Bill to extend unemployment AGAIN killed by senate republicans

[Foxfyre]

You do not know my business nor do you know my business philosophy.

We all have certain guuidelines that we follow...and then we all deviate where we deem it appropriate.

Certain expenses are that...expenses.

Other expenses that are NOT constant, are expenses that are deducted from my distribution.

An increase in UI, whgich has not even come close to being an issue will be exactly that. A decrease in my take-home. I will not sacrifice quality of employee by offering lower salaries than the market dictates.

In my business, that would be suicide.

I was only judging your business decisions by precisely what you posted as your business decisions. I don't make presumptions about people or judge their opinions by anything other than what they reveal here.

And yes, most of us do eat the expense and don't reduce the wages of our employees because of a modest incidental tax increase on this or that. But if the overall costs of doing business doesn't affect what you offer new hires or what new benefits or wage increases you can offer your existing employees, or your projected bottom line is not affecting what new hires you can afford or what expansion is reasonably indicated, I would question your business judgment if I was evaluating your business for a loan.

There are hundreds of employers in our area who are already calculating the cost of additional taxes once the Bush tax relief expires at the end of this year, and the consequences of having to provide mandatory health insurance for their employees and other affects of existing and pending legislation. They are taking long hard looks at what that will do to their bottom line and that is absolutely affecting their long term plans for expanding and increasing their work force. And not in a good way.

And THAT I believe is exacerbating the unemployment problem and is one of the reasons that the unemployment fund is exhausted.

Maybe I should elaborate.
I am a NYS sub chapter s corp. I take a low salary and quarterly distributions.
When I am evaluated for a loan, my distrinutions are not a factor included.

Any non constant cost simply affects my distributions. Not my gross net before distributions.

Friend, I am not arguing your business decisions. But I don't care if you're running a lemonade stand, if you base your business on anything other than the existing or reasonably probable bottom line, you're in much more danger of going bankrupt than if you employ reasoned business decisions. I don't know how lending insitutions evaluate that in New York. In New Mexico, they evaluate the probability of you being able to repay your loans.

 

[Foxfyre]

Okay so the Dems in the Senate don't have their super majority any more and will have even less power (hopefully) come January.

But they still have 59 votes. And they can't even get all 59 of those for this legislation.

So they blame the Republicans for killing the bill? And not the brave Democrats who also refuse to vote for it?

When they can get all 59 of their own to vote for it, then maybe they have more of a leg to stand on to blame the Republicans.

Until then, to blame Republicans makes them look like. . . . jackasses?

I mean they can be cute:

But to blame others for what you can't even get done yourself is still being a . . . .

 

[WillowTree]

Okay so the Dems in the Senate don't have their super majority any more and will have even less power (hopefully) come January.

But they still have 59 votes. And they can't even get all 59 of those for this legislation.

So they blame the Republicans for killing the bill? And not the brave Democrats who also refuse to vote for it?

When they can get all 59 of their own to vote for it, then maybe they have more of a leg to stand on to blame the Republicans.

Until then, to blame Republicans makes them look like. . . . jackasses?

I mean they can be cute:

But to blame others for what you can't even get done yourself is still being a . . . .

awwwwww him's a cute little jackazz.

 

[Immanuel]

They would rather you lose your home than receive unemployment benefits YOU paid for. I don't understand these people. They think they would rather collect a paltry payment than work and get paid what they were used too? What kind of logic is that?

Right now, its hard (depending on where you live of course) to find employment. The jobs just are not there. They quote the unemployment numbers when they are trying to make the president look bad, but say to these guys, go find a job. ???

They think a person who is trying to find a job but cant is automatically a "welfare queen" and that is just wrong.

Sometimes if a person can't find work it is because they won’t take a job unless it is of a certain type, or in a certain field that suits them; something they are invested in. It may be better for some people to finally lose their home and be forced to move to another city where there are jobs in their desired occupational field; a move they would never make unless conditions precipitate that move.

That could be the best thing for them, rather than waiting for certain job openings that will never come. Too often maybe, people need to be forced to begin at a lower level occupation - maybe even working a second part time job until they get a raise - just so that they can get back into the game. Once back in the game they can be more comfortable, earning a check, while attempting to again find work in their desired field. That may never happen, but by having some work they have more leverage than as an unemployed person.

