PDA

View Full Version : Ashamed of the GOP this morning...



suitanim
06-25-2010, 08:06 AM
I am 100% unequivocally breaking with party ranks today. I think it was a HUGE mistake to defeat the jobless aid bill in the Senate. This could very well come back to bite them in their collective ass in the Fall.

This is classic "pound foolish, penny smart" thinking. They passed massive, fraud-riddled, irresponsible and inefficient spendulus bills, TARP, that POS cash for clunkers, et al, and thrashed this fairly modest bill that will screw literally millions of people. It will also have long-term negative net effects on the economy as you will basically have a couple hundred thousand people a week sliding from a little bit of income to none.

I could see this working if there were jobs for them, but there aren't. Now what are they going to do? They'll have absolutely NO money to kick back into the system, and they will end up eating away at public dollars anyway by using incredibly inefficient government relief programs.

I am 100% FOR austerity programs, but cutting 16 billion that goes directly to unemployed people (as well as keeping employed people on the job) AFTER passing over a trillion in shitty spendulus bills is, quite frankly, retarded.

If nothing else, they should RE-introduce this bill using unspent spendulus money (and there is still a ton of it just sitting there). And they need to do it quickly...which is impossible.

stillers4me
06-25-2010, 08:33 AM
We don't know what was stuck in the anal crevices of this bill that made them strike it down.

suitanim
06-25-2010, 08:54 AM
No, we do...there was a tax on investment fund managers. And, after they pared this thing down 3 times, it still left 35 billion in deficit spending. It also had some Medicaid funding in it.

It was short-sighted to knock this down, especially since the D's compromised multiple times on it.

Mach1
06-25-2010, 09:00 AM
Bummer, no more handouts.

suitanim
06-25-2010, 09:14 AM
Bullshit. I know 5 people, including a couple in my family, that haven't worked in a long time. They send out applications every day. There's simply nothing out there for them, and now, as of the end of this month, they will have ZERO income. One guy I know worked for THIRTY years as a printer, and his company went bankrupt and they shut the doors in his face. He's not a lazy bum who sits on his porch drinking 40's all day, he's a hard worker who was rewarded for his company loyalty by getting fucked in the ass, and now the system that he paid into all his life is breaking down when he needs it most.

What do you think happens to these people, people who want to work but can't? They end up on welfare or assistance, food stamps, and the like. The pittance they were making in direct cash (which was at least enough to keep them going) will be nothing compared to the cash they'll end up eating up in the government dole pipeline, huge bloated inefficient systems where 80% of the money goes to overhead.

This is classic narrow thinking, failing to see the forest through the trees.

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 09:46 AM
As I've been saying for quite some time ... both parties have sold us out. We don't need health-care reform, financial reform, or immigration reform ... we need government reform.

suitanim
06-25-2010, 09:51 AM
As I've been saying for quite some time ... both parties have sold us out. We don't need health-care reform, financial reform, or immigration reform ... we need government reform.

I agree by respectfully disagreeing...we'll need government reform in order to achieve REAL Immigration reform, REAL Healthcare reform, or REAL financial reform.

X-Terminator
06-25-2010, 09:58 AM
Bullshit. I know 5 people, including a couple in my family, that haven't worked in a long time. They send out applications every day. There's simply nothing out there for them, and now, as of the end of this month, they will have ZERO income. One guy I know worked for THIRTY years as a printer, and his company went bankrupt and they shut the doors in his face. He's not a lazy bum who sits on his porch drinking 40's all day, he's a hard worker who was rewarded for his company loyalty by getting fucked in the ass, and now the system that he paid into all his life is breaking down when he needs it most.

What do you think happens to these people, people who want to work but can't? They end up on welfare or assistance, food stamps, and the like. The pittance they were making in direct cash (which was at least enough to keep them going) will be nothing compared to the cash they'll end up eating up in the government dole pipeline, huge bloated inefficient systems where 80% of the money goes to overhead.

This is classic narrow thinking, failing to see the forest through the trees.

Unfortunately, it's the lazy bums and the ones who get benefits and then choose not to go back to work who ruined it for the people you mentioned. Same thing for welfare/food stamps. I'm sure that was one of the biggest reasons why the GOP voted it down. I personally know people who have abused both systems, which has made me a little less supportive of extending benefits, but there has to be some kind of compromise so that the ones who are abusing the system get cut off, and those who have every intention of going back to work are able to keep their benefits.

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 10:45 AM
I agree by respectfully disagreeing...we'll need government reform in order to achieve REAL Immigration reform, REAL Healthcare reform, or REAL financial reform.

We may or may not be on the same page. I agree that we need social reforms, but the problem is I don't trust the people doing the reforming. Contrary to what Obama says, the mess we're in has little to do with George Bush. The problems didn't start in the last 8 years.

The government and the media have duped us into believing that banks and Wall Street are to blame for the financial crisis. The reason people need unemployment benefits and are losing their homes has little to do with subprime lending and more to do with the fact that we've lost our manufacturing base. There are very few good-paying jobs for people with low or limited skills.

The reasons why our manufacturing jobs have left are tied directly to decisions our government had made. As I said, they sold us out. And until we get our manufacturing jobs back, any rebound in the economy is going to be temporary. In fact, I suspect it's going to get a lot worse.

