jump to last post 1-28 of 28 discussions (81 posts)

Demoralizing The Unemployed

  1. cliffordh profile image62
    cliffordhposted 6 years ago

    I was one of many individuals yesterday that, was disappointed in the Senate�s refusal to fund emergency unemployment benefits for millions of Americans across the country who, were in desperate need of it, using the catchall excuse their reluctance to add more to an already growing deficit problem. For like most people I wondered what in hell was going through their heads. Just because, I often sit and watch them vote on things, that don�t make sense, with no qualms about doing so whatsoever. Proving beyond, a shadow of a doubt, that both the Congress and Senate are more often willing to take care of their own business; way before they ever take care of the American people�s welfare.

    Then I started reading the comments made by individuals from all over the United States just to see what most of them thought about what�s going on within the halls of Washington.

    Well as you can guess, I wasn�t too shocked by what I came across on those blogs. For the majority of American�s were in favor of it. Because a lot of people, either know someone or happened to be one of the many, who have been affected by its fallout. Yet, the individuals who weren�t in support of its passing concerned me the most. Simply because, when it got right down to it they didn�t seem to have a grasp on realty the way one would expect a person to.

    Now you may think I�m being too sensitive about this issue. Because I admit, I either know someone or have friends that are affected by this. So, I can�t really be impartial about it the way I should be. And to some extent that might be true. But here is what�s running through my mind about this whole mess. And whether you agree with me or not is strictly up to you.

    We really don�t know each individuals circumstance or why they landed on the unemployment line the way they did. Yet, some of these naysayers out there were willing to comment quite vocally I might add, about how dysfunctional they were without really knowing the facts. Take for instance, the comment I read by one individual. This gentleman (and I use that term loosely for this particular fellow), called all the people who were on unemployment free loaders and good for nothing lazy bums who were feeding off the system just because they wouldn�t get off their butts and go out and get a job. Of course, I�m being somewhat more polite about how he put it, than he did.

    He accused everyone who was on the unemployment line of not wanting to take jobs which most illegal aliens would have easily snapped up. Like flipping burgers at McDonald�s or picking up trash off the street, just because this kind of stuff was beneath them, he said. Then he went on to state that there were plenty of opportunities if only most of these yo-yo�s would go out and look for them. Harsh sentiments to be sure on his part as well as inaccurate as hell. But don�t take my word for it. Go out and visit these unemployed people in each state and ask them why their, there. And what they would give to get a job right now. And I�m sure you�ll be surprised.

    They are unemployed people struggling to provide for their families. To keep a roof over their heads. They are people just like you and I from every nationality who are being forced to jump on welfare lines in order to keep food in their children�s stomachs. And even individuals forgoing paying bills that they know will eventually come back to haunt them. All because, they don�t have a choice.

    We�ve seen mass job loses, everything from factory workers in Detroit, to skilled construction people being given their blue slips just because the recession itself was none discriminatory on who it hit. Even in my own state of Utah, I�ve seen plants closed down who just opened four years ago because there was not enough business for them to keep their doors open. Sending over thousands of people back out in the job market who never expected to find themselves struggling against a mass wave of other bodies for the few jobs that were available So, don�t tell me what you think these people are. I know what they are. They are hard working individuals that are my neighbors, my friends and my family. But most of all they are fellow Americans. People who don�t deserve what happened to them. And who are suffering through no fault of their own.

    Even the experts can tell you there is always a cause and effect to this dilemma that both Senators and Congressmen alike seem to want to overlook, which I classify as the human factor. This situation with the economy didn�t start over night. It�s been coming to a head for years. So, when you look at President Obama and say why isn�t he doing more about this, than he is? Then ask yourself this question. Who were the senators and congressman in office (the incumbents) when all the deregulation with the financial institutions was going on? And how many of them helped to create the opportunities that led to the predatory lending schemes which eventually sent our market into a downward spiral in the first place.

    It seems as if most Americans have a short term memory where the truth is concerned in my book. For rather than have our politician�s both Democrats and Republican alike own up for what wrong they�ve heaped upon the unsuspecting public, we�d prefer to blame it on the current administration instead. Paying out billion of dollars, in aid packages that have been sent to all the failing financial institutions, in order to help them out of a hole they themselves dug. But it was nothing more than a reclamation act on the part or Republicans and Democrats alike to cover their tracks for their past indiscretions. If the public took a closer look at their voting records over the years they�d probably find out that many of these so called elected officials had a hand in it all in some way. For piece by piece they�ve been selling America down the road for a long time.

    They allowed companies to ship their jobs overseas just so they could get cheaper labor. Taking away many of the opportunities needed here in this country to keep individuals employed. They�ve allowed an imbalance of import versus export in the goods market. And this I know personally from working for the federal government myself. They�ve allowed outrageous government waste and abuse to take place as well. Spending billions of taxpayer�s dollars, directly to companies that have furnished no viable valuable in return for the services they are providing.