You are right, there are some of us who won't or at least are not willing to take any old job just to go back to work, and quite frankly, I am one of those. I will be 50 years old next year. I have been in the accounting field for 30 years. I am not (yet) willing to take an entry level position just so that I can be off unemployment. I've worked in jobs that I was over-qualified for and I don't particularly care to do so again, ever. Currently, I am looking for a position as a controller of a non-profit organization because that is where I feel my services would fit very well. I am looking at other industries and I will even consider a staff accountant or senior accountant position, but I don't have a whole hell of a lot of experience or skills in other fields, not that I could not learn or take a position in another field, but I'm not ready to do so.

I figure this next position that I take had damned well better be THE career choice because the next job search I'm looking at will be very close to 60 and that makes things even worse. In fact, I'm hoping never to have to go through this again.

To be quite frank with you, I don't know what I will do if they don't extend benefits. If you ask me, it kind of sucks. I know of people that have been on unemployment for years and now, when I need it, they decide its time to end the extensions? When the economy is in the worst condition it has been in my life time! They tell me the recession is over and things are getting better. I say that they are damned liars. Sucks to be me I guess. Yet, we'll keep throwing billions of dollars every year at two un-winnable wars that the last Republican President pushed us into and we'll keep feeding the rich lobbyists and their corporate employers with more and more pork and we'll keep sending out foreign aid and we'll probably do another "stimulus" package that will make the fat cats happy, and bail out another industry or two so that the CEOs can collect huge bonuses; but in the meantime those who can't find jobs in their industries just have to suck it up and go work in the tomato fields.

At the end of January when I lost my job, I was sending resumes out to every job posting that was put out in my area for accounting positions. Most are frigging scams! They are not hiring people. A lot are simply temp agencies fishing for workers, but there are not any damned jobs out there to even send the temps on.

I have found myself damned near depressed, because I want to go back to work, but I don't want to take any frigging job that is out there. I'm too old to work as an A/P clerk! With my experience I'd be bored stiff in three hours. No one even wants to hire me for those jobs, because they can see that I am over-qualified.

I hate like hell to be living on unemployment right now. But, thanks the the current economy, I don't have a lot of choice in the matter. I don't blame Bush and I don't blame Obama, I blame Washington.

I'm one of those who believes that the morons in Washington spend way too much money, but as far as I am concerned if we are going to spend money then damn it we should be spending it on those in our society that actually need it an not some SOB with votes to sell.

Why extend unemployment, the GOP logic says. Let them apply for welcare and foodstamps. It is just another pot of money from another area. Who wins that one?

GOP logic?

What about basic logic that if they lose iunemployment benefits, they will do what they gotta do to earn a living.

There are jobs out there.

Sorry if they are "beneath" them.

Beneath them? There is nothing "beneath" me. But there are positions that I can't get hired for because people think that I am over qualified for and that I am over qualified for. There are jobs out there that I cannot do because I am not physically capable of doing. There is no such thing as a job that is beneath me; but there are jobs that I do not fit into, some I am not at all qualified to do, some I am over qualified for and some that I am under qualified to do. Hey and quess what! There are even a few out there that are just right for me!!! Guess what... there are also 5000 or more other people in this area that have similar qualifications as I do and we are all competing for a couple hundred jobs in our field. Sucks to be me.

Would you hire a person that was qualified to run your business to write a few checks for you; someone that you know will be looking for a job more suitable to his or her qualifications or would you rather hire someone that was young and willing to learn and grow with your company? I would take the youngster in that case every time. Turn the tables around, would you hire the youngster with no experience to run your business or would you hire the person with the experience?

It is a fallacy to think that the jobs are out there. Employers are not hiring right now. They are cutting back on staff because of the economy. Things WILL eventually turn around, but that is not going to be overnight.

Could I go to work as a greeter for Walmart? Maybe. Would I? Yeah, if the job were offered I probably would, just to do something with my life. I might even be able to start my own business, but I do not have the entrepreneur spirit.

This post has gone on long enough.

Go ahead and take the benefits from me. I will survive. But, don't for a minute think that everyone can.

Immie

PS The tone of this may sound a bit angry. It is not intended to be that way. I'm frustrated. I'm ready to give up. For those of you that are employed right now... good for you, but don't be deceived, jobs are not out there for everyone. Everyone on unemployment is not lazy and milking the G.D.d system.

