobs going unfilled. Unemployment here only requires that you accept a job with comparable responsibility to what you had prior to being laid off. Places like Amazon and Barnes and Noble are hiring workers to start at $14 per hour and can't find enough people because unemployment pays $400 per week to do nothing. That's 70% of the pay plus 39 hours per week of free time (since it really only takes about an hour per week to do what's necessary to continue to qualify for benefits.)

 

[JSt0rm]

You know what we shouldn't do? Extend unemployment benefits.

I live in the state with the worst unemployment in the nation. Unemployment had not gone down since 2005 until last month when it went down .2% only because more people moved out of the state than filed for benefits. Yet still I see lots of jobs going unfilled. Unemployment here only requires that you accept a job with comparable responsibility to what you had prior to being laid off. Places like Amazon and Barnes and Noble are hiring workers to start at $14 per hour and can't find enough people because unemployment pays $400 per week to do nothing. That's 70% of the pay plus 39 hours per week of free time (since it really only takes about an hour per week to do what's necessary to continue to qualify for benefits.)

Semantics. Are amazon and barns and noble going to hire 25 million people? I dont have the answers but cutting back is a sure fire way to dip into another recession or depression. I'm getting into my highest earning years and if they are wasted because of some tards that dont learn from history I'm going to be pissed...

 

[bamacre]

Semantics. Are amazon and barns and noble going to hire 25 million people? I dont have the answers but cutting back is a sure fire way to dip into another recession or depression. I'm getting into my highest earning years and if they are wasted because of some tards that dont learn from history I'm going to be pissed...

Don't worry, Helicopter Ben will make sure your salary continuously increases. :biggrin:

 

[sactoking]

Semantics. Are amazon and barns and noble going to hire 25 million people? I dont have the answers but cutting back is a sure fire way to dip into another recession or depression. I'm getting into my highest earning years and if they are wasted because of some tards that dont learn from history I'm going to be pissed...

Not increasing something is not the same as cutting. I agree that we shouldn't cut unemployment but we also shouldn't extend it again either.

 

[sandmanwake]

Do a budget on 1350/mo before tax and see how much that leaves you even when your housing is free. Not exactly making it rain.

Assuming I'm not paying for housing? Well, going by my actual monthly budget without housing cost factored in:

$1350/month
- approx $120/month utilities
- $25/month car insurance
- approx $250/month food for just myself
- $35/month transportation cost (monthly bus fare)
- $20/month for unexpected crap

= $900 left over each month

I also have student loans, but I think I can defer that if I lost my job and claimed hardship. Even if I couldn't, that's only another $153/month, which would still leave me around $747/month that I can put in the bank for emergencies. $900 or even $747/month left over every month is more than what I was able to sock away every month when I first got out of college after taxes and everything.

For a single person like myself, very doable especially since I keep a strict budget every month already. Not sure how much a wife and kids would eat into the $900/$747 left over if I was married and spawned.

 

[JSt0rm]

Not increasing something is not the same as cutting. I agree that we shouldn't cut unemployment but we also shouldn't extend it again either.

Thats fine keep it at 99 weeks. What is proposed is slamming the brakes on a bullet train.

 

[Jhhnn]

In order to maintain denial, Righties demonize the victims... Why am I not surprised?

It's obviously more important to extend tax cuts for the wealthy, so they can... run up the price of Gold!

That'll stimulate the economy, for sure...

 

[shira]

Assuming I'm not paying for housing? Well, going by my actual monthly budget without housing cost factored in:

$1350/month
- approx $120/month utilities
- $25/month car insurance
- approx $250/month food for just myself
- $35/month transportation cost (monthly bus fare)
- $20/month for unexpected crap

= $900 left over each month

I also have student loans, but I think I can defer that if I lost my job and claimed hardship. Even if I couldn't, that's only another $153/month, which would still leave me around $747/month that I can put in the bank for emergencies. $900 or even $747/month left over every month is more than what I was able to sock away every month when I first got out of college after taxes and everything.

For a single person like myself, very doable especially since I keep a strict budget every month already. Not sure how much a wife and kids would eat into the $900/$747 left over if I was married and spawned.

Your car insurance is $300 a year? For a YOUNG man, it should be more like $1500 a year.

And somehow you have internet access. Is that free?

And I guess you never watch TV, because that would require paying an access charge. Or do you use rabbit-ears?

And the cost of your medical insurance is free? And your dentist is free?

And your car runs on free gasoline, free maintenance, and free repairs?

And your cell-phone plan is free?

And no electrical equipment that you own ever breaks and needs repair or replacing?

And you pay no income tax?

And your clothes are free?

And your toothpaste and toilet paper and laundry detergent and dental floss and shampoo and soap are free?

And eyeglasses or contact lenses never need to be purchased?

And of course you NEVER go out on dates, because that would cost money - so it's the monastic life for you.

And of course everyone on unemployment has no dependents.

And I don't know about where YOU live, but heating costs alone in winter in the eastern part of the United States are at least $200 a month.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Assuming I'm not paying for housing? Well, going by my actual monthly budget without housing cost factored in:

$1350/month
- approx $120/month utilities
- $25/month car insurance
- approx $250/month food for just myself
- $35/month transportation cost (monthly bus fare)
- $20/month for unexpected crap

= $900 left over each month

I also have student loans, but I think I can defer that if I lost my job and claimed hardship. Even if I couldn't, that's only another $153/month, which would still leave me around $747/month that I can put in the bank for emergencies. $900 or even $747/month left over every month is more than what I was able to sock away every month when I first got out of college after taxes and everything.

For a single person like myself, very doable especially since I keep a strict budget every month already. Not sure how much a wife and kids would eat into the $900/$747 left over if I was married and spawned.

I'm assuming you still live with your parents b/c you have no clue about the cost of things. You don't have to pay for gas for your car? How can your Auto insurance be that low? Internet, cell phone, heating, electric and water is only $120/month?

And then you have to pay taxes at the end of year for your unemployment wages. Also, most people are still paying for housing while on unemployment, especially those that are renting.

From this article - http://thehill.com/blogs/on-the-mon...fails-to-pass-unemployment-benefits-extension

A recent Labor Department report shows that for every dollar spent on unemployment insurance, two dollars are reinvested into the economy.

 

[extra]

Lol, my girlfriend is on unemployment. That money goes to food and medical bills only, and she spends a good part of every day working on finding another job--too funny.

Edit: unemployment money is more like this, assuming you were single:

1. take in approx 800-1000 a month from unemployment.
2. 300-800 of that, depending on where you live, and if you have roomates, goes to rent.
3. 100 ish goes to food.
4. Rest gets juggled between whatever bills are most behind and most critical.