Having health care is important, but having a good job is more important. Immigration reform is important, but having a good job is more important. Our elected officials are more focused on social reforms and creating phantom "green jobs" than getting our real jobs back. Unless they get their collective head out of the sand, rather than extending jobless benefits, we should just give unemployed workers lifetime benefits.

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 10:58 AM
Unfortunately, it's the lazy bums and the ones who get benefits and then choose not to go back to work who ruined it for the people you mentioned. Same thing for welfare/food stamps. I'm sure that was one of the biggest reasons why the GOP voted it down. I personally know people who have abused both systems, which has made me a little less supportive of extending benefits, but there has to be some kind of compromise so that the ones who are abusing the system get cut off, and those who have every intention of going back to work are able to keep their benefits.

:clap2:
As you said X-T, those who truly want to find a job are getting screwed by those who don't.
----------------------------------
http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/long-term-unemployment-benefits-diminish-incentive

Past studies ... show that people are most likely to find a job just as their unemployment benefits run out. Many people use that thin cushion to wait until the last minute to act. They pass up lower-paying, less desirable jobs, or they avoid moving to take a job...surveys show people are very pessimistic about this labor market and their job prospects, and they think it's not worth the effort to look. The generosity of benefits makes it easier to take that view.

Unemployment benefits may have good intentions of helping those who have been laid-off from their jobs. However, in reality, unemployment benefits are likely to increase unemployment, diminish unemployed workers incentives to search for employment and add to the federal deficit.

BPS3akaWirels3
06-25-2010, 11:51 AM
Well, I just filed for unemployment last week. Luckily I know a few people in my business and it's not that hard to find a job doing what I do if you don't mind relocating which I have down more times then I can count on both hands.. Looks like I might being moving back to Ratbird heaven.. lol

BPS3akaWirels3
06-25-2010, 11:54 AM
:clap2:
As you said X-T, those who truly want to find a job are getting screwed by those who don't.
----------------------------------
http://www.freedomworks.org/blog/jborowski/long-term-unemployment-benefits-diminish-incentive

Past studies ... show that people are most likely to find a job just as their unemployment benefits run out. Many people use that thin cushion to wait until the last minute to act. They pass up lower-paying, less desirable jobs, or they avoid moving to take a job...surveys show people are very pessimistic about this labor market and their job prospects, and they think it's not worth the effort to look. The generosity of benefits makes it easier to take that view.

Unemployment benefits may have good intentions of helping those who have been laid-off from their jobs. However, in reality, unemployment benefits are likely to increase unemployment, diminish unemployed workers incentives to search for employment and add to the federal deficit.

I agree with that... GET A DAM JOB NO MATTER WHAT AND CONTINUE TO LOOK FOR ANOTHER.. Don't waste good money..

Dino 6 Rings
06-25-2010, 12:08 PM
I have a couple questions.

1. Of the "nearly quarter of a million people" which is 200,000 a week, that will have their unemployment benefits not extended, how long exactly have they been on unemployment already? 18 months? Longer?

2. Why did an unemployment bill have a Tax on Domestic Oil in it?

3. What is the current national debt? 13 Trillion?

4. 16 Billion dollars to the states to keep state workers employed?

5. Why no mention of the Medicare fix that was pulled out of this bill and passed 417 - 1 in the House?

6. $4.6 Billion of it was for a class action lawsuit brought by black farmers against the Agriculture Department. Why was that in an unemployment bill?

suitanim
06-25-2010, 05:40 PM
That's easy...show me ONE bill that doesn't have pork and riders attached, and I'll show you a bill written in fantasyland.

This is a bottom line issue: The Republicans plowed away at MUCH worse bills that were originally presented, continually gaining more and more concessions from the Dems, until there was something workable to bring to the floor.

Then they torpedoed it anyway.

This could have been positioned positively by the GOP...they could have passed it, and trumpeted the fact that they whittled 90% of the pork out of it, and used it as a model for legislature closer to what they will pass in the future. Unfortunately, they proved they are "The party of no" yesterday.

It's not like I'm switching my vote tomorrow. I'm still a registered Republican. It's not like I'm going to suddenly become retarded and switch parties and vote for the guys who wanted this to be a 500 billion dollar bill with 67 pork riders on it. But they fucked up on this one...and the biggest fuck up was negotiating and working together with the left and then trashing the compromise anyway. This will hurt them both in the short term in November, and the long run when they regain power, or get closer to a majority.

Mach1
06-25-2010, 07:28 PM
The only people it's going to hurt are the ones that are to lazy to get off their ass's to find a job or take whats available until something better comes around.

st33lersguy
06-25-2010, 09:25 PM
We don't need more spending, we don't need an excuse for the unemployed to not find a job, we need to cut the debt, cut the deficit, and try to pass measures that will help job growth like lowering taxes on small business

suitanim
06-25-2010, 10:25 PM
The only people it's going to hurt are the ones that are to lazy to get off their ass's to find a job or take whats available until something better comes around.

Can you READ? I personally know 5 people who have worked for most of their adult lives, have paid into unemployment, and have been cut off or will be cut off soon. 2 of them had about 6 months of unemployment.

