[nolidad]

So in your world the job market is never changing. If people could find jobs in the roaring 1920s, they could find them in the great depression of the 1930s.

It must be very confusing to you that millions of people who have not been "lazy" though most of their lives suddenly are since the crash.

AAHH, once again the legendary Love take an opponents statement and stretch it and make wild insane assumptions and then make people have to defend against your assumptions!!!

But let me ask-- According to teh Prez- teh recession is over- we have pulled back from teh brink
and have spent over a trillion dollars on "fiscal jobs stimulus"- so why can;t tehy find jobs when the govt. seeded over $3,000 /person to create jobs????

I'

m pretty sure the people on welfare don't have a lobby or bribe the millionares in congress.

Not sure at all what your comment has to do wqith the jobs bill.

In some cases you are right. In others, the time the person spends at McDonalds is time they could be hunting for another position as a surgeon. Of course, even those jobs are not unlimited.

Agreed, there are real hardships out there. What we are talking about is teh fact is we as a govt. have made it far easier to not look for work than to look for work until almost 3 years has gone by.

If I can make 75% of my pay (to varied state limits) and stay home- why should I go to work?? That is a precailing attitude among many(not all). This is what we are talking about.

People should go to work at Mcdonalds, collect teh difference in unemp[loyment that is allowed while continuing to seek emplyment that provides wages that they were getting before. Having the public dole is suppossed to be a safety net- not a long term fix with the exception of the rare few who are incapapble of gainful employment.

Actually, we need them producing and spending... and not getting foreclosed on. That may not be possible as ditch diggers.

Maybe maybe not- but if they are earning some income it reduces the strain on teh social safety nets and reduces deficit sp[ending. We exteneded jobless benefits by taking on more national debt- this is going to strangle everyone down the road- and we are near the end of that road.

Moodys has come out and said that America needs to make fiscal adjustments that will strain teh very social cohesion. This means riots in the streets over massive tax increases and service cuts. If we don't do this we will have the same effect because our dollar will collapse under the weight of our debt.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

AAHH, once again the legendary Love take an opponents statement and stretch it and make wild insane assumptions and then make people have to defend against your assumptions!!!

Originally Posted by nolidad

Once again when you can't defend a position - you resort to personal attacks.

According to nolidad, you have no defendable position.

But let me ask-- According to teh Prez- teh recession is over- we have pulled back from teh brink
and have spent over a trillion dollars on "fiscal jobs stimulus"- so why can;t tehy find jobs when the govt. seeded over $3,000 /person to create jobs????

Is $3k per year a job?

I know a lot of people with jobs thanks to stimulus spending.

Not sure at all what your comment has to do wqith the jobs bill.

I think you should go play in traffic.

Agreed, there are real hardships out there. What we are talking about is teh fact is we as a govt. have made it far easier to not look for work than to look for work until almost 3 years has gone by.

It's always easier to not look for work than to look for work.... the government is irrellevent to that statement.

What the government has done is given you money (unemployment), from a pool you paid into, in exchange for job hunting. Having been on unemployment once, I can tell you it's not a lot.

Stop making stuff up. You might learn something.

If I can make 75% of my pay (to varied state limits) and stay home- why should I go to work?? That is a precailing attitude among many(not all). This is what we are talking about.

Why not ask if you could make 1,000,000%? I thought we were discussing unemployment.

People should go to work at Mcdonalds, collect teh difference in unemp[loyment that is allowed while continuing to seek emplyment that provides wages that they were getting before. Having the public dole is suppossed to be a safety net- not a long term fix with the exception of the rare few who are incapapble of gainful employment.

I can't come to my interview today, I have to work the frier.

Maybe maybe not- but if they are earning some income it reduces the strain on teh social safety nets and reduces deficit sp[ending. We exteneded jobless benefits by taking on more national debt- this is going to strangle everyone down the road- and we are near the end of that road.

Go thank a republican.

Moodys has come out and said that America needs to make fiscal adjustments that will strain teh very social cohesion. This means riots in the streets over massive tax increases and service cuts. If we don't do this we will have the same effect because our dollar will collapse under the weight of our debt.

There's more than one way to kill an economy.

[nolidad]

Is $3k per year a job?

I know a lot of people with jobs thanks to stimulus spending.

And ask them at teh end of the year when those jobs are gone. Teh jobs bill just kicked the can down the road- it created very very few jobs and th eones it sdaved were mostly govt jobs that are threatened again because the fed money is goen and the states have no money to keep those jobs afloat.

I think you should go play in traffic.

Gee shucks you do say the sweetest things!

What the government has done is given you money (unemployment), from a pool you paid into, in exchange for job hunting. Having been on unemployment once, I can tell you it's not a lot.

Well I can't speak for Florida butr in Massachusetts you can recieve up to $1,000/week (75% of your pay) and no employee pays a dime into unemployment- the whole tab is picked up by employers.

Why not ask if you could make 1,000,000%? I thought we were discussing unemployment.

We are and that is what soem folks make- 75% of their former pay is given to them in unemployment compensation.

