why don't we make people work for unemployment checks

[Xavier434]

Have you ever been laid off at no fault of your own with a few kids to feed and a wife to provide for?


I already know the answer to that question, but maybe you should consider that there are some things in life which are simply more important. You can slice this pie anyway you want. The bottom line is that the worker is working to make the white collar exec a rich old man and part of that white collar's expense for hiring labor is paying for this unemployment insurance benefit. No, it is not on your pay stub, but that is how the system works. Your personal economic situation would be worse if it didn't exist because if these people didn't get these benefits then they would have to turn elsewhere to provide for their families and themselves while being unemployed and that means welfare until they find work. Which do you think is more expensive overall and which do you think is more progressive? I tend to see more people on unemployment eventually finding work than I do those who jump on the welfare train.

Pick one. You don't have a 3rd option.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

I think you know why we don't do that.

 

[Newbian]

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

How about we just grind them up and use them as Soylent green.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
ok okay for sake of argument Lets say this is a god given right. Why can't it be offset also by the stipulation that you must be serving the community for some amount of time in addition to searching for a job?

I already explained in a previous post how this gets complicated and my explaination is just the tip of iceberg (no pun intended). You didn't respond to it.

 

[soulcougher73]

Originally posted by: edro
I agree!
All unemployment people should have to work >10 hours of community service a week.
All welfare people should have to work >20 hours of community service a week.

Oh wait... Obama is president.

Yeah because the republicans do so much to fix this.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

I think you know why we don't do that.

And we don't do that for unemployed persons either for the same reason as the elderly. Because it's money they have already earned.

In the workers case they are entitled to it if unemployed due to no fault of their own.

In the seniors case they are entitled to it if they... don't die and worked earlier in life.

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: soulcougher73

Originally posted by: edro
I agree!
All unemployment people should have to work >10 hours of community service a week.
All welfare people should have to work >20 hours of community service a week.

Oh wait... Obama is president.

Yeah because the republicans do so much to fix this.

Not to mention Obama has absolutely nothing to do with it..it's been this way for a while.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
ok okay for sake of argument Lets say this is a god given right. Why can't it be offset also by the stipulation that you must be serving the community for some amount of time in addition to searching for a job?

You have to be flexible to apply for jobs, run around town, make copies, get letters of recommendation, multiple interviews, on the job tests / exams / training. Not to mention that you need that last unemployment check before you start getting paying work which makes it a tough overlap with community service.

Volunteer work is inherently flexible. The rest is all workable with a good process in place. Lower the requirement to 5 hours a week if you have kids or 10 if your single.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: soulcougher73

Originally posted by: edro
I agree!
All unemployment people should have to work >10 hours of community service a week.
All welfare people should have to work >20 hours of community service a week.

Oh wait... Obama is president.

Yeah because the republicans do so much to fix this.

It's just easier to forget that a republican was in office for 8 years, and easier to blame the black liberal.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Have you ever been laid off at no fault of your own with a few kids to feed and a wife to provide for?


I already know the answer to that question, but maybe you should consider that there are some things in life which are simply more important. You can slice this pie anyway you want. The bottom line is that the worker is working to make the white collar exec a rich old man and part of that white collar's expense for hiring labor is paying for this unemployment insurance benefit. No, it is not on your pay stub, but that is how the system works. Your personal economic situation would be worse if it didn't exist because if these people didn't get these benefits then they would have to turn elsewhere to provide for their families and themselves while being unemployed and that means welfare until they find work. Which do you think is more expensive overall and which do you think is more progressive? I tend to see more people on unemployment eventually finding work than I do those who jump on the welfare train.

Pick one. You don't have a 3rd option.

lets assume before they wer eworking 40 hours per week. if they had to volunteer 5 hours per week that still leaves them 35 hours to job hunt.

 

[swbsam]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
looking at my pay stub now and I see nothing about unemployment insurance deductions. Its a tax on your employer not on you.

OP - I suggest, the next time you're unemployed, to just waive the benefit and get on with your life.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

I think you know why we don't do that.

And we don't do that for unemployed persons either for the same reason as the elderly. Because it's money they have already earned.

In the workers case they are entitled to it if unemployed due to no fault of their own.

In the seniors case they are entitled to it if they... don't die and worked earlier in life.

You report your employers payroll tax as income? really?

 

[rasczak]

Originally posted by: Newbian

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

How about we just grind them up and use them as Soylent green.

We already do. You're next .

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
ok okay for sake of argument Lets say this is a god given right. Why can't it be offset also by the stipulation that you must be serving the community for some amount of time in addition to searching for a job?

You have to be flexible to apply for jobs, run around town, make copies, get letters of recommendation, multiple interviews, on the job tests / exams / training. Not to mention that you need that last unemployment check before you start getting paying work which makes it a tough overlap with community service.