    But the bottom-line here is that it all comes around in a circle, one way or the other. The recession has directly hit more than half of the nation's working adults, pushing them into unemployment, pay cuts, reduced hours at work or part-time jobs that will most likely affect every aspect of the economy where consumer spending is concerned.

    And believe me when I say this. That nothing like this has been seen since the Great Depression. It is exacting a terrible punishment on citizens in every state. That continues nearly a whole year after the economy started showing some growth again. And hit hardest is the 9.7 percent of workers who have been out of a job for an average of nearly six months.

    Also the fact that home values are down are causing people to spend less. They�re tapping into their savings. And older adults between ages 50 and 61 are staying in jobs longer because they can�t afford to retire as they had planned. It�s even gotten bad enough that families are moving in with each other and people are borrowing money from friends and acquaintances just so they can weather the economical storm.

    Because whether you know it or not unemployment benefits is an insurance against the economy sliding back into recession. For by extending benefits you are stimulating the economy when money is being immediately recycled right back into it.

    Think about it? As long as people have money in their pockets they will shop at the local grocery store, or stop by the gas station to fill up their cars. They even hit the local hardware store to keep their homes up, and purchase clothing and other necessities that all function together to keep each community running. However, the sad alternative to this problem is just as real too. If money is not being spent, stores close and there are more jobs to loose. So, isn�t it time we wake up and smell the coffee.

    1. ledefensetech profile image81
      ledefensetechposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      How long does the gravy train run?  I was out of work for a year and a half.  Instead of pissing and moaning about not being able to find a job, I decided to go back to school and retrain myself into a new profession.  In the interim I've had to take a part time job that only pays minimum wage, but that's OK I won't be at a minimum wage job forever. 

      And let's be honest.  You don't really try very hard to find a job until it's close to time for your benefits to run out.  Nothing concentrates the mind like a hanging, so you might need to start looking harder at your options and making hard decisions.

      1. Ohma profile image83
        Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Gee you sound just like the politicians that say we need undocumented workers because U.S. citizens will not do certain jobs. Of course no one says that you can not support a family on minimum wage or that the actual cost of living is completely out of control.

    2. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Unemployment benefits should be extended, and the legislation to accomplish this should not be saddled with the current liberal add-ons, it should be, it deseves to be, a bill all it's own.   

      The unemployed are not to blame for the disgrace of this economy, and if we can continuously shell out tax dollars on this project and that, on pseudo stimulus, on creating new bullshxx czars and commissions and social programs like health care that actually add to our debt, we absolutely must be well capable of extending unemployment benefits at least one more time, until and if any actions by this adminstation really stimulate and encourage our economy.

      1. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Unemployment benefits should be extended"

        For how long?

        1. KFlippin profile image61
          KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          As long as this administration is breaking the bank on other asinine programs and regulations and new taxes.......the CBO should include unemployment extension in every projection of the financial impact of this administrations's spendthrift bills/policies, if we are going to go bankrupt, let the people have their unemployment.  Bad policy is bad policy, and this administation ought to lessen some other part of their non-existent budget to pay for unemployment benefits for those who suffer by his quite non-stimulutic policies...........

  2. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    it's the classic election year politics. without getting into any further, this party seems to enjoy the word, NO.  out of touch with the millions who are unemployed, asserting they are all freeloaders is absurd. let them live without their 4 figure weekly income for a year and take away their health benefits. many of them should lose their comfy position representing the citizens of their district, their vote affects millions around the country.
    http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-k … o_bea.html

    I'm sure they will enjoy their July 4th recess.

  3. Naty.S profile image60
    Naty.Sposted 6 years ago


    Just want to say...good for you for taking the time and effort to share your thoughts on and bring attention to this topic. I'm sure many people are going to argue against you with the same reasons the "gentleman" you described had. I am not unemployed nor have I ever had to receive unemployment services, but I, too, see this as a disappointment. Although, I must say, I am not surprised the vote went the way it did. It will always be easier to simply focus on self, judge, and criticize than it is to actually get involved, show compassion, and make a difference.

  4. Sab Oh profile image60
    Sab Ohposted 6 years ago

    Raising taxes does not stimulate consumer spending.

    1. bgamall profile image86
      bgamallposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Neither does cutting jobs and benefits Sab.

      What will help consumer spending is a forgiveness of debt. Since only Israel in the bible did that I am not holding my breath. No Jubilee here.

      1. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Neither does cutting jobs and benefits "

        Yeah, raising taxes has that detrimental effect as well.