IOW if I grossed $1,000/week on a job and get laid off- in Massachusetts I would recieve a check for $750/week from unemployment for up to (I may be off by a 3-4 weeks) 135 weeks if the new bill passes. Plus I would qualify for mass health, food stamps,WIUC(if I had small kids) and a few other state subsidies. Many construction workers take the whole winter off and collect unemployment because they make more in unemployment than in nearly every job they could get otherwise.

I can't come to my interview today, I have to work the frier.

Make mine supersized

There's more than one way to kill an economy.

Agreed, but but sides of the aisle have settled on teh path we have been on since the days of FDR-- spend far more than you take in and kick the can down the road for future generations to take care of. The l;ast real surplus budget our nation ran was under JFK (who would not be welcomed inteh Pelosi/Reid dem party). Clintons surplusses were a lie. He did what his predeccessors did and hid the deficit by raiding and confiscating allthe SSIN and Medicare trust fund money available.

[JerryLove]

Originally Posted by nolidad

And ask them at teh end of the year when those jobs are gone. Teh jobs bill just kicked the can down the road- it created very very few jobs and th eones it sdaved were mostly govt jobs that are threatened again because the fed money is goen and the states have no money to keep those jobs afloat.

Without a statistic, you are just spouting guesses; which don't trump my antecdotes.

Well I can't speak for Florida butr in Massachusetts you can recieve up to $1,000/week (75% of your pay) and no employee pays a dime into unemployment- the whole tab is picked up by employers.

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Employers count things like medical, social security, and unemployment as part of the "compensation package". Whether the money comes out of your pay before or after the employer cuts a check is irrellevent.

We are and that is what soem folks make- 75% of their former pay is given to them in unemployment compensation.

No, they don't.

"You may receive approximately 50% of your average weekly wage, up to a maximum of $629 per week. " - Benefits

That's after three weeks of nothing as a "waiting period".

During all that time, they are required to be looking for work.

I will not go work for McDonalds while I live in this house. The reason being I cannot pay for my house while at McDonalds. Should I loose my house and end up living with relatives, and should I feel I cannot get a job in my field... I have a good deal of fast food experience to draw from.

Until then, time spent having me serving burgers is time where I cannot be hunting a job that lets me keep our economic infrastructure running.

IOW if I grossed $1,000/week on a job and get laid off- in Massachusetts I would recieve a check for $750/week from unemployment for up to (I may be off by a 3-4 weeks) 135 weeks if the new bill passes. Plus I would qualify for mass health, food stamps,WIUC(if I had small kids) and a few other state subsidies. Many construction workers take the whole winter off and collect unemployment because they make more in unemployment than in nearly every job they could get otherwise.

You have no idea what you are are talking about.

With the extension, it's 63 weeks rather than 30. This is because of the dramatic increase in unemployment lenght (which, in your theory, is because people got lazy suddenly and by the millions about 2 years ago).

Agreed, but but sides of the aisle have settled on teh path we have been on since the days of FDR-- spend far more than you take in and kick the can down the road for future generations to take care of. The l;ast real surplus budget our nation ran was under JFK (who would not be welcomed inteh Pelosi/Reid dem party). Clintons surplusses were a lie. He did what his predeccessors did and hid the deficit by raiding and confiscating allthe SSIN and Medicare trust fund money available.

And Clinton's suggestion for the surplus was to stop the raiding while the republicans were calling for tax cuts and rebates.

[nolidad]

There's no such thing as a free lunch. Employers count things like medical, social security, and unemployment as part of the "compensation package". Whether the money comes out of your pay before or after the employer cuts a check is irrellevent.

What does this have to do with anything?? We have been talking about unemployment. Unemployment is not counted as part of an employees "compensation" poackage it is mandated by state law to all employers in Massachusetts. Health, Life and pensions are part and parcel of compensation- for they are benefits to an employee- unemployment is an employer tax per worker hired.

No, they don't.

"You may receive approximately 50% of your average weekly wage, up to a maximum of $629 per week. " - Benefits

That's after three weeks of nothing as a "waiting period".

During all that time, they are required to be looking for work.

Well I stand corrected- I was speaking from one of my customers who receives unemployment.

But after that three weeks they receive the back checks if there unemployment is not contested
for the last 2 of the 3 weeks (the first week they received a check from their employer the last check.)

Yes they must look for work. That is exp[ected--and the work must be comparable- they are not required to work at McDonalds if they were an engineer, but if they take a job that pays less (the ratios I do not know) they will recive reduced unemployment checks for a proscribed perid.

With the extension, it's 63 weeks rather than 30. This is because of the dramatic increase in unemployment lenght (which, in your theory, is because people got lazy suddenly and by the millions about 2 years ago).

And with the next extension (which didn't get voted on) it would have run it over 95 weeks.

And it is not my theory it is you tasking a statemetn and stretching it way past by your assumptions.

And Clinton's suggestion for the surplus was to stop the raiding while the republicans were calling for tax cuts and rebates.

And tehn th e sides gotr reversed under Bush when he warned that SSSI waas unsustainable as well as medicare- they just laughed at him like the GOP did to Clinton. Both sides were wrong.