• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sen. Bunning (R): Tough sh*t unemployed.

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I don't really see a fundamental problem with thinking that this bill should somehow actually be paid for.

the problem is that benefits, once given by people who are only in power as long as they're popular, can't really be taken away. where does it end, perpetual unemployment benefits?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Balt
Just curious on this: Do you think the current unemployment rate is a consequence of people's lack of desire to work?


Hacp said:
Its a consequence of labor being too expensive and regulations making it hard for businesses to make a profit.

Why are companies moving shit to India and China? Because its CHEAPER!
Click to expand...

Of course and your job should be next to be sent overseas.
 
I suppose there are some legitimate points being made. What was the point of pay-go which Dems slipped in to legislation two weeks ago, if they're just going to ignore it on every piece of legislation?

And why is an unemployment funding bill bundled along with such other things as highway funding and medicare cuts?

Senator Bunning is absolutely correct in one thing, the federal government cannot keep passing out money that we don't have. Yes all politicians are guilty of this, and something needs to brake the cycle.

I'd bet if those receiving unemployment checks were asked, "Would you forgo a week's payment or two if it meant the government returned to fiscal discipline afterwards?" the majority would be in favor.
 
Fern said:
Selective quoting FTL.

Basically he wants PAYGO adhered to.

I don't see any good reason for this problem. Lately everything that comes around in Congress is done at the last minute creating an artificial crisis. Why is that?

Fern
Click to expand...

This. Unemployment benefits are an excellent use of stimulus funds, as most people receiving them probably spend them immediately.

Businesses are not going to be hiring until they know what sort of hits they are going to take from health care reform, cap and trade energy cost increases, tax increases, and regulatory reform. Therefore unemployment benefits need to continue until those issues are either ironed out and passed, or dropped for Obama's first term.
 
Last edited:
werepossum said:
this. Unemployment benefits are an excellent use of stimulus funds, as most people receiving them probably spend them immediately.

Businesses are not going to be hiring until they know what sort of hits they are going to take from health care reform, cap and trade energy cost increases, tax increases, and regulatory reform. Therefore unemployment benefits need to continue until those issues are either ironed out and passed, or dropped for obama's first term.
Click to expand...

qft
 
I think he has a legitimate point, but at the same time it's unacceptable that one senator would be able to cause this sort of gridlock. I think Senate rules need major reform.
 
senseamp said:
I think he has a legitimate point, but at the same time it's unacceptable that one senator would be able to cause this sort of gridlock. I think Senate rules need major reform.
Click to expand...

The Senate makes their own rules.

They are also aware that knee jerk reactions can usually come back to bite them.

Tinkering with their rules to please a certain group will potentially create other problems down the road.

The fillibuster is one issue that both sides have complained about when it is used against them. Yet all realize that their turn may come when they need to use it for their purpose.
 
JohnOfSheffield said:
Heh, i'm not American nor do i give a sheit, i get my money from a source that will only have more to do the more the US keeps fucking up.
Click to expand...

Well that's an outright lie. If you didn't care you wouldn't do so much crying in threads about US politics that have nothing to do with you.
 
Anyway, did anyone actually read the article? He isn't against extending the benefits, he's against paying for it with additional debt rather than the massive stimulus bill that was already passed.

I think his efforts to block the vote are stupid, but his reasoning for not liking the bill seems sound to me. All the "lolz typical republican, hates the poor, why help the people in your country when you can fight wars" is completely missing the point.
 
Deeko said:
Anyway, did anyone actually read the article? He isn't against extending the benefits, he's against paying for it with additional debt rather than the massive stimulus bill that was already passed.

I think his efforts to block the vote are stupid, but his reasoning for not liking the bill seems sound to me. All the "lolz typical republican, hates the poor, why help the people in your country when you can fight wars" is completely missing the point.
Click to expand...
Was he against the Iraq war?
Was he against Bush's tax cuts?
Neither were paygo as far as I can remember.

His reasoning doesn't pass the smell test

.
 
GroundedSailor said:
Was he against the Iraq war?
Was he against Bush's tax cuts?
Neither were paygo as far as I can remember.

His reasoning doesn't pass the smell test

.
Click to expand...