        1. Doug Hughes profile image60
          Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It depends WHERE you raise taxes. There are a bunch of people who have been so hard hit by this recession they have has to cut back on the number of mansions they own. I'm talking about the top 1% who own 35% of America. That's a FACT!!!!

          The money to provide extended unemployment is there, but those with the wealth OWN the GOP and the GOP blocked the aid. A lot of these folks were one step from homeless. What do you want? Soup kitchens and tent cities? Have you no shame?

          1. Sab Oh profile image60
            Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            "There are a bunch of people who have been so hard hit by this recession they have has to cut back on the number of mansions they own. "

            Oh, you mean the folks who already pay the most in income taxes? The ones who own and invest in companies that create jobs (real jobs, not government makework illusions), the ones who spend more money and thus contribute to real economic stimulus? Those ones? Yeah, let's 'punish' them in the name of some vindictive emotional indulgence that if anything makes the situation worse. Great idea.

            1. rebekahELLE profile image92
              rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              ? come down to planet earth sab.

              1. WizardOfOz profile image61
                WizardOfOzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I second that motion.

              2. Sab Oh profile image60
                Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                The planet earth, or the People's Republic of Earth?

                1. bill yon profile image43
                  bill yonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Sab Oh you are out of touch with reality and the way you are talking you must be either retired or rich because its obvious that you are not dealing with todays economy.I'm one of those "lazy" people on unemployment and I search everyday there are no jobs out there,the so called rich are not creating jobs in america they are creating those jobs overseas,I've tried to get jobs at mcdonalds and burger king you name it but the response I get is you are "OVER Qaulified" because of my work history and my educational back ground,I've tried to get jobs in warehouse's but I'm "OVER Qaulified" for that too.I even go to day labors and all the while I am back in school finishing up on my degree and trying to start a business with nothing.My benefits have been cut off because of the out of touch millionaire republicans and I won't forget this and neither will the millions of people caught in this game thats being played on us all.the way its looking I might be the only guy in a homeless shelter chasing a masters degree.

                  1. rebekahELLE profile image92
                    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    don't give up. have you tried a temp agency? some companies are being so cautious of hiring any new employees, they're going through temp services.
                    also have you talked with your unemployment agency? sometimes they themselves have jobs. if you still qualify for benefits, they may extend them. I don't see how they can't.

                    but then again, I heard the republicans want to cut taxes for those making over 250,000... and add it to the deficit.
                    http://bluewavenews.com/2010/07/12/repu … ng-for-it/

  5. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    so you're still talking about debt, what happens to the over 2 million people without a check? you've just lost that segment of consumer spending (mostly on bills and food) or are you of the mindset as some senators and say, who cares? 

    btw clifford, you've made a lot of good points. thanks for sharing.

    I just read that it may go to the floor again tonight.
    http://www.opencongress.org/articles/vi … e-Tonight-

    1. 0
      china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      The problem with government run by business is that basic commodities are low profit and so not of interest.  The segment of population that is protected in any way are those who buy luxury goods like cars and fuel, etc.

      1. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Fuel is a luxury good?

        1. WizardOfOz profile image61
          WizardOfOzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          At current prices.

  6. akirchner profile image96
    akirchnerposted 6 years ago

    My problem is that you don't see many elected officials unemployed now do you?  And in this time of 'economic' down turn, they aren't giving up their pay raises or THEIR benefits....it is the classic tale though - the haves and the have nots.  But alas, it could still be worse I imagine.  Let's hope the second try passes for those who are still desperately seeking workdome.

    1. Sab Oh profile image60
      Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Let's hope instead that those without jobs look for and find one, even if it is not their preferred one.

      1. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        The minimum wage is $7.25 per hour. IF you can work full-time your GROSS income is just $15,000 per year.  If you are a single parent with training and/or skill who has been laid off - working for Taco Bell won't pay anything close to what you need to live.  Your comment seems utterly blind to reality (10% unemployment) and heartless if you read the OP about the circumstances people are actually in.

        1. Ohma profile image83
          Ohmaposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Well it is nice to be able to agree with you on this one Doug.

        2. azdp1 profile image61
          azdp1posted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Exactly. I don't know how Walmart and Taco Bell became livable wage incomes with the bad economy. This bad economy has been going on for 3 decades, and the people in the Midwest know that. The last election, the media acted like they suddenly were telling us all something brand new, and they were clueless about how once-great cities like Detroit, Cleveland, Buffalo, and more were spiraling down. It took over 30 years to practically destroy them, and there are actually ghost towns in the Midwest.

  7. lovemychris profile image80
    lovemychrisposted 6 years ago

    Wow....I guess none of them thought of that huh?
    Are you kidding me? Job opens up, and the applicant line is out the door.
    Of course, it would help if employers would HIRE Americans. They seem to prefer the International workers...at least where i live.