 

[Jarhead]

I was only judging your business decisions by precisely what you posted as your business decisions. I don't make presumptions about people or judge their opinions by anything other than what they reveal here.

And yes, most of us do eat the expense and don't reduce the wages of our employees because of a modest incidental tax increase on this or that. But if the overall costs of doing business doesn't affect what you offer new hires or what new benefits or wage increases you can offer your existing employees, or your projected bottom line is not affecting what new hires you can afford or what expansion is reasonably indicated, I would question your business judgment if I was evaluating your business for a loan.

There are hundreds of employers in our area who are already calculating the cost of additional taxes once the Bush tax relief expires at the end of this year, and the consequences of having to provide mandatory health insurance for their employees and other affects of existing and pending legislation. They are taking long hard looks at what that will do to their bottom line and that is absolutely affecting their long term plans for expanding and increasing their work force. And not in a good way.

And THAT I believe is exacerbating the unemployment problem and is one of the reasons that the unemployment fund is exhausted.

Maybe I should elaborate.
I am a NYS sub chapter s corp. I take a low salary and quarterly distributions.
When I am evaluated for a loan, my distrinutions are not a factor included.

Any non constant cost simply affects my distributions. Not my gross net before distributions.

Friend, I am not arguing your business decisions. But I don't care if you're running a lemonade stand, if you base your business on anything other than the existing or reasonably probable bottom line, you're in much more danger of going bankrupt than if you employ reasoned business decisions. I don't know how lending insitutions evaluate that in New York. In New Mexico, they evaluate the probability of you being able to repay your loans.

And I agree. And that is exactly how a sub chapter (s) corp is evaluated.
It does not care about what my personal wealth may be during any given year. It cares about my bottom line. When my bottom line is greater than my expenses, including my minimal recorded salary, I take a distribution.

Having always taken distributions with the exception of my inaugural year, I am deemed as a good credit risk.

Any unforseen cost that may arise will affect my distribution, not my liquidity.

Where in New Mexico? I have relatives in Las Cruces. I love that state. My wife and I are seriously considering retirement there.

 

[Foxfyre]

They would rather you lose your home than receive unemployment benefits YOU paid for. I don't understand these people. They think they would rather collect a paltry payment than work and get paid what they were used too? What kind of logic is that?

Right now, its hard (depending on where you live of course) to find employment. The jobs just are not there. They quote the unemployment numbers when they are trying to make the president look bad, but say to these guys, go find a job. ???

They think a person who is trying to find a job but cant is automatically a "welfare queen" and that is just wrong.

Sometimes if a person can't find work it is because they won’t take a job unless it is of a certain type, or in a certain field that suits them; something they are invested in. It may be better for some people to finally lose their home and be forced to move to another city where there are jobs in their desired occupational field; a move they would never make unless conditions precipitate that move.

That could be the best thing for them, rather than waiting for certain job openings that will never come. Too often maybe, people need to be forced to begin at a lower level occupation - maybe even working a second part time job until they get a raise - just so that they can get back into the game. Once back in the game they can be more comfortable, earning a check, while attempting to again find work in their desired field. That may never happen, but by having some work they have more leverage than as an unemployed person.

You are right, there are some of us who won't or at least are not willing to take any old job just to go back to work, and quite frankly, I am one of those. I will be 50 years old next year. I have been in the accounting field for 30 years. I am not (yet) willing to take an entry level position just so that I can be off unemployment. I've worked in jobs that I was over-qualified for and I don't particularly care to do so again, ever. Currently, I am looking for a position as a controller of a non-profit organization because that is where I feel my services would fit very well. I am looking at other industries and I will even consider a staff accountant or senior accountant position, but I don't have a whole hell of a lot of experience or skills in other fields, not that I could not learn or take a position in another field, but I'm not ready to do so.

I figure this next position that I take had damned well better be THE career choice because the next job search I'm looking at will be very close to 60 and that makes things even worse. In fact, I'm hoping never to have to go through this again.

To be quite frank with you, I don't know what I will do if they don't extend benefits. If you ask me, it kind of sucks. I know of people that have been on unemployment for years and now, when I need it, they decide its time to end the extensions? When the economy is in the worst condition it has been in my life time! They tell me the recession is over and things are getting better. I say that they are damned liars. Sucks to be me I guess. Yet, we'll keep throwing billions of dollars every year at two un-winnable wars that the last Republican President pushed us into and we'll keep feeding the rich lobbyists and their corporate employers with more and more pork and we'll keep sending out foreign aid and we'll probably do another "stimulus" package that will make the fat cats happy, and bail out another industry or two so that the CEOs can collect huge bonuses; but in the meantime those who can't find jobs in their industries just have to suck it up and go work in the tomato fields.