What does any of that have to do with this? I believe the point is we passed a $700+ billion stimulus package for exactly things like this - in fact, the last extension of unemployment DID come from the stimulus. So why shouldn't this one?

I realize its easier to just fall back on campaign talking points, but lets try not to, k
 
EagleKeeper said:
There is already $$ available for this purpose. Use them vs adding in more deficit.
The additional deficit will somehow never get paid down.

The Congress needs to stand up and draw a line in the sand at some point.
To always put off the hard decisions until tommorrow does not bode well.

Such an attitude has dug us deeper into this hole.
Using a crisis as an excuse to sidestep common sense does not help matters at all.
Click to expand...

Correct. All Bunning is doing is insisting that comgress abide by the rules that it passed. I know that in the new era of hope and change, rules aren't supposed to matter, but somebody has to make a stand. As you correctly pointed out, there's money a-plenty that's already been allocated but not spent. Congress should use that money and stop the libertroll whining. But they won't because they want to be able to dump that money into districts/states where they think that they can keep dems in office this year and in 2012.

By the way, I'm currently unemployed right now, so no libetroll whining about how I don't know what it feels like.
 
Common Courtesy said:
The Senate makes their own rules.

They are also aware that knee jerk reactions can usually come back to bite them.

Tinkering with their rules to please a certain group will potentially create other problems down the road.

The fillibuster is one issue that both sides have complained about when it is used against them. Yet all realize that their turn may come when they need to use it for their purpose.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what the purpose of filibuster is? It's to allow time for sufficient debate, not to be used as a veto.
 
My thoughts:
- Paygo is a good thing. It makes legislators actually think about the money they're spending. That said, it's worthless if they can just ignore it for every "crisis."

- Unemployment benefits are a good thing, but there has to be an end. Otherwise, some people will just abuse it and never work, even if their lifestyle is significantly decreased. That's just the way life is.

- Spending tax dollars on welfare initiatives isn't the most efficient way to grow the economy (as some believe). The best thing to do is to reduce spending and tax rates. It's been shown several times that decreasing tax rates benefits the economy and actually increases tax revenue.
 
senseamp said:
Common Courtesy said:
The Senate makes their own rules.

They are also aware that knee jerk reactions can usually come back to bite them.

Tinkering with their rules to please a certain group will potentially create other problems down the road.

The fillibuster is one issue that both sides have complained about when it is used against them. Yet all realize that their turn may come when they need to use it for their purpose.
Click to expand...

Do you even know what the purpose of filibuster is? It's to allow time for sufficient debate, not to be used as a veto.
Click to expand...
My comments were in response to changing the rules. Not how they are being applied.

Change the rules based on one's reactions can easily cause problems down the road when one needs those rules.
 
Common Courtesy said:
My comments were in response to changing the rules. Not how they are being applied.

Change the rules based on one's reactions can easily cause problems down the road when one needs those rules.
Click to expand...

Certainly if a rule is being abused it should be changed to stamp out such abuse.
 
senseamp said:
Common Courtesy said:
My comments were in response to changing the rules. Not how they are being applied.

Change the rules based on one's reactions can easily cause problems down the road when one needs those rules.
Click to expand...

Certainly if a rule is being abused it should be changed to stamp out such abuse.
Click to expand...

The problem is the definition of abuse.

When the shoe is on the other foot, the same rule may be felt to be needed.

Tweaking the rules when they are being used in a unique way will backfire.

The Senate realizes this
 
Deeko said:
What does any of that have to do with this? I believe the point is we passed a $700+ billion stimulus package for exactly things like this - in fact, the last extension of unemployment DID come from the stimulus. So why shouldn't this one?

I realize its easier to just fall back on campaign talking points, but lets try not to, k
Click to expand...

No talking points. I was merely pointing out that the senator finds paygo religion when it suits him politically to do so, despite the entire senate agreeing to extend the limit by 1 month to allow the house to go through it.

The word hypocrisy comes to mind.
 
Crisis are being created so they can have an excuse to avoid their own rules.

This was known well in advance - as usual, the pols chose to ignore it.

The pols do not want a PayGo system - it would set a bad precident.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top