    And yes, my boss hires student workers from over-seas for the summer.....
    And if a job opens up, he asks them to ask their friends if they need work.

    But hey-it's all about the bottom line is it not? I mean, that is why we are in this mess....IS IT NOT????

  8. azdp1 profile image61
    azdp1posted 6 years ago

    While there are always meatloaves and deadbeats, most people who are out of a job don't relish it.
    I lost my job because our facility didn't turn the profit that the owner wanted. My hours were reduced, then finally let go.

    As someone educated, with job experience, and I've been around the block, I am finding closed doors in my profession. Looking outside my profession hasn't gotten me anywhere, although I won't stop looking.

    I know some clerk is going through resumes and discarding any that don't have specifically five years in that specific job title.

    I am wondering how I will pay my bills. I don't ever get the line that people won't work at McDonald's because it's beneath them. What the heck? The obvious reason is it won't be a livable wage. Those jobs were never meant to be a livable wage. "It's better than nothing." No, it's NOT. Because it is like being in a boat with 15 holes and now I can plug up 5 of them. I still can't pay all my basic bills and rent. So I am still in a deficit.
    I did get one interview at Taco Bell. The manager looked at my resume and said, "If you don't waste my time, I won't waste yours." I am vastly over educated and yet, if the job paid me enough to live, I'd have a blast making Tacos and humming Malaguena.

  9. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    what is minimum wage? 7.50? unemployment benefits range around 300. a week, making it minimim wage pay. who can live on 300. a week, own a home, buy food, pay the bills?  so if you want all of the unemployed accepting minimum wage jobs, it's just not going to happen. many are so over qualified, they would never get hired.
    and what happens to those that do take the job and end up not able to pay their mortgage or buy food or go to the doctor? they lose their homes and end up in shelters or wherever. don't you see the problem? it's not as easy as saying, go work at mickeys.

    1. nlowman profile image60
      nlowmanposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I'd just like to throw in my two cents...I was laid off from my job at Microsoft about a year ago and no longer have unemployment benefits. Right now, I babysit here and there. I've been applying to many jobs, probably about 5 or so a week, many that I am over qualified for, and I have not received any replies at all. So, I can just vouch for the never getting hired thing. It's not for a lack of trying. I don't know where the jobs are. Maybe I need to take some qualifications off my resume or something.

  10. MikeNV profile image74
    MikeNVposted 6 years ago

    I find it interesting that the Democratic Party continues to blame the Republicans like they are against the unemployed.  When the FACT of the matter is the Democrats REFUSE to fund the Bill.  So where does $33.9 Billion come from if it's not funded?  Borrow it and add to the Deficit. That's the Obama plan for everything.  Borrow and Spend.

    Obama has an option to use unused Stimulus funds to pay for unemployment.  But they can't do that... that's for the Government Jobs they are creating... and that money is going to be needed to pay for all the new positions in all the new Government Agencies he is creating.

    So blame the Democrats, Blame the Republicans, blame anyone you want... bottom line is that nothing is being done to help people get back to work.

    This country can not afford to borrow and spend forever.

    Interesting how BOTH parties always find money for the Bankers.  We can't have CEO's and Corporate Executives losing their Million Dollar Retirement nest eggs.  So what if people in the "Real World" can't feed their kids and keep a roof over their head, as long as CEO's don't lose their Summer homes!

    --------------- Quotes --------------------

    "Republicans, tapping into voter anger about the growing national debt, said they would support extending the benefits if the bill was paid for. They proposed using unspent money from President Barack Obama's massive 2009 economic recovery package.

    Democrats rejected the offer, saying the money was needed for jobs programs. Republicans said the stimulus package included plenty of lawmakers' pet projects that could be cut to cover the unemployment benefits.

    "Americans are not receiving their unemployment checks because Democrats refuse to pay for these benefits at a time of record federal deficits," said Rep. Dave Camp of Michigan, the top Republican on the Ways and Means Committee."

  11. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

      it is a stand alone bill now. the House passed it, it will now be in the hands of the Senate when they go back to work July 12. happy july 4th to the senators.
    http://all247news.com/house-finally-pas … bill/1080/

    to compare everyone the same is unjustified. I'm really amazed at how some people think about this situation. just the fact that there are this many people unemployed for this long is an emergency.

    1. KFlippin profile image61
      KFlippinposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      That is not new news -- just 'news' ignored by this administration.

  12. leeberttea profile image60
    leebertteaposted 6 years ago

    Pelosi said that this bill extending unemployment was the best job creations bill.

    Simple question, if you are on unemployment getting 400 dollars a week but you can get a job that pays you 300 dollars a week, would you take it?