These people are DESPERATE for jobs and can't find them. I hope to Christ the ignorance displayed in this thread is the exception, and not the general rule to how people in this country think (or, more likely, are TOLD to think by talking heads and radio ratings machines). What a sad state of affairs...

tony hipchest
06-25-2010, 11:17 PM
arizona is cutting off all the illegal immigrants. perhaps they should go pick lettuce for $7.25/hour down there.

america is all about getting back up on that horse even when you get knocked off, even if it means starting from the ground up. its funny how some people couldnt give a damn about these issues until it hits close to home.

the problem has already been stated. trust fund babies and people who have their parents pay their way through college, and get a job at their daddy's buddies firm suddenly find themselves out of work.

instead of taking a minimum wage paying job and living w/in their means like so many millions of other americans (and pulling themselves up by the bootstraps and working their way back up) they put in applications to $200,000/ year jobs and whine when they dont get hired.

quick hint- when one is laid off or fired, they probably arent due for a pay increase.

other than that the OP makes some very valid points which i would naturally expect 95% of conservatives here to automatically disagree with.

suitanim
06-25-2010, 11:29 PM
Sorry, but wrong again.

High School educated 4 out of 5. Skilled, but specially skilled (like printing). Not even Wal-Mart is interested in hiring older, unskilled workers full time. And since when did a company closing it's doors due to insolvency reflect on the ran and file workers? Or should they abandon their house (and mortgage), their belongings, and hitch hike with their few remaining dollars in pocket with the promise of picking vegetables 2500 miles away?

Even when I take a position opposite my usual one, when it's clearly stated, and backed up with specific examples, I'm still attacked by the same few people, regardless of the merits of my positions, opinions, and arguments. It's tedious and tired and low-brow.

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 11:37 PM
arizona is cutting off all the illegal immigrants. perhaps they should go pick lettuce for $7.25/hour down there.

:pop2:
Immigrant farm workers' challenge: Take our jobs

SAN FRANCISCO – In a tongue-in-cheek call for immigration reform, farm workers are teaming up with comedian Stephen Colbert to challenge unemployed Americans: Come on, take our jobs.

Farm workers are tired of being blamed by politicians and anti-immigrant activists for taking work that should go to Americans and dragging down the economy, said Arturo Rodriguez, the president of the United Farm Workers of America.

So the group is encouraging the unemployed — and any Washington pundits or anti-immigrant activists who want to join them — to apply for the some of thousands of agricultural jobs being posted with state agencies as harvest season begins.

All applicants need to do is fill out an online form under the banner "I want to be a farm worker" at http://www.takeourjobs.org, and experienced field hands will train them and connect them to farms.

According to the Labor Department, three out of four farm workers were born abroad, and more than half are illegal immigrants.

Proponents of tougher immigration laws have argued that farmers have become used to cheap labor and don't want to raise wages enough to draw in other workers.

Those who have done the job have some words of advice for applicants: First, dress appropriately.

During summer, when the harvest of fruits and vegetables is in full swing in California's Central Valley, temperatures hover in the triple digits. Heat exhaustion is one of the reasons farm labor consistently makes the Bureau of Labor Statistics' top ten list of the nation's most dangerous jobs.

Second, expect long days. Growers have a small window to pick fruit before it is overripe.

And don't count on a big paycheck. Farm workers are excluded from federal overtime provisions, and small farms don't even have to pay the minimum wage. Fifteen states don't require farm labor to be covered by workers compensation laws.

Any takers?

"The reality is farmworkers who are here today aren't taking any American jobs away. They work in often unbearable situations," Rodriguez said. "I don't think there will be many takers, but the offer is being made. Let's see what happens."

To highlight how unlikely the prospect of Americans lining up to pick strawberries or grapes, Comedy Central's "Colbert Report" plans to feature the "Take Our Jobs" campaign on July 8.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100624/ap_on_en_tv/us_immigration_take_our_jobs

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
Even when I take a position opposite my usual one, when it's clearly stated, and backed up with specific examples, I'm still attacked by the same few people, regardless of the merits of my positions, opinions, and arguments. It's tedious and tired and low-brow.

Who attacked you? Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're attacking you. You can't post something in The Soapbox and expect everyone to agree with you no matter what position you take.

suitanim
06-25-2010, 11:42 PM
If the people I know live close to this kind of job, they'd most likely take it...but there isn't anything like that around here.

SteelerEmpire
06-25-2010, 11:45 PM
I agree that voting this bill down was a big mistake. Those knuckle-heads in Washington cannot figure out how to get people jobs THEN remove the only income they do have... savage. CRIME WILL SKY-ROCKET !!!!!!

suitanim
06-25-2010, 11:49 PM
I agree that voting this bill down was a big mistake. Those knuckle-heads in Washington cannot figure out how to get people jobs THEN remove the only income they do have... savage. CRIME WILL SKY-ROCKET !!!!!!

I wonder about that...so far we have manged to buck the usual trend of crime increases in depressed economies. But when you take away the bread from actual bread winners, they might get desperate. A couple people I have talked to are VERY proud. They are reluctant to ask for help. The don't want to go on food stamps. They don't want to go on government relief or welfare. But I wonder what choice do they have with no income at all when just a year ago they were running households with two incomes, a mortgage, etc, etc...

I think they'll bite the bullet and go on relief before they commit crime....

Wallace108
06-25-2010, 11:59 PM
I wonder about that...so far we have manged to buck the usual trend of crime increases in depressed economies. But when you take away the bread from actual bread winners, they might get desperate. A couple people I have talked to are VERY proud. They are reluctant to ask for help. The don't want to go on food stamps. They don't want to go on government relief or welfare. But I wonder what choice do they have with no income at all when just a year ago they were running households with two incomes, a mortgage, etc, etc...