At the end of January when I lost my job, I was sending resumes out to every job posting that was put out in my area for accounting positions. Most are frigging scams! They are not hiring people. A lot are simply temp agencies fishing for workers, but there are not any damned jobs out there to even send the temps on.

I have found myself damned near depressed, because I want to go back to work, but I don't want to take any frigging job that is out there. I'm too old to work as an A/P clerk! With my experience I'd be bored stiff in three hours. No one even wants to hire me for those jobs, because they can see that I am over-qualified.

I hate like hell to be living on unemployment right now. But, thanks the the current economy, I don't have a lot of choice in the matter. I don't blame Bush and I don't blame Obama, I blame Washington.

I'm one of those who believes that the morons in Washington spend way too much money, but as far as I am concerned if we are going to spend money then damn it we should be spending it on those in our society that actually need it an not some SOB with votes to sell.

Why extend unemployment, the GOP logic says. Let them apply for welcare and foodstamps. It is just another pot of money from another area. Who wins that one?

GOP logic?

What about basic logic that if they lose iunemployment benefits, they will do what they gotta do to earn a living.

There are jobs out there.

Sorry if they are "beneath" them.

Beneath them? There is nothing "beneath" me. But there are positions that I can't get hired for because people think that I am over qualified for and that I am over qualified for. There are jobs out there that I cannot do because I am not physically capable of doing. There is no such thing as a job that is beneath me; but there are jobs that I do not fit into, some I am not at all qualified to do, some I am over qualified for and some that I am under qualified to do. Hey and quess what! There are even a few out there that are just right for me!!! Guess what... there are also 5000 or more other people in this area that have similar qualifications as I do and we are all competing for a couple hundred jobs in our field. Sucks to be me.

Would you hire a person that was qualified to run your business to write a few checks for you; someone that you know will be looking for a job more suitable to his or her qualifications or would you rather hire someone that was young and willing to learn and grow with your company? I would take the youngster in that case every time. Turn the tables around, would you hire the youngster with no experience to run your business or would you hire the person with the experience?

It is a fallacy to think that the jobs are out there. Employers are not hiring right now. They are cutting back on staff because of the economy. Things WILL eventually turn around, but that is not going to be overnight.

Could I go to work as a greeter for Walmart? Maybe. Would I? Yeah, if the job were offered I probably would, just to do something with my life. I might even be able to start my own business, but I do not have the entrepreneur spirit.

This post has gone on long enough.

Go ahead and take the benefits from me. I will survive. But, don't for a minute think that everyone can.

Immie

PS The tone of this may sound a bit angry. It is not intended to be that way. I'm frustrated. I'm ready to give up. For those of you that are employed right now... good for you, but don't be deceived, jobs are not out there for everyone. Everyone on unemployment is not lazy and milking the G.D.d system.

Somebody like you is what the system was designed for Immie. And if everybody was like you, we wouldn't have the problem we have. I have friends and relatives all in the same boat with you--out of work for a long time now, at the end of their ropes on resources, and getting pretty desperate. It is beyond humiliating and degrading to them to have to accept help from friends and relatives, put out SOS's in their churches, etc. but some are having to do that.

But if everybody who has opportunity to work would work, the economy would be in better shape. And the unemployment funds wouldn't be so depleted and it wouldn't put so much increasing strain on the economy and thereby deepen and lengthen the recession by extending them for those who have no opportunity to work.

There is nothing fair that good people are forced to suffer the consequences forced on them by others. But there is nothing to be gained to continue to erode the economy until many millions more are out of work either and there is no hope left for anybody.

I wish I could make it better for people like you.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Okay so the Dems in the Senate don't have their super majority any more and will have even less power (hopefully) come January.

But they still have 59 votes. And they can't even get all 59 of those for this legislation.

So they blame the Republicans for killing the bill? And not the brave Democrats who also refuse to vote for it?

When they can get all 59 of their own to vote for it, then maybe they have more of a leg to stand on to blame the Republicans.

Until then, to blame Republicans makes them look like. . . . jackasses?

