Nope-could have a couple of times, but was able to find work quickly.

 

You my friend, are just awesome. If everyone could simply be like you we would have zero unemployment against what every economist in American history has ever said. Maybe when I grow up . . .

You my friend, are just awesome. If everyone could simply be like you we would have zero unemployment against what every economist in American history has ever said. Maybe when I grow up . . .

Why chide him for busting his butt to keep working?

I thought it was small businesses that drove the job market.

 

99 weeks - that is the limit.

 

As much as you want to say it, we are not TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY.

 

And your second paragraph is EXACTLY what we did under Bush. Why do you think we would get a different outcome than what we got.

 

You don't see the link between small business and major corporations? Wow!

You my friend, are just awesome. If everyone could simply be like you we would have zero unemployment against what every economist in American history has ever said. Maybe when I grow up . . .

 

Typical. :ohbrother:

Motivator for what - have you guys not paid attentionn at all at any point. THERE ARE 5 APPLICANTS FOR EVERY JOB OUT THERE. So, when every job is filled only 20% of those unemployed right now would have jobs. You can't just go to work.

 

And, I don't think you guys understand how unemployment works . . . it is not never ending. your benefits do run out.

 

I hate when these numbers get thrown around. Just b/c 5 or 10 or 20 people apply for an open position it doesn't mean they are all willing to take those jobs.

Typical. :ohbrother:

 

Maybe when you grow up, you'll realize that this continuous movement towards socialism will not work.

As much as you want to say it, we are not TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY.

 

Quick question Ace... "When you file your tax return every year, do you receive a tax return for over paying throughout the year, or do you end up owing the government more money?"

How many of us have been in a situation of unemployment recently and can actually talk from experience? Thankfully, I haven't, but I have seen people that have. The ones that I know aren't lazy and do actively look for work. Many of us aren't considering the fact that if one spouse works, do you give up that job and move away for the possibility of another job? What if you did this and couldn't sell your house? (Many houses in my area have been for sale for over 2 years now.) Do you move and give up your family connections, many of whom help out with babysitting and transportation for free (as their contribution to the 'families help families' idea)? From what I have seen, for many, there is not a clear cut solution.

How many of us have been in a situation of unemployment recently and can actually talk from experience? Thankfully, I haven't, but I have seen people that have. The ones that I know aren't lazy and do actively look for work. Many of us aren't considering the fact that if one spouse works, do you give up that job and move away for the possibility of another job? What if you did this and couldn't sell your house? (Many houses in my area have been for sale for over 2 years now.) Do you move and give up your family connections, many of whom help out with babysitting and transportation for free (as their contribution to the 'families help families' idea)? From what I have seen, for many, there is not a clear cut solution.

 

That's just it TB&G. There will never be a "clear cut solution" for everyone and government cannot provide it in a free society.

That's just it TB&G. There will never be a "clear cut solution" for everyone and government cannot provide it in a free society.

 

Then why imply (or back up those that imply) that those that are on unemployment are lazy and are not doing what they can to find a job that works for their situation?

Then why imply (or back up those that imply) that those that are unemployment are lazy and are not doing what they can to find a job that works for their situation?

 

I don't think that anyone implied that EVERYONE that is unemployed are lazy. Most of those opposed to extending the benefits are concerned about the cost and money going to the ones that are lazy and have little interest in getting a job as long as they can get a check (they do exist). Does a job have to "work for their situation" before taking it?

I don't think that anyone implied that EVERYONE that is unemployed are lazy. Most of those opposed to extending the benefits are concerned about the cost and money going to the ones that are lazy and have little interest in getting a job as long as they can get a check (they do exist). Does a job have to "work for their situation" before taking it?

 

Some have certainly implied that the majority of those that are on unemployment are lazy or are choosing to milk the government. As to the "work for their situation" issue, did you even read my previous post? I have many examples of issues that must be considered (and ones that I have seen people have to consider) before accepting a job. I would certainly say that yes, a job must work for your situation before you accept it. You aren't going to accept a job that won't actually put money in your pocket/bank account JUST because it is a job, would you? Would you move so that you can take a job and force your spouse to give up his/her job? Would you move and put your house up for sale, renting another home or apartment, knowing that you might not sell your old home and still be paying on the mortgage for a long time?

 

I personally haven't been put in that type of position, but I know those that have. They don't WANT unemployment. They want a job. And no...McDonalds won't hire you if you have an MBA.

Quick question Ace... "When you file your tax return every year, do you receive a tax return for over paying throughout the year, or do you end up owing the government more money?"

 

What does it matter? Were I asked, I would love to give another "nickel" on my property taxe so we could replace the 1953 building in our school district, with one that is actually capable of handling the technology that is needed today to teach our struggling at-risk students. But my nickel by itself WILL NOT cover that cost. It is a about a group effort to get something done. Everyone paying that nickel would allow us to move toward that goal. Me paying an extra nickel will not do much. So, ask that question all you want, but it is silly and you know it is, because you also know that my personal action does not have an impact.

Maybe when you grow up, you'll realize that this continuous movement towards socialism will not work.

 

Maybe when you grow up and develop some kind of compassion, you will realize that the economic drive to the bottom line is not good for the country.

The whole timeframe of this most recent extension leaps out in vibrant flashing neon lights for any willing to see it for what it is.

 

This latest extension expires in October... just in time for Democrats to hit the campaign trail and point out how those mean old rich old stingy Republicans won't grant yet another extension for all those poor unfortunates who need to pay the rent.

 

They will not be honest and also point out that the problem the Republicans have is not the idea of assisting those in need, but that the President and Democrats are violating the letter and intent of the "PayGo" legislation they passed to gain votes. PayGo essentially dictates that new spending is acceptable only as long as the money appropriated for it is deducted from somewhere else in the budget ensuring no net increase in spending. The republicans have only been trying to hold the dems to their own legislation while trying to prevent futher runaway spending and a certain cratering of the economy.

 

This is a mess, and the sooner se get greedy, power hungry politicians out of the way and work together, the sooner (and more likely) we will pull out of this.