Volunteer work is inherently flexible. The rest is all workable with a good process in place. Lower the requirement to 5 hours a week if you have kids or 10 if your single.

If it's required it's not volunteer work.

Also, why is the government ENTITLED to something for nothing yet the worker is NOT ENTITLED to money that they have worked for already?

 

[TruePaige]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: senseamp
How about we make old and disabled people work 20 hrs for their social security checks?

I think you know why we don't do that.

And we don't do that for unemployed persons either for the same reason as the elderly. Because it's money they have already earned.

In the workers case they are entitled to it if unemployed due to no fault of their own.

In the seniors case they are entitled to it if they... don't die and worked earlier in life.

You report your employers payroll tax as income? really?

Not everything you earn in life is reported as income on a 1040.

Also, if you receive the unemployment benefits...then you report them as income...

 

[swbsam]

What blows is that unemployment's considered taxable income.. So the government's kinda double dipping there!

I don't think unemployment costs the government as much as you thing.

 

[DisgruntledVirus]

Originally posted by: Drakkon

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: DisgruntledVirus
Work to do what exactly?

community service. 15-20 hours a week. Something so they can still search for other jobs but aren't being total leeches on society.

I believe you're thinking of welfare, not unemployment.
This thread is stupid.

Yep methinks some people need to look into the difference.

Now if this thread were about welfare, food stamps, and other govt taxpayer paid programs then I'd agree - put em to work picking up trash.

X2

I can't stand people who just sit around collecting welfare who are perfectly capable of working.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: soulcougher73

Originally posted by: edro
I agree!
All unemployment people should have to work >10 hours of community service a week.
All welfare people should have to work >20 hours of community service a week.

Oh wait... Obama is president.

Yeah because the republicans do so much to fix this.

You can't show a partisan hack logic, it doesn't work that way.

 

[Superself]

Because unemployment checks are the result of work already performed.

You are trying to force people to work for something they have already earned. If you never worked, you will never get an unemployment check.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
ok okay for sake of argument Lets say this is a god given right. Why can't it be offset also by the stipulation that you must be serving the community for some amount of time in addition to searching for a job?

You have to be flexible to apply for jobs, run around town, make copies, get letters of recommendation, multiple interviews, on the job tests / exams / training. Not to mention that you need that last unemployment check before you start getting paying work which makes it a tough overlap with community service.

Volunteer work is inherently flexible. The rest is all workable with a good process in place. Lower the requirement to 5 hours a week if you have kids or 10 if your single.

If it's required it's not volunteer work.

Also, why is the government ENTITLED to something for nothing yet the worker is NOT ENTITLED to money that they have worked for already?

semantics. Community service is community service. required or not. The government isn't receiving the benefit necessarily. Volunteer work can be done at many non profits.

 

[killster1]

has no one has thought of them working at the house.. folding newspapers.. tracking child predators.. i know people that have been on unemployment they where not looking for jobs they where drinking beers having bbq's etc.. they could have done alot of community service.. of course this is absurd since no one would vote for such a idea.. but maybe for the people that have been on unemployment a good while can start doing some services hah..

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Superself
Because unemployment checks are the result of work already performed.

You are trying to force people to work for something they have already earned. If you never worked, you will never get an unemployment check.

Yeah your missing the point here. Why shouldn't it be "earned" once you complete the community service? I understand how the law is written now but why shouldn't it be modified?

 

[ghost recon88]

I full agree with the OP here.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
lets assume before they wer eworking 40 hours per week. if they had to volunteer 5 hours per week that still leaves them 35 hours to job hunt.

Listen, there are good ways to do this sort of thing, but the problem here is that it just isn't as simple as you are making it out to be. See my original post about gas money and kids.

However, maybe we can work around some of those problems. Maybe we can exclude anyone with parental responsibilities and maybe we can provide them with transportation. Maybe we can even offer child care services while they are doing the community service. Of course, all of that costs money too.

Then you need to consider reasonable competition. Think about it. People who get laid off would be the only ones required to do this community service since they are the only ones who qualify for unemployment. As previously explained, that causes a problem with availability. What that means is anyone who quits their job or gets fired is MORE available than those who got laid off at no fault of their own. That means that those who quit or got fired have that much of a better chance of finding a job before the guy that got laid off. Now, how is that fair?

Is what you want really worth it after jumping through all of the hoops and spending all of the money necessary in order to produce and maintain this new government program that you want?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: killster1
has no one has thought of them working at the house.. folding newspapers.. tracking child predators.. i know people that have been on unemployment they where not looking for jobs they where drinking beers having bbq's etc.. they could have done alot of community service.. of course this is absurd since no one would vote for such a idea.. but maybe for the people that have been on unemployment a good while can start doing some services hah..

sure maybe the stipulation kicks in after 1 or 2 months. I'd be ok with that.