Is financial relief for the unemployed an example of socialism?

[Full-Auto]

And I know people that have lost their jobs, and have been pounding pavement for over a year looking for work.

Delta had 1000 opening for flight attendants, they received 100,000 applications. A school announced that there is a janitorial opening, and recieved 500 applications. Look in any paper, and you see the same kind of thing.

I really think that you are making up the your story, and are one hard hearted Conservative.

Lets add to your remarks.

Boeings just hired 150 people, 250k applied.

Yes, figures like that are in every paper. Yet these people still insist that the people out of work are just lazy. My grandfathers told me that the attitude of this kind of person was the same in the Great Depression.

some studies have shown that it is human nature to take advantage of situations like these.

Will there be some taking advantage? Yes of course, I just find it difficult to fathom that so many are living the high life on 300 a week before taxes.

 

[Conspiracist]

Is financial relief for the unemployed an example of socialism?

I believe it is a form of socialism. Just because I call something a form of socialism does not mean I consider it a bad thing. I just call a dog a dog, a bird a bird and socialism socialism. Has no bearing on my thoughts on it.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Some of you do not understand basic definitions. This should help. If you think I am being arrogant, then I suggest you stop being ignorant.

Social Democracy is an ideology which believes in socialism however views reform rather than revolution as the best way to achieve its goals. It suggests that social inequalities can be addressed by an enhanced level of state intervention within the existing structure of the capitalist economic system. The influence of social democracy was increased after 1945 when capitalism was seen to be bringing many benefits to working-class people (such as a rising standard of living and social mobility) in a number of countries that in turn tended to reduce the hostility between the social classes.

Socialism is a political and economical theory or system of social organization based on collective ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange. Socialist ideas arose in the 19th Century in reaction to the exploitive and brutal nature capitalism imposed on people. Socialists seek a society in which cooperation and fraternity replace the divisions based on class lines that characterizes capitalist societies.
• Early socialists suggested that the interests of capital and labour are natural opposed and that the ownership of the means of production by small groups of producers based upon the spirit of cooperation should be the basis of society. Socialism strongly supports the ideals of democracy; however, some believe that genuine democracy is harmed by the existence of capitalism and the economic inequality that goes with it.
• Amongst socialists there is a disagreement onto how to achieve their goals. One side gives preference to the idea that a revolution is needed whereby capitalism is abolished and replaced with a socialist society. The other side ( known as social democracy ) supports the idea of a gradual movement towards socialism through reform of the current capitalist society.

 

[Conspiracist]

Between 2001 and 2009, there were 42,000 factories in the US shut down and the jobs outsourced overseas. We actually gave tax breaks to the companies doing this. And lost over 500 jobs per factory. But the wealthy made a killing off of this. So now we are to throw people out of work because of Republican policies off of unemployment. So how do they and their children eat? Even when they are living in a car, they still have to eat. But that is irrelevant. Much more important that the very wealthy get their tax break. Even though they pay a much lower percentage of income in taxes than do middle class earners such as myself.

The morality represented by the present Republican Party is despicable.

That is where we disagree. It was BOTH parties not just one. You portray yourself as a thinker and one of much knowledge. Try some honesty for once and kill the rhetorical partisan bullshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Old Rocks has the truth of it, and Conspiracist is the hypocrite. I wish it were not so, but it is.

 

[Conspiracist]

Old Rocks has the truth of it, and Conspiracist is the hypocrite. I wish it were not so, but it is.

You're a putz! Who signed the fucking WTO agreement? Which president?

Stop acting as if you know all and what have you. You may try some honesty yourself.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I know far more than you, sonny, and I am far more objective and clear about who, why, and how this has happened. I am not a witless hack like you. You don't like it? Grow up and educate yourself.

 

[Conspiracist]

I know far more than you, sonny, and I am far more objective and clear about who, why, and how this has happened. I am not a witless hack like you. You don't like it? Grow up and educate yourself.

Who signed the WTO agreement then Starkey?

 

[JakeStarkey]

That is not the point at all, and you know it. You don't create the criteria here, until you demonstrate that you twist your philosophy to fit the facts, not twist the facts to fit the philosophy. So go ahead and prove me wrong.

 

[Conspiracist]

That is not the point at all, and you know it. You don't create the criteria here, until you demonstrate that you twist your philosophy to fit the facts, not twist the facts to fit the philosophy. So go ahead and prove me wrong.