I think they'll bite the bullet and go on relief before they commit crime....

These sound like great people you're describing and my heart goes out to them, but I ask you, why aren't they able to find jobs? Why aren't a lot of hard-working unemployed Americans able to find jobs? Could it be because the jobs just aren't there? Is the solution to keep extending unemployment benefits? Or is the solution getting our jobs back?

SteelerEmpire
06-26-2010, 12:02 AM
I wonder about that...so far we have manged to buck the usual trend of crime increases in depressed economies. But when you take away the bread from actual bread winners, they might get desperate. A couple people I have talked to are VERY proud. They are reluctant to ask for help. The don't want to go on food stamps. They don't want to go on government relief or welfare. But I wonder what choice do they have with no income at all when just a year ago they were running households with two incomes, a mortgage, etc, etc...

I think they'll bite the bullet and go on relief before they commit crime....

That's it right there. The source of money will just be "transferred" into the form of welfare and food stamps... Yet they will still be getting a stream of money from the government... So they are just put from one program...to another...

Wallace108
06-26-2010, 12:14 AM
That's it right there. The source of money will just be "transferred" into the form of welfare and food stamps... Yet they will still be getting a stream of money from the government... So they are just put from one program...to another...

Getting unemployment benefits doesn't have the same social stigma attached to it as getting welfare and food stamps do. If honest, hard-working people have to go on welfare or receive food stamps to make ends meet, they'll get off of them as quickly as they can. Since unemployment benefits don't have that stigma, a lot of people have no problem living off those benefits until they're about to run out ... then they look for a job. This doesn't apply to everyone obviously, but definitely a lot.

Mach1
06-26-2010, 10:38 AM
Can you READ? I personally know 5 people who have worked for most of their adult lives, have paid into unemployment, and have been cut off or will be cut off soon. 2 of them had about 6 months of unemployment.

These people are DESPERATE for jobs and can't find them. I hope to Christ the ignorance displayed in this thread is the exception, and not the general rule to how people in this country think (or, more likely, are TOLD to think by talking heads and radio ratings machines). What a sad state of affairs...

If you fill so bad for them support them on your dime, not mine.

MasterOfPuppets
06-26-2010, 11:04 AM
If you fill so bad for them support them on your dime, not mine.

actually it's not "your dime" that pays unemployment benefits. employers pay unemployment insurance that funds the program. ...i'd rather see the government have to give it to citizens than let them piss it away themselves like they are doing with social security.


Out of Work and Challenged on Benefits, Too
In Record Numbers, Employers Move to Block Unemployment Payouts

It's hard enough to lose a job. But for a growing proportion of U.S. workers, the troubles really set in when they apply for unemployment benefits.
More than a quarter of people applying for such claims have their rights to the benefit challenged as employers increasingly act to block payouts to former workers.

The proportion of claims disputed by former employers and state agencies has reached record levels in recent years, according to the Labor Department numbers tallied by the Urban Institute.

Under state and federal laws, employees who are fired for misbehavior or quit voluntarily are ineligible for unemployment compensation. When jobless claims are blocked, employers save money because their unemployment insurance rates are based on the amount of the benefits their workers collect.

As unemployment rolls swell in the recession, many workers seem surprised to find their benefits challenged, their former bosses providing testimony against them. On one recent morning in what amounts to one of Maryland's unemployment courts, employees and employers squared off at conference tables to rehash reports of bad customer service, anger management and absenteeism.

"I couldn't believe it," said Kenneth M. Brown, who lost his job as a hotel electrician in October.
He began collecting benefits of $380 a week but then discovered that his former employer, the owners of the Gaylord National Resort and Convention Center, were appealing to block his unemployment benefits. The hotel alleged that he had been fired for being deceptive with a supervisor.

"A big corporation like that. . . . It was hard enough to be terminated," he said. "But for them to try to take away the unemployment benefits -- I just thought that was heartless."

After a Post reporter turned up at the hearing, the hotel's representative withdrew the appeal and declined to comment. A hotel spokesperson later said the company does not comment on legal matters. Brown will continue to collect benefits, which he, his wife and three young children rely on to make monthly mortgage payments on their Upper Marlboro home.

Unemployment compensation programs are administered by the states and funded by payroll taxes that employers pay. In 2007, employers put up about $31.5 billion in such taxes, and those taxes typically rise during and after recessions, as states seek to replenish the funds.

With each successful claim raising a company's costs, many firms resist letting employees collect the benefit if they consider it undeserved.

"In some of these cases, employers feel like there's some matter of principle involved," said Coleman Walsh, chief administrative law judge in Virginia, who has handled many such disputes. But, he said, "nowadays it appears their motivation has more to do with the impact on their unemployment insurance tax rate. Employers by and large are more aware of unemployment as a cost of business."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/02/11/AR2009021104311.html

SteelCityMom
06-26-2010, 11:13 AM
If you fill so bad for them support them on your dime, not mine.

I'm not sure how you think people that receive unemployment benefits are being supported off of your dime. Employers pay into unemployment by way of state and federal tax. That means that these programs should already be paid for. The only way the government has to pay for anything is if a states unemployment gets so high that loans are necessary to cover the overhead (which is happening in a lot of states...and is through no fault of the workers).