    No one can deny that for the unemployed, a weekly check takes the pressure off, but given the choice between working for less then that stipend most wouldn't do it. Though when you're not making anything and have no money coming in, you'll take any job to survive.

    That's reality. 10% unemployment is also the new reality in America. Obama is making us just like Europe whose countries all have averaged higher unemployment than the USA for decades due to their entitlement centric society. Even Joe Biden said those 8 million jobs are never coming back!

    So, how long do you want to extend unemployment, into perpetuity?

    1. lovemychris profile image80
      lovemychrisposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Those 8 million jobs that are never coming back is the problem.
      And who is it that took the jobs outta here? Why, the businesses themselves!

      Yes, so next time you look around to point the finger of blame, point it at Vulture Capitalism.

      All about the benjamins baby---they want more and more and more....5 mil a year isn't enough for them.

      Hell, Cheney got 32 mil from Halliburton! What a Capitalistic accomplishment to look up to and achive!!!

      blech. puke. barf. He deserves that like he deserved the vpsidency....not at all. little brownnosing snotball from hell.

    2. bill yon profile image43
      bill yonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I would take a job at 300 if I was getting 400 from unemployment,because the job is permanent unemployment is temporary.

    3. Ralph Deeds profile image68
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Nobody's proposing that unemployment benefits be extended "in perpetuity." And I believe the proposal would apply only in states where unemployment is highest. There will be no need to extend unemployment benefits once the economy is back on its feet and unemployed people can find jobs. Now, in many states the number of unemployed people exceeds the number of available jobs by ten to one. Blaming the unemployed for not finding a job in these circumstances is not fair.

      1. readytoescape profile image59
        readytoescapeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Geez… Ralph we actually agree on something

  13. Dobson profile image83
    Dobsonposted 6 years ago

    I find the fact that the congress would not extend the benefits troubling solely for the fact that people that are unemployed for the most part will not get the amount of money they have chosen to try to exist on each month and therefore are going to find a gap. As the gap deepens, the other shoe begins to fall with late fees and possible effects to the credit rating or security of the home loan.

    I do agree that the United States debt is becoming increasingly a National emergency. We don't want to think about the total implications of the looming crisis, but the financial crunch we thought was horrible is merely a pebble in the ocean compared to what will happen if the deficit spending continues uncheck

  14. readytoescape profile image59
    readytoescapeposted 6 years ago

    For those who don’t know Unemployment benefits vary by State, with Massachusetts paying the most at $628-$942 for up to 72 weeks and with Alabama and Florida paying the least at $255 for 59 weeks and $275 for 79 weeks (as of June 2009) respectively. The numbers above are the maximum benefits allowed by the laws of the individual states.

    Now it can be easily stated that those in Mass have a better opportunity for financial survival than those in Alabama or Florida. Those in southern states are barely at subsistence levels while those collecting benefits in other states are reaping benefits that equate too, for example, the average salary in the state of Florida at 52K per year.

    For further analysis consult the areas that have the highest foreclosure rates, you will see Florida as one of the leaders. This rate of increased foreclosure activity is a direct result of unemployment in the state and very low UE benefits.

    If you track back the economic downfall you will find it all began when Obama and McCain clinched their respective nominations and the outcome of the election, with its foretold financial impacts, became apparent to the markets; thereby divestment increased and depressed the entire economy creating the conditions that brought on massive unemployment.

    The majority of people today collecting UE benefits would rather not be. The majority of these newly unemployed have lost jobs that they have held for more than ten years and lost jobs that paid considerably well to sustain middle income lifestyles. One cannot maintain this lifestyle with UE benefits or a job a Taco bell (unless one is in Mass.). And even if you try your debts continue to mount and one will still lose all that one has ever worked for. Again see the foreclosure rates.

    The only solution is to stimulate private sector financial investment to re-establish lost incomes. This can only happen when the tax structure is certain, lowered and government regulation and interference is reduced or eliminated.

    Okay that’s my dissertation for the day.

    1. Aya Katz profile image90
      Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Readytoescape, "stimulating" the economy to create jobs is not the solution, it's a major part of the problem. "Stimulating" is just a euphemistic way of saying that you take money away from people who have savings in order to make everyone invest in businesses that are not viable to create jobs that have no real economic foundation. Let's not stimulate. Let's let the economy develop naturally.

      1. readytoescape profile image59
        readytoescapeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I did not advocate the government doing anything to “stimulate” the economy other than get out of the way and stop stifling business with taxation, regulation and new legislation.

        And in so your “natural economic development” could occur, and it would do so rapidly.

      2. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "Let's not stimulate. Let's let the economy develop naturally."

        Spoken like Herbert Hoover.

  15. readytoescape profile image59
    readytoescapeposted 6 years ago

    And for the record, my use of the term “stimulate” is the dictionary version and not that of government speak or stimulus packages.

