First drug addicts ... then spoiled kids. What's next? Worthless slugs?

In order to become eligible for unemployment compensation, one must have lost his or her job "through no fault of his or her own." Just thought I'd throw that out there.

Most everyone who sides with the Republicans on this issue needs to realize that they're one bad boss or one merger away from becoming unemployed. And if you're over 50 and suddenly unemployed, good luck.

 

That's why I've taken proper steps with my savings and continuing education and experience. Everyone with intelligence knows their one day away from losing their job. But those who prepare for worst case scenarios aren't surprised by those situations.

If it were up to me, I'd pay for extended unemployment benefits by reining in corporate welfare. For what it's worth, unemployment benefits have never run past 99 weeks. Some of these corporate welfare benefits, on the other hand, have been on the books for decades. Got to sweep away the cobwebs before you can even read what the breaks are about.

 

You are really going down this corporate welfare road again? So explain to me examples of corporate welfare again in your mind.

Where have I said anything you just stated. All I've simply stated is there needs to be a time limit on the benefit. Government assistance should have a cap and not continue to be extended. You don't even realize how this cycle of complacency feeds this system and unemployment.

 

Tell me how extending unemployment is going to create jobs?

You and others keep harping about the necessity for a limit on unemployment benefits. Unlike corporate welfare, there as always been a cut-off limit on benefits. The low end is 26 weeks; the high end has been up to 99 weeks.

^This.

 

But to say there aren't jobs out there is baloney. There are 3 billboards within 3 miles of the Kennedy bridge here in Louisville announcing that there are jobs. So, that argument doesn't hold water. I understand that if you're 60 and become unemployed that it's tough to reinvent yourself. But there are jobs to be had.

 

Corporate welfare. That's where the answer lies it seems.

 

I will also say if your 60 and lose your job and don't have a healthy savings that is on you. I have stated over and over I'm all for unemployment benefit , I just think a cap is necessary. To incentivive people into the workforce. Sometimes that means taking a job outside of their field or a job they normally wouldn't want.

You and others keep harping about the necessity for a limit on unemployment benefits. Unlike corporate welfare, there as always been a cut-off limit on benefits. The low end is 26 weeks; the high end has been up to 99 weeks.

 

I'm asking you to define corporate welfare . You have gone down this path before and have proven you don't understand how the economy works. I don't want you throwing out random liberal talking point , define the term and then I will debunk your thought.

You and others keep harping about the necessity for a limit on unemployment benefits. Unlike corporate welfare, there as always been a cut-off limit on benefits. The low end is 26 weeks; the high end has been up to 99 weeks.

 

My position won't change there needs to be a cap. Just like I think there should be on any government benefit.

You are really going down this corporate welfare road again? So explain to me examples of corporate welfare again in your mind.

No need to get sidetracked. Hellbird asked how I intended to pay for expanded benefits, and I gave him an answer. Exxon, which makes billions in profits every quarter, doesn't need to receive a welfare check from U.S. taxpayers.

No need to get sidetracked. Hellbird asked how I intended to pay for expanded benefits, and I gave him an answer. Exxon, which makes billions in profits every quarter, doesn't need to receive a welfare check from U.S. taxpayers.

 

They don't receive a welfare check from the government. So you can quit with the propaganda. There is a difference between tax incentives where a person or company gets to keep more of their own money and programs that take money from one hand to give to a third party. I suggest you first understand what a welfare program is and what tax incentive programs are, before you spout off.

 

If the government lowers my personal income tax rate, that isn't welfare it's a tax cut. I get to keep more of my own money. Corporate welfare is a made up term by liberal think tanks.

No need to get sidetracked. Hellbird asked how I intended to pay for expanded benefits, and I gave him an answer. Exxon, which makes billions in profits every quarter, doesn't need to receive a welfare check from U.S. taxpayers.

Blah blah blah.....................Companies paying the most in income taxes

They don't receive a welfare check from the government. So you can quit with the propaganda. There is a difference between tax incentives where a person or company gets to keep more of their own money and programs that take money from one hand to give to a third party. I suggest you first understand what a welfare program is and what tax incentive programs are, before you spout off.

 

If the government lowers my personal income tax rate, that isn't welfare it's a tax cut. I get to keep more of my own money. Corporate welfare is a made up term by liberal think tanks.

The libertarian Cato Institute, founded in 1974 by your pal Charles Koch (and others), says corporate welfare costs U.S. taxpayers $100 billion a year.

 

Corporate Welfare in the Federal Budget | Cato Institute

No need to get sidetracked. Hellbird asked how I intended to pay for expanded benefits, and I gave him an answer. Exxon, which makes billions in profits every quarter, doesn't need to receive a welfare check from U.S. taxpayers.

 

Again with Exxon? Do you really think it's wise to use the corp that pays not only the highest tax rate but most tax $'s in the US as an example of corp welfare?

Again with Exxon? Do you really think it's wise to use the corp that pays not only the highest tax rate but most tax $'s in the US as an example of corp welfare?

"Americans are sick and tired of 'crony capitalism,' and the way to solve the problem is to eliminate business subsidy programs."

 

Source: Cato Institute report referenced in Post No. 70

"Americans are sick and tired of 'crony capitalism,' and the way to solve the problem is to eliminate business subsidy programs."

 

Source: Cato Institute report referenced in Post No. 70

ExxonMobil

• Income tax expense: $31.05 billion

• Earnings before taxes: $78.73 billion

• Revenue: $428.38 billion

•1-year share price change: 6.56%

• Industry: Oil and gas

 

Are they looking for jobs in their field or are they looking for jobs period?

 

Jobs period. They gave up months ago on jobs in their fields. Most recently the two with degrees have applied for call center positions, seasonal positions in retail, at UPS, Cafe Press, Zappos and Amazon, 1 at McDonalds. Two of the three have sold their homes and cars. One lives with her brother and his family, one is renting an apartment. The lady I'm her 60's has some physical limitations, so she has not been able to apply for the jobs that require standing or lifting over 50 lbs. She lost her home and is now living with her son and his wife and kids.

Jobs period. They gave up months ago on jobs in their fields. Most recently the two with degrees have applied for call center positions, seasonal positions in retail, at UPS, Cafe Press, Zappos and Amazon, 1 at McDonalds. Two of the three have sold their homes and cars. One lives with her brother and his family, one is renting an apartment. The lady I'm her 60's has some physical limitations, so she has not been able to apply for the jobs that require standing or lifting over 50 lbs. She lost her home and is now living with her son and his wife and kids.

 

Gotcha. Thanks for the info. I hope they can find something soon.