Purpose
In general, the Federal-State Unemployment Insurance Program provides unemployment benefits to eligible workers who are unemployed through no fault of their own (as determined under State law), and meet other eligibility requirements of State law.
Unemployment insurance payments (benefits) are intended to provide temporary financial assistance to unemployed workers who meet the requirements of State law.


Each State administers a separate unemployment insurance program within guidelines established by Federal law.


Eligibility for unemployment insurance, benefit amounts and the length of time benefits are available are determined by the State law under which unemployment insurance claims are established.


In the majority of States, benefit funding is based solely on a tax imposed on employers. (Three (3) States require minimal employee contributions.)

http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/uifactsheet.asp

I get that you don't like the idea of people not looking for work, I don't like it either...but you have to keep some perspective here. Unemployment benefits are not something you can raise a family off of, these people WANT to work. There just happens to be a shortage of jobs in many places.

Mach1
06-26-2010, 11:42 AM
actually it's not "your dime" that pays unemployment benefits. employers pay unemployment insurance that funds the program. ...i'd rather see the government have to give it to citizens than let them piss it away themselves like they are doing with social security.


I'm not sure how you think people that receive unemployment benefits are being supported off of your dime. Employers pay into unemployment by way of state and federal tax. That means that these programs should already be paid for. The only way the government has to pay for anything is if a states unemployment gets so high that loans are necessary to cover the overhead (which is happening in a lot of states...and is through no fault of the workers).



I get that you don't like the idea of people not looking for work, I don't like it either...but you have to keep some perspective here. Unemployment benefits are not something you can raise a family off of, these people WANT to work. There just happens to be a shortage of jobs in many places.

I am an employer, so technically it is my dime.

SteelCityMom
06-26-2010, 12:18 PM
I am an employer, so technically it is my dime.

Right...but you're only paying insurance on your own workers, not other companies. So people who have had jobs with other companies aren't getting unemployment benefits on your dime. And your rates are only dependent on how many former employees you've had that collect unemployment, not other companies.

Some of the people you should be mad at here are a number of small business owners will fudge the books, hire illegals or pay people under the table to avoid having to pay any unemployment tax. This puts more of a strain on the state than people justifiably collecting the unemployment their companies have paid into.

ricardisimo
06-26-2010, 01:22 PM
I think the bigger question is: How did the Republican Party have any say at all in the success or failure of this, or any other bill.

House= 253 Democrats: 178 Republicans
Senate= 59 Democrats (caucus) : 41 Republicans

Neither Bush Papa nor Jr. (nor Reagan, even) ever had a majority like this, and they did as they pleased. The Democratic Party is utterly worthless. Why is anyone at all still a registered Democrat?

Godfather
06-26-2010, 02:27 PM
The Democratic Party is utterly worthless.

I agree 100%.

I can't stand the Republicans either but they're the only alternative for now.

Mach1
06-26-2010, 02:28 PM
Right...but you're only paying insurance on your own workers, not other companies. So people who have had jobs with other companies aren't getting unemployment benefits on your dime. And your rates are only dependent on how many former employees you've had that collect unemployment, not other companies.

Some of the people you should be mad at here are a number of small business owners will fudge the books, hire illegals or pay people under the table to avoid having to pay any unemployment tax. This puts more of a strain on the state than people justifiably collecting the unemployment their companies have paid into.

Wrong, where do you think the moneys goes that I pay in. Why don't I get a refund at the end of the year when I don't have layoff's or lost workers. They sure don't keep a money account just for us.
Our rate more than tripled this year and we have never laid anyone off or have ever had to pay claims. If you think its bad now wait till Jan. 1 2011 when the new taxes and rate hikes hit.

SteelCityMom
06-26-2010, 03:24 PM
Wrong, where do you think the moneys goes that I pay in. Why don't I get a refund at the end of the year when I don't have layoff's or lost workers. They sure don't keep a money account just for us.
Our rate more than tripled this year and we have never laid anyone off or have ever had to pay claims. If you think its bad now wait till Jan. 1 2011 when the new taxes and rate hikes hit.

Lol, because it's insurance you're paying on. I've never heard of getting refunded yearly for any kind of insurance if it isn't used.

And something had to have changed in your experience rating for your rates to go up so quickly. Be sure though that the businesses that do have to pay claims have much higher rates. If your state tripled the tax rate, be sure that it's due more to either or both a) such a high unemployment rate...not much you can do about that or b) too many businesses not paying the proper tax rate or fudging the books so they don't have to pay it at all...but still have employees on unemployment.

You had to have known about this system when you opened your business though...it's not some kind of secret, and the program has been in place since 1935. If you're not happy with it, the best advice I can give is move to Canada and open a business there. Both employees and employers are required to pay into UI. But they don't get yearly refunds on their insurance either.

Godfather
06-26-2010, 04:27 PM
Lol, because it's insurance you're paying on. I've never heard of getting refunded yearly for any kind of insurance if it isn't used.

And something had to have changed in your experience rating for your rates to go up so quickly. Be sure though that the businesses that do have to pay claims have much higher rates. If your state tripled the tax rate, be sure that it's due more to either or both a) such a high unemployment rate...not much you can do about that or b) too many businesses not paying the proper tax rate or fudging the books so they don't have to pay it at all...but still have employees on unemployment.

You had to have known about this system when you opened your business though...it's not some kind of secret, and the program has been in place since 1935. If you're not happy with it, the best advice I can give is move to Canada and open a business there. Both employees and employers are required to pay into UI. But they don't get yearly refunds on their insurance either.

