Here's something to chew on: Every person now drawing unemployment HAD A JOB in the not-too-distant past. Every person now drawing unemployment was PAYING TAXES in the not-too-distant past. We're not talking about stumblebums or work shirkers.

 

It's really too bad that the majority who post on these political threads consider them fair game, simply because they're economically disadvantaged.

Aside from the drama of it all, do you think that unemployment should be unlimited? Serious question. I respect your opinion, so let's hear what you think about the limit.

Aside from the drama of it all, do you think that unemployment should be unlimited? Serious question. I respect your opinion, so let's hear what you think about the limit.

Unemployment compensation has never been unlimited.

Unemployment compensation has never been unlimited.

 

So, why the angst against what has been said by the speaker or those that have commented in this thread?

Was that guy a Republican?

 

He voted for Lincoln and supported the new, at that time, Republican party.

Here's something to chew on: Every person now drawing unemployment HAD A JOB in the not-too-distant past. Every person now drawing unemployment was PAYING TAXES in the not-too-distant past. We're not talking about stumblebums or work shirkers.

 

It's really too bad that the majority who post on these political threads consider them fair game, simply because they're economically disadvantaged.

 

Who is talking about eliminating unemployment ? The question that you have been asked is should it be unlimited and if not then when should the cut off be? Its a simple question . I stated above I'm for unemployment benefits but I think its a short term solution and extending even further does not promote job growth it actually hinders it.

I'm agreeing with Lipton Bash.

 

 

I don't know what to say or do now. I'm so confused.

 

 

I agree with Lipton Bash.

I'm agreeing with Lipton Bash.

 

 

I don't know what to say or do now. I'm so confused.

 

 

I agree with Lipton Bash.

 

Feel like we are sharing a moment.

Unemployment compensation has never been unlimited.

 

Then why are you getting your knickers all in a bunch because the limit has been reached? DO you honestly believe that if this 3 month extension is granted that 3 months from now we won't be hearing this again from the libs?

 

Now answer the question that has been asked repeatedly, what should the limit be?

Then why are you getting your knickers all in a bunch because the limit has been reached? DO you honestly believe that if this 3 month extension is granted that 3 months from now we won't be hearing this again from the libs?

 

Now answer the question that has been asked repeatedly, what should the limit be?

What amuses me are all the posters who feel that if only the unemployed would knock on a few more doors ... or send out a few more resumes ... or "network" a bit harder ... then, by golly, they would be gainfully employed once again!

 

Sorry, folks, life don't work that way no more. It did in the 1950s, but not in 2014.

 

How many of you have been unemployed in your 50s "through no fault of your own"? Hmmmm?

 

What separates me from the right-wing stumblebumpkins is that I believe in lending a helping hand, not in dropping a banana peel to those in need.

Edited January 8, 201412 yr by Twotoplace

I'm agreeing with Lipton Bash.

 

 

I don't know what to say or do now. I'm so confused.

 

 

I agree with Lipton Bash.

What specifically do you agree with Bash about? That those drawing unemployment compensation can be or should be compared to enabled substance abusers?

 

Absolutely amazing.

Then why are you getting your knickers all in a bunch because the limit has been reached? DO you honestly believe that if this 3 month extension is granted that 3 months from now we won't be hearing this again from the libs?

 

Now answer the question that has been asked repeatedly, what should the limit be?

Why don't you research who or what actually pays for unemployment benefits, then report your findings to the class.

What amuses me are all the posters who feel that if only the unemployed would knock on a few more doors ... or send out a few more resumes ... or "network" a bit harder ... then, by golly, they would be gainfully employed once again!

 

Sorry, folks, life don't work that way no more. It did in the 1950s, but not in 2014.

 

How many of you have been unemployed in your 50s "through no fault of your own"? Hmmmm?

 

What separates me from the right-wing stumblebumpkins is that I believe in lending a helping hand, not in dropping a banana peel to those in need.

Master of diversion.

Here's something to chew on: Every person now drawing unemployment HAD A JOB in the not-too-distant past. Every person now drawing unemployment was PAYING TAXES in the not-too-distant past. We're not talking about stumblebums or work shirkers.

 

It's really too bad that the majority who post on these political threads consider them fair game, simply because they're economically disadvantaged.

I don't think anyone is saying they don't feel for those that have lost their jobs etc. due to the economy. Boehner deffinatly isn't saying any such thing. All the GOP and I'm with them on this, wants is a way to pay for the money going toward extending those benefits. The president has continued since the first day he got in office is to continue to print paper money to cover his programs even though that paper is worthless.

 

You can't keep extending the program without a way to pay for it, it's that simple. I don't know why that is so hard to understand by the Dems. You want to keep paying, then find a way to pay for it.

What amuses me are all the posters who feel that if only the unemployed would knock on a few more doors ... or send out a few more resumes ... or "network" a bit harder ... then, by golly, they would be gainfully employed once again!

 

Sorry, folks, life don't work that way no more. It did in the 1950s, but not in 2014.

 

How many of you have been unemployed in your 50s "through no fault of your own"? Hmmmm?

 

What separates me from the right-wing stumblebumpkins is that I believe in lending a helping hand, not in dropping a banana peel to those in need.

I ask you a simple question....how are you paying for it?

 

Same question the GOP has asked for years yet you and the Dems I. Washington continue to ignore that and just want to continue paying for something for nothing.

So, why the angst against what has been said by the speaker or those that have commented in this thread?

I can answer that question since two won't. It's because Boehner is Relublican, that is why two has so much angst about this.