You said I was wrong that both parties are at fault for jobs going over seas. You claim republicans hold the sole responsibility for it and the Dems hold none. You know that Bill Clinton signed the agreement that helped send so many of our jobs to India and China and you say, "That is not the point at all, and you know it."

Please do not tell me what I know. I saw my point as valid and for some reason it makes no difference to you because it would make you wrong. That's fine. I know not to waste any more time with you. If Oldrocks would like to discuss this I will be more than happy to discuss with them. Bye bye Joke Dorkey!

 

[Wry Catcher]

It doesn't start out as socialism/welfare as there is money paid in, by employers, to a fund to pay the unemployment compensation.
With all the extensions that have been tacked on states no longer have the money in their respective funds to pay the compensation.
As a result the Fed has had to pick up the tab.
Now, the Fed doesn't have an unemployment compensation fund so they can only reach into the tax jar.

Yay!!! More unfunded liabilities to explode our debt!!

And what better use of borrowed money? Is it stupid to assist fellow Americans who worked for years to buy a home and support their families while we spend billions of dollars on a military spread around the world, more than a billion to build and Embassy in Iraq?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I said no such thing: there is your first lie. I said not such about "sole responsibility": there is your second lie. And I just realized that you are reading so quickly and so biasedly, you have no idea what you are saying.

Go get straightened out before talking to me again. Thank you for so clearly and unequivocally proving my point.

 

[Cuyo]

Is financial relief for the unemployed an example of socialism?

I dont see an acceptable option in your poll.

Do you pay unemployment taxes while you are working?
Does your employer pay unemployment fees while you are collecting?
Did you have to initially hold a job for a period of time before you can be eligible for unemployment?


The unemployment extentions are a form of socialism but the initial 26 weeks of unemployment, which was paid for by your employer and your own taxes, is not.

Something does not need to be unfunded to be 'Socialism.' Your analysis seems more to diverge the aspects you approve of from the aspects you don't approve of, but it's all 'Socialism.'

 

[Conspiracist]

Is financial relief for the unemployed an example of socialism?

I dont see an acceptable option in your poll.

Do you pay unemployment taxes while you are working?
Does your employer pay unemployment fees while you are collecting?
Did you have to initially hold a job for a period of time before you can be eligible for unemployment?


The unemployment extentions are a form of socialism but the initial 26 weeks of unemployment, which was paid for by your employer and your own taxes, is not.

Something does not need to be unfunded to be 'Socialism.' Your analysis seems more to diverge the aspects you approve of from the aspects you don't approve of, but it's all 'Socialism.'

Agreed. The first 26 weeks that your employer "helps" pay for is mandated. Socialism to me.

 

[JakeStarkey]

But what you think, kiddo, does not define socialism. That has been done long ago. So, then, the answer is simply your definition is personal, not universal, means nothing except to you. Good to know.

 

[MikeK]

Well I have friends down her in Florida who are on unemployment. Believe me. They are in no hurry to look for work.

They are overjoyed that the unemployment gravy train will keep on chugging along. These folks have no intention of actually looking for a job until the free ride comes to a halt.

I wonder how many across America are thinking the same way???

Of course there are folks out there who are actually looking for work.+

Perhaps now that business knows the Bush tax cuts are in place for 2 years they will start expand and hire. I certainly hope so.

The only question now is how hard Obamacare is gonna hit business?? All those waivers are starting to tell a story.

There always are the ten percent. We take them for granted but we can't allow their existence to harden us against the needs of those who legitimately want jobs. We can't just let unfortunates be thrown into desolate poverty and die on the streets.

I don't know what the situation is today but Unemployment Insurance recipients back in the 50s were required to prove they were looking for work. They had to show up every week with a list of jobs they applied for and there were investigators who (selectively) verified the claims. Those who were caught sandbagging were cut off.

Does anyone know if they still do that?


There was a similar situation with welfare back in the 40s and 50s. It wasn't called Welfare back then but Home Relief and there were centers situated in low income neighborhoods where the needy went for help. They were given cash for rent and other needs and they were given food parcels, but each individual was investigated. I understand that today they just mail out checks. Is that true?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Verification and investigation should be required for all assistance. Those who are healthy should do relief jobs in public works. Plenty of parks need to be cleaned up, court houses tidied up, school yards picked up, day cares to be manned. No one should expect anything for nothing in return, period.

 

[The Rabbi]

Is financial relief for the unemployed an example of socialism?

Four weeks' benefits is insurance.
Ninety nine plus weeks is socialism.

 

[JakeStarkey]

According to Rabbi?

 

[Conspiracist]

According to Rabbi?

Is it capitalism Storkey?