Canada's looking good. They'll have lower tax rates in a few months...not to mention cheaper and better healthcare once Obamacare kicks in.

Mach1
06-26-2010, 06:12 PM
Lol, because it's insurance you're paying on. I've never heard of getting refunded yearly for any kind of insurance if it isn't used.

And something had to have changed in your experience rating for your rates to go up so quickly. Be sure though that the businesses that do have to pay claims have much higher rates. If your state tripled the tax rate, be sure that it's due more to either or both a) such a high unemployment rate...not much you can do about that or b) too many businesses not paying the proper tax rate or fudging the books so they don't have to pay it at all...but still have employees on unemployment.

You had to have known about this system when you opened your business though...it's not some kind of secret, and the program has been in place since 1935. If you're not happy with it, the best advice I can give is move to Canada and open a business there. Both employees and employers are required to pay into UI. But they don't get yearly refunds on their insurance either.

Maybe I should go to mexico and get some of that cheap labor.

I can assure you that nothing changed on my end to get the rate increase. It is as you know a insurance company and can raise its rates. It wasn't just me it was the whole state that got jacked up rates. It's only going to double in 2011 though, not triple as it did this year. The reason they raised the rates, they claim is to be more in line with the rest of the country.

MasterOfPuppets
06-26-2010, 08:23 PM
Wrong, where do you think the moneys goes that I pay in. Why don't I get a refund at the end of the year when I don't have layoff's or lost workers. They sure don't keep a money account just for us.
Our rate more than tripled this year and we have never laid anyone off or have ever had to pay claims. If you think its bad now wait till Jan. 1 2011 when the new taxes and rate hikes hit.
why don't we get a refund for not using medical insurance ? why don't we get a refund for making no claims against auto insurance ? :noidea:

Mach1
06-27-2010, 02:02 AM
why don't we get a refund for not using medical insurance ? why don't we get a refund for making no claims against auto insurance ? :noidea:

I was just being sarcastic. Just try writing a $3000 check every three months for it though.

Dino 6 Rings
06-29-2010, 04:37 PM
OMG! What thread got both tony and revs banned! LMAO!

BigNastyDefense
06-29-2010, 09:28 PM
I am not reading all through this. Here is my opinion:

The people in Washington, D.C. need to get their heads out of their asses. They need to find a way to help the unemployed. They need to find a way to bring real jobs into communities. We need to pull our manufacturing back to the United States of America.

The people on unemployment need to take what's out there. I work at a gas station. It's not where I pictured myself being right now. But I am employed. Take two jobs that don't pay what you made, but they do pay something. Too many people on unemployment sit and wait for a job that paid what they used to make to come along. They turn down decent jobs because it's not $52,000 a year. But then when their unemployment is close to running out, they complain that they won't get anymore assistance. IMHO, they don't deserve it. Beggers can't be choosers.

Stlrs4Life
06-30-2010, 08:02 AM
I find it funny that suitanim was banned after this thread! What's wrong? He disagreed with the GOP? And ya ban him?

Stlrs4Life
06-30-2010, 08:04 AM
OMG! What thread got both tony and revs banned! LMAO!


Was wondering the same.

Wallace108
06-30-2010, 08:17 AM
The people in Washington, D.C. need to get their heads out of their asses. They need to find a way to help the unemployed. They need to find a way to bring real jobs into communities. We need to pull our manufacturing back to the United States of America.

I couldn't agree more. But it appears most of our elected officials don't seem the least bit interested in getting them back. Obama promised several times during the campaign that he would revisit NAFTA and other trade agreements, but I haven't heard it mentioned since. Sorry, but I don't think we can sit around and wait for all these phantom "green jobs" to be created.

SteelCityMom
06-30-2010, 08:18 AM
I am not reading all through this. Here is my opinion:

The people in Washington, D.C. need to get their heads out of their asses. They need to find a way to help the unemployed. They need to find a way to bring real jobs into communities. We need to pull our manufacturing back to the United States of America.

The people on unemployment need to take what's out there. I work at a gas station. It's not where I pictured myself being right now. But I am employed. Take two jobs that don't pay what you made, but they do pay something. Too many people on unemployment sit and wait for a job that paid what they used to make to come along. They turn down decent jobs because it's not $52,000 a year. But then when their unemployment is close to running out, they complain that they won't get anymore assistance. IMHO, they don't deserve it. Beggers can't be choosers.

Not everyone, but many are taking what's out there...because it's near impossible to live off of a partial income, especially with a family. Fact of the matter is though, there's a shortage of even crappy jobs in a lot of areas. And the jobs that are out there are being flooded with applications.

There's more to this bill than just extending unemployment benefits though (that will leave hundreds of thousands/week with no income). MORE people are going to lose their jobs because of it. The Senate is dragging their feet while more and more people lose work.


The rejected bill would also have provided $16 billion in new aid to states, preserving the jobs of thousands of state and local government workers and providing what White House officials called an insurance policy against a double-dip recession. It also included dozens of tax breaks sought by business lobbyists, and tax increases on domestically produced oil and on investment fund managers.