    1. Aya Katz profile image90
      Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Readytoescape, okay. We seem to be on the same side, so no need to quibble over words. However, in order not to confuse others, it is best to be clear that we mean just leave the economy alone and not something else. Stimulate, in the common dictionary definition,  does not mean leave something alone.

      I think we have to hit rock bottom before the economy is likely to grow again. This means we need to let all the false economic activity die down first, and people who are used to having jobs created for them by others are going to have to learn how to make a living without a job. In time, if they are successful, some of them may even end up employing others. But first, they need to learn to support themselves.

  16. jiberish profile image80
    jiberishposted 6 years ago

    I agree that the Unemployment bill should be a stand alone bill, and I agree that it should be extended and funded by the stimulus.  I disagree with those who bash people who are on it, even though there are some min wage jobs available, you would have to work 2 jobs to bring in what unemplyoment pays.  Most people paid into a fund all their lives and this is the first time they've had to take advantage of it.  It is not like Welfare, and to compare it would be moronic.  Look around and see those who have children to feed, and tell them that it's ok for their parents not to recieve help.  The summer is here, those with children will not have to pay for daycare as well.  The decisions made by this administration is mostly the cause of the job losses, and just because Obama says the economy is getting better doesn't make it so.  Visit http://www.dailyjobcuts.com/ and see if your job isn't next to be laying off.

    1. Aya Katz profile image90
      Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Jiberish, what about people who have never been employed? I have never held a full time job in the United States. I support a child, too. Why do you think that people who recently lost their jobs deserve help from the government, when some of us have always not had jobs and have survived without government support.

      1. readytoescape profile image59
        readytoescapeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Most working people not only deserve it, but they have paid for it. Every pay period deducted out of each pay check an employee pays an unemployment insurance premium. The government has abused and mis-administered this fund which is one of the reason the individual "benefit" is so abysmal.

  17. Dobson profile image83
    Dobsonposted 6 years ago

    Clifford, you should really make this into your first hub. It is obvious you have things to dsay and a hub is a great place to do this!

  18. 69
    logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago

    Where I am at, there are lots of jobs available for $10 or more per hour!  There are also a lot of people too damn lazy to work for that when they can lay around and collect unemployment. 
    Are there some people that need unemployment benefits?  Absolutely!  Are there others that could work but won't?  Absolutely!  Doesn't this make it more difficult for those that do need it?  Absolutely!  I have been layed off at times, but never drew umemployment because I knew I would be back and others needed it worse than I.  I had peers however that took the system for all they could!  Why?  Greed!  Because the system let them!
    Right now I am working 3 jobs!  No one looked for them for me, I found them on my own!  I busted my ass to get them, I am busting my ass to keep them and the government wants to bust my ass for working so hard by robbing me through the tax laws!
    True, most people have paid into unemployment and they should get full measure of their investment!  However when that runs out, come and ask me personally for help, don't rob me through the government.  In the long run you will get more and I will pay less.

    Unemployment benefits would have been extended had the Democrats been willing to make a few logical spending cuts in other areas.  Instead, they want to play political games with peoples lives because all the care about is appearances.
    The Republicans should have pushed them harder, but they have about as much courage as the Democrats.  Whatever happened to Paygo that the Dem's voted in?

    People have got to think this through!  If you drain the taxpayer dry, who is going to pay for all the things politicians think we need now!  How can we avoid collapse if it eventually comes to the point where you are paying so many different taxes it ultimately becomes more profitable to be on unemployment?  That it makes no sense to bust your ass for nothing?
    I believe in helping others, I just don't believe in supporting those  who believe they entitled to the fruits of my hard labor without making extensive efforts of their own and then contributing to the fullest extent when they are able.
    Those that think the government should tax us to death should donate all they have first, before they have designs on my hard earned assets!

  19. MikeNV profile image74
    MikeNVposted 6 years ago

    Another story today about Unemployment dropping from 9.7% to 9.5% because 650,000 people are no longer looking for work. 

    These "Official" numbers mean nothing.  People can't find jobs even when they are "looking".

    1. Aya Katz profile image90
      Aya Katzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sometimes when people stop looking for work that's when they discover that they can make a living some other way. They might be working as independent contractors with no benefits and no safety net. They might have started their own home business. They may have found a job abroad, with lower wages but also a lower cost of living. If they stopped looking for a job, they must be doing something else.

      1. 0
        china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        It is admirable that you are able to survive without a 'job' but you are clearly a bright enough guy, what about those who do not have the smarts to look after themselves so well, a considerable proportion of the population I would think.

        1. Cagsil profile image83
          Cagsilposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          The problem is a lack of know how. No one is taught how to, it has to come from outside pressure of society, before one begins to realize the necessity for learning.