The demise of the bill means that unemployment benefits will phase out for more than 200,000 people a week. Governors who had been counting on federal aid will now have to consider a fresh round of budget cuts, tax increases and layoffs of state workers.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=128092037

SteelCityMom
06-30-2010, 08:24 AM
I couldn't agree more. But it appears most of our elected officials don't seem the least bit interested in getting them back. Obama promised several times during the campaign that he would revisit NAFTA and other trade agreements, but I haven't heard it mentioned since. Sorry, but I don't think we can sit around and wait for all these phantom "green jobs" to be created.

There's too many enviromental standards (and taxes) in this country to make big manufacturing businesses want to come back or stay here. Plain and simple it's just cheaper to produce in other countries where you can avoid these costs.

The "green movement" has literally killed American manufacturing business.

HometownGal
06-30-2010, 09:01 AM
I find it funny that suitanim was banned after this thread! What's wrong? He disagreed with the GOP? And ya ban him?

What I find funny is that you continue to beat this same dead horse as you did over at SF. C'mon Dom - get off it. No one was ever banned at SF - nor will anyone ever be banned here - because of their political opinons or party affiliation. As to why they were both given mini-vacations, they are well aware of the reasons and understand our actions. End of rumors and story.

BPS3akaWirels3
06-30-2010, 10:51 AM
PA as of today owes the Fed's $3 billion for UC benefits.. wow..

Dino 6 Rings
06-30-2010, 12:01 PM
What I find funny is that you continue to beat this same dead horse as you did over at SF. C'mon Dom - get off it. No one was ever banned at SF - nor will anyone ever be banned here - because of their political opinons or party affiliation. As to why they were both given mini-vacations, they are well aware of the reasons and understand our actions. End of rumors and story.

Oh but come on HTG its hilarious that I'm not around for a while, come back and both are on mini-bans. I really don't have to know the "why" Its obvious with those two the "why" because they can't stand each other and let their personal opinions of one another get into every single topic on this board. But its still. FREAKING HILARIOUS!

Tony, Revs...you guys crack me up.

The WH
06-30-2010, 04:31 PM
The "green movement" has literally killed American manufacturing business.
it woudn't have anything to do with having to pay employees more than 1 dollar a day either? would it?

Wallace108
06-30-2010, 04:53 PM
There's too many enviromental standards (and taxes) in this country to make big manufacturing businesses want to come back or stay here. Plain and simple it's just cheaper to produce in other countries where you can avoid these costs.

The "green movement" has literally killed American manufacturing business.

I agree, SCM. Environmental standards and taxes definitely play a role ... so does lower wages as WH said in the above post. We can't compete in the global economy because our workers make too much. Instead of raising other countries to our level, we're being brought down to theirs. Whatever the reason, it all goes back to our elected officials for allowing this to happen.

Mach1
06-30-2010, 05:28 PM
I agree, SCM. Environmental standards and taxes definitely play a role ... so does lower wages as WH said in the above post. We can't compete in the global economy because our workers make too much. Instead of raising other countries to our level, we're being brought down to theirs. Whatever the reason, it all goes back to our elected officials for allowing this to happen.

Their not letting it happen, their making it happen. "Spread the wealth", "energy rates would necessarily sky rocket", cap n scam, global warming scam, spendulis plans, ect ect....

7SteelGal43
06-30-2010, 05:40 PM
it woudn't have anything to do with having to pay employees more than 1 dollar a day either? would it?

No WH, it has nothing to do with paying workers a decent living wage. It has EVERYTHING to do with the green movement and a buttload of other govt mandates and bull%$& regulations.

Godfather
06-30-2010, 06:41 PM
No WH, it has nothing to do with paying workers a decent living wage. It has EVERYTHING to do with the green movement and a buttload of other govt mandates and bull%$& regulations.

We had the longest economic boom in the history of the world from 1982-2007, with environmental standards and worker safety protections in place.

That seems to work better than the Chicom system where the Sago mine disaster is called Tuesday and the entire country is a Superfund site.

SteelCityMom
06-30-2010, 06:45 PM
it woudn't have anything to do with having to pay employees more than 1 dollar a day either? would it?

It's partly that too...but think back to when businesses in the US could pay their employees a very decent living wage and stay in the US. It wasn't all that long ago. Companies didn't really start leaving in droves until the EPA and other enviromental groups started lobbying the hell out of Congress and got a ton of bogus taxes passed.

smokin3000gt
06-30-2010, 06:57 PM
It's partly that too...but think back to when businesses in the US could pay their employees a very decent living wage and stay in the US. It wasn't all that long ago. Companies didn't really start leaving in droves until the EPA and other enviromental groups started lobbying the hell out of Congress and got a ton of bogus taxes passed.

Well said, SCM. I agree with WH to a point as well but it would be much easier to pay employees better if we weren't getting raped with capital gains and the tons of other taxes/fees/fines we have to pay.

ricardisimo
07-01-2010, 03:35 PM
There's too many enviromental standards (and taxes) in this country to make big manufacturing businesses want to come back or stay here. Plain and simple it's just cheaper to produce in other countries where you can avoid these costs.

The "green movement" has literally killed American manufacturing business.

I couldn't disagree with you more. Slave wages in China and elsewhere have killed American manufacturing.

ricardisimo
07-01-2010, 03:40 PM
It's partly that too...but think back to when businesses in the US could pay their employees a very decent living wage and stay in the US. It wasn't all that long ago. Companies didn't really start leaving in droves until the EPA and other enviromental groups started lobbying the hell out of Congress and got a ton of bogus taxes passed.