          Not everyone learns at the same pace, but everyone has the same potential capacity, gender makes no difference.

          Those who understand the power of money, and how to respect it, then understand it's use. Those who do not, struggle with it.

        2. Sab Oh profile image60
          Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          So it's the government's job to "look after" the people?

          1. 0
            china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            what else is any elected government for, oh yes I forgot, in your case it helps business graze its crop of moron humanity.

            1. Sab Oh profile image60
              Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              To provide security, opportunity, a limited safety net, and a referee when needed. It is NOT to "look after" the citizenry as if everyone in society were invalids or helpless children.

              1. 0
                china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                There is precisely your view I guess - democratically elected governments are supposed to be by the people FOR the people.  Your idea of it is that they just graze you for profit - you are a sheep ! big_smile

                1. Sab Oh profile image60
                  Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                  Are you really trying to put words in my mouth? First the straw man and now this? Come on.

                  Perhaps YOU have a different idea about what "for the people" means. You prefer the blue pill?

                  And please refrain from personal insult. Thank you.

                  1. 0
                    china manposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                    'For the people' is not hard to understand - and it is clear and unambiguous - in case you are having trouble with it it means government for the people, not for some people - THE people

  20. readytoescape profile image59
    readytoescapeposted 6 years ago

    Actually the numbers have dropped not because people aren’t looking for work, but that their benefits have run out and are therefore no longer counted. These numbers also do not include the tens of thousands that have lost work and are not eligible for benefits due to self-employment status.

  21. sooner than later profile image60
    sooner than laterposted 6 years ago

    Too many problems with the US to list. She is a sinking ship that will become invasion worthy to her enemies within the next 10 years or less. we have bled the soils, bled the monies and gold reserves, sold her jobs, sold her soul to the National Reserve and given the rest to the thankless leaches. She has the highest prison rate per capital- and all those dads in prison have girls on the outside squirtin kids with more daddies and they all live off the system. People loose their jobs and apply half heartedly at enough places to stay unemployed by government "job search" requirements. Now given some states are worse than others- I would think the government could figure out how to spot those areas that need help more than others, but hey how would the people know what would help better than the government- they do a good job with Amtrack. wink

  22. Sab Oh profile image60
    Sab Ohposted 6 years ago

    LOL @ the doomsayers! I think the "It's hopeless, we're doomed!" crowd have a lot in common with the conspiracy nuts. The drama and 'certainty' makes them feel excited and important at the same time. They are, of course, often one and the same people and would benefit from mental health services. IMO.

    1. Doug Hughes profile image60
      Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      SAB - I don't think anyone said, "It's hopless, we're doomed!"  A few of us batted around the REALITY of trying to support a family on a minum wage job or even several minimum-wage jobs. Look at the reality of cutting off benefits, which you support.  The load for helping will fall to the states and local governments. And they don't have the money!

      There's 2 reasons to take care of people in need. The first one is ethical, and I won't waste my time trying to teach you ethical motives. The second is quite selfish - starving people will riot. You may think that Americans will feel it's their patriotic duty to starve to death quietly, but they won't..

      If it stands, the GOP is going to give the finger to  roughly 15 million people. When your unemploment is gone - fend for yourselves. The conservative arguments for cutting off benefits aren't just selfish - they're stupid.

      There's the anecdote about the guy who throws a rope 10 feet to a man who's drowning 20 feet offshore with the rationale - "I met him halfway." But it doesn't  apply - the GOP won't even go 10 feet.

      1. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "I don't think anyone said, "It's hopless, we're doomed!" "

        Perhaps you haven't read all the responses.

      2. Sab Oh profile image60
        Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        "There's 2 reasons to take care of people in need"

        It's "take care of" where you go wrong.

        "I won't waste my time trying to teach you ethical motives. "

        Good idea, then we won't have to examine your qualifications to do so.

        "starving people will riot"

        Ah, scare tactics. Pay more taxes or we will unleash our army of dependency upon you! Great approach. roll

        "You may think that Americans will feel it's their patriotic duty to starve to death quietly, but they won't.. "

        And now that old favorite - emotive hyperbole roll

    2. WizardOfOz profile image61
      WizardOfOzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Conspiracy nuts?  You mean the ones with the 'we hate communists' t-shirts?