Not really. US business started moving offshore with the rise of neoliberalism. Slave wages are now the goal. Service sector jobs don't pollute at all, and yet whenever possible, those are outsourced to Asia and South America (or to our own prison systems) just like manufacturing. Most of these jobs thankfully can't be moved, like cops, cooks, drivers, etc.

But you better believe they will move anything that can possibly be done over a wire to another country with sub-standard wages. Mostly it's been telecomm stuff so far, but they're licking their chops over virtual everything, including teaching, banking, sex, whatever. Please don't let them convince you that laws designed to safeguard minimum standards are somehow to blame. Greed is to blame, almost without exception.

The WH
07-01-2010, 04:37 PM
No WH, it has nothing to do with paying workers a decent living wage. It has EVERYTHING to do with the green movement and a buttload of other govt mandates and bull%$& regulations.
keep telling yourself that, if it makes you feel better.

SteelCityMom
07-01-2010, 06:58 PM
Not really. US business started moving offshore with the rise of neoliberalism. Slave wages are now the goal. Service sector jobs don't pollute at all, and yet whenever possible, those are outsourced to Asia and South America just (or to our own prison systems) like manufacturing. Most of these jobs can't be moved, like cops, cooks, drivers, etc.

But you better believe they will move anything that can possibly be done over a wire to another country with sub-standard wages. Mostly it's been telecomm stuff so far, but they're licking their chops over virtual everything, including teaching, banking, sex, whatever. Please don't let them convince you that laws designed to safeguard minimum standards are somehow to blame. Greed is to blame, almost without exception.

I don't completely disagree with you...I just don't see it as just one reason that businesses have left the country. I know cheap labor is a big part of it too, but taxes and restrictions on businesses certainly does play a big part of it as well.

Believe me, I know it all comes down to greed.

Wallace108
07-01-2010, 11:02 PM
I don't completely disagree with you...I just don't see it as just one reason that businesses have left the country. I know cheap labor is a big part of it too, but taxes and restrictions on businesses certainly does play a big part of it as well.

Believe me, I know it all comes down to greed.

I don't think there's only one contributing factor, but the underlying reason is definitely greed. Regardless of what the cause was, we know the problem. But why focus on traitor American companies when we can stick it to banks and Wall Street?

If an American company sets up shop in China, pays workers pennies, and ships their products back here, we should slap so many tariffs on them that it wouldn't benefit them to use cheap labor. I have no problem with an American company building a factory in China, hiring Chinese workers for whatever they'll work for, and selling the products in China. But the message should be clear: If you're an American company and want to sell your products in America, they sure as hell are going to be made in America.

Mach1
07-01-2010, 11:07 PM
In the words of the Messiah "at least the unemployment rate isn't at 15%".

This clown has got to go!

Wallace108
07-01-2010, 11:24 PM
I think Pelosi has lost her mind. She thinks unemployment benefits are one of the best job creators ... So I'm guessing in her mind, the more people that are unemployed, the better the economy is.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAhmYKlsWW4

The WH
07-02-2010, 12:14 AM
Pelosi makes me sick.

Wallace108
07-02-2010, 12:27 AM
Pelosi makes me sick.

Needless to say, I agree. If you look at our leadership, on both sides of the aisle, it should come as no surprise our country is in the shape it is.

suitanim
07-08-2010, 04:09 PM
There are so many wrong things going on in this thread it would take a week to start correcting them.

But, as an update, the original people I posted about are now relegated to the point of taking ANY job they can get. 1 out of 5 found a job, and the other 4 are still living on nothing. I guess they are just lazy, though, and deserve whatever they get, or don't get.

Stlrs4Life
07-14-2010, 10:39 PM
Republicans Blocking Unemployment Extension and Economic Progress (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rep-charles-rangel/republicans-blocking-unem_b_646604.html)




While our economy slowly tries to recover from years of Republican mismanagement, more than a million people are being denied unemployment benefits by Republicans in the Senate. These workers, who are unemployed through no fault of their own, are being held hostage by legislators more interested in making political points than helping people.

Democrats have been pushing for weeks to extend benefits for 1.7 million workers whose payments are about to expire. The extension would continue benefits through the end of November.

The actions by Senate Republicans are just plain cruel. Holding back benefits while ridiculing those in need is worse than adding insult to injury. Contrary to statements we've heard from some Republican opponents, these workers are not lazy or undeserving, and they do not enjoy being unemployed.

Ask your friend who's without a job -- it's about restoring their livelihood and dignity. All they need is a little push from their government and encouragement from their fellow Americans so they can get back on their feet.

Democrats in Congress are as outraged as our constituents so we won't stop fighting to get this legislation and other important programs passed. We will continue working with President Obama to get our economy growing again and creating jobs.

The legislation passed so far, including last year's stimulus bill and this year's historic expansion of healthcare, have lead to signs of progress: The Recovery Act alone has created or saved up to 3.6 million jobs (as recently reported (http://www.whitehouse.gov/files/documents/cea_4th_arra_report.pdf) by the President's Council of Economic Advisors ) and has also provided more than $160 billion in tax cuts to American families and small businesses. Our investments in road construction jobs, clean energy, broadband have not only put Americans back to work, but also laid the foundation for continued competitiveness and success.

Surely, more needs to be done to create and expand opportunities for our children and families. Yet we cannot move forward by doing what Republicans suggest and turning their backs on Americans who need help. That would not only be unsound economic policy. It's just plain mean and un-American.