    3. sooner than later profile image60
      sooner than laterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I'm sure you were addressing me as a doomsayer with your laugh, but even more funny- let me correct that- sad actually- is that people really don't underestand how fragile America is right now. And not just because times are bad, but truly how fragile it is. I predicted the fall of the real estate bubble before it happened and those were "good times". When my wife and I left Arizona for Costa Rica last year- the state still had a 70% overbuild for the average 3% of home buyers. Ghost towns!!! And when you look back at the loans comparable to the minimal in comparison crisis of the 80's, this bubble kinda looks like sabotage doesn't it? Shame BS- but now on a much larger scale. But why didn't Americans remember it? Answer me that

      We got out because we have always maintained that anytime you double your money, that is good enough- and thats what we did on the land we owned prior to the bubble. Now, I know that that land could have sold for 5 times that amount that I sold it for- but let the next guy get greedy. I got out with good gains while 99% suffered major losses(and thats sad)- not sad because they lost their hummers back to the banks, sad because they would do it again if the market picked up. But I wouldn't worry about that. Now watching govenment spending is like wathing a butcher knife get soaked in lemon juice then dipped in salt and start hacking at what is left- don't forget we have sold over 400 million tons of gold to foreign countries sinse the recession who have no faith in our dollar and that should put you to rest well at night.

      but i'm sure this dooms stuff is still funny to you.

      1. WizardOfOz profile image61
        WizardOfOzposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Read some Australian media, if you want a disturbing memory, it is all happening here.  The funny thing about our financial crisis is that nobody believes it will happen.  We are following in the same shadow.  Well, not me.  I am waiting for the market to fall and I am going poaching.

  23. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    and they deserve to be able to use what they have paid into, especially those who have worked for many years, middle age, finding themselves laid off. for every job position, there are 5 unemployed people applying for that job. what happens to the 4 that aren't hired? middle age workers are being hit hard because of their income needs, highest earning years and then it stops. trying to replace that job is very difficult. these people are finding they're over qualified, their resume is tossed.
    the opportunities for learning new skills for the unemployed are there for a reason. they are necessary or they will find themselves underemployed, possibly working two or more low paying jobs. the young people coming out of high school have no choice now but to gain the skills they need if they're not college bound.
    2 year degrees can prepare you for a decent job, at least you'll have employable skills. self-employment is always an option, but not everyone has those skills.

  24. Jane@CM profile image61
    Jane@CMposted 6 years ago

    I for one am grateful that my husband found employment.  He found it before he was able to collect unemployment.  So many of his friends with 4 year degrees & Masters degrees are now collecting unemployment after the massive layoff last August. 

    I've written about this and my take on "some" of those collecting who claim they cannot find a job have created their own limitations.  I speaking of highly educated, employable people who simply will not relocate for a job.  Yes, they have great reasons, they love their school district, can't move away from family, etc. but the bottom line is - who comes first, your extended family that you can visit or your immediate family?  These are people who I look at and say, there are jobs out there for you - you are choosing unemployment.  That makes me sad.

    1. 69
      logic,commonsenseposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Jane you are right on!  If one truly wants employment, then any job will do!  To me, your family takes precedence over your own desires.  When I got out of high school several years ago, my dad needed help financially.  I went to work instead of college to help out.  Survive first then go for the extra things when you are able and stable!

  25. American Romance profile image61
    American Romanceposted 6 years ago

    There is a liberal on here who gleefully claims she is on unemployment and happy to have time to work on her screen plays, Those are the ones we conservatives resent!

  26. Ralph Deeds profile image68
    Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago

    During previous recessions, unemployment benefit extensions were passed easily with bi-partisan support during Republican and Democratic administrations.

    1. Sab Oh profile image60
      Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      And they were paid for too

      1. Doug Hughes profile image60
        Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I presume you favor raising taxes to the wealthy and on corporations, perhaps cancelling the corporate welfare, like oil subsidies, to pay for extended unemployment.

        1. Sab Oh profile image60
          Sab Ohposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          I most certainly do not. That would be self-defeating.

      2. Ralph Deeds profile image68
        Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        They were at least under the Democratic administrations.

  27. readytoescape profile image59
    readytoescapeposted 6 years ago

    I would like to point out that the Benefits paid to the majority of recipients are derived from Unemployment Insurance premiums paid by these very same people. Had the bureaucrats not abused and raided the system, not unlike Social Security, plenty of funds would be available.

    To believe this system is a handout is a crock. Many people now collecting these benefits have paid into the system each week for many years, and now that they need their “benefits” you would begrudge them getting what they are entitled too?

    Congress especially the Senate are essentially obligated to pass the Emergency bill and replace the funds “stolen” from a program that has been in place since 1935. Had these funds been left untouched and/or securely invested there would be no need for emergency bills to fund the system, again just like Social Security.

  28. rebekahELLE profile image92
    rebekahELLEposted 6 years ago

    http://www.opencongress.org/articles/vi … sion-Bill-

    latest I've read for those following this crucial bill.

    certainly not a handout. ridiculous that people lump the unemployed into one big stereotype. kind of out of touch with America to make an assumption as broad based as some are making.

    this is the right thing to do at this time or the repercussions will be far worse. my say.