I mean they can be cute:

But to blame others for what you can't even get done yourself is still being a . . . .

awwwwww him's a cute little jackazz.

 

[Foxfyre]

Maybe I should elaborate.
I am a NYS sub chapter s corp. I take a low salary and quarterly distributions.
When I am evaluated for a loan, my distrinutions are not a factor included.

Any non constant cost simply affects my distributions. Not my gross net before distributions.

Friend, I am not arguing your business decisions. But I don't care if you're running a lemonade stand, if you base your business on anything other than the existing or reasonably probable bottom line, you're in much more danger of going bankrupt than if you employ reasoned business decisions. I don't know how lending insitutions evaluate that in New York. In New Mexico, they evaluate the probability of you being able to repay your loans.

And I agree. And that is exactly how a sub chapter (s) corp is evaluated.
It does not care about what my personal wealth may be during any given year. It cares about my bottom line. When my bottom line is greater than my expenses, including my minimal recorded salary, I take a distribution.

Having always taken distributions with the exception of my inaugural year, I am deemed as a good credit risk.

Any unforseen cost that may arise will affect my distribution, not my liquidity.

Where in New Mexico? I have relatives in Las Cruces. I love that state. My wife and I are seriously considering retirement there.

Albuquerque, just about 4 hours north up I-25 from Cruces. New Mexico is a really crappy state to do business in but it isn't that bad to retire in if you can afford a roof over your head.

Hubby and I have been running a straight proprietorship for some time now. Minimal liability risk in our business and most of that is assumed by our clients. If we decided to get back in full steam and put on employees or independent contractors though, we would incorporate or at least upgrade to an LLC. The last time we had more than two or three employees we were a C Corp.

Currently we are mostly retired because we can get by and there simply isn't enough business to go around for us and also those who need it to live on. If we were working, we would get the business and would literally be taking the food out of the mouths of their children. We could use the extra income--we aren't eating out much these days, don't go to concerts or movies, and won't be taking a vacation this year--but we feel it is important to conserve right now with the uncertainty in the economy and the chaos that our fearless leaders seem determined to force on us.

We are not eligible for unemployment insurance.

 

[Ravi]

They would rather you lose your home than receive unemployment benefits YOU paid for. I don't understand these people. They think they would rather collect a paltry payment than work and get paid what they were used too? What kind of logic is that?

Right now, its hard (depending on where you live of course) to find employment. The jobs just are not there. They quote the unemployment numbers when they are trying to make the president look bad, but say to these guys, go find a job. ???

They think a person who is trying to find a job but cant is automatically a "welfare queen" and that is just wrong.

Sometimes if a person can't find work it is because they won’t take a job unless it is of a certain type, or in a certain field that suits them; something they are invested in. It may be better for some people to finally lose their home and be forced to move to another city where there are jobs in their desired occupational field; a move they would never make unless conditions precipitate that move.

That could be the best thing for them, rather than waiting for certain job openings that will never come. Too often maybe, people need to be forced to begin at a lower level occupation - maybe even working a second part time job until they get a raise - just so that they can get back into the game. Once back in the game they can be more comfortable, earning a check, while attempting to again find work in their desired field. That may never happen, but by having some work they have more leverage than as an unemployed person.

You are right, there are some of us who won't or at least are not willing to take any old job just to go back to work, and quite frankly, I am one of those. I will be 50 years old next year. I have been in the accounting field for 30 years. I am not (yet) willing to take an entry level position just so that I can be off unemployment. I've worked in jobs that I was over-qualified for and I don't particularly care to do so again, ever. Currently, I am looking for a position as a controller of a non-profit organization because that is where I feel my services would fit very well. I am looking at other industries and I will even consider a staff accountant or senior accountant position, but I don't have a whole hell of a lot of experience or skills in other fields, not that I could not learn or take a position in another field, but I'm not ready to do so.

I figure this next position that I take had damned well better be THE career choice because the next job search I'm looking at will be very close to 60 and that makes things even worse. In fact, I'm hoping never to have to go through this again.

To be quite frank with you, I don't know what I will do if they don't extend benefits. If you ask me, it kind of sucks. I know of people that have been on unemployment for years and now, when I need it, they decide its time to end the extensions? When the economy is in the worst condition it has been in my life time! They tell me the recession is over and things are getting better. I say that they are damned liars. Sucks to be me I guess. Yet, we'll keep throwing billions of dollars every year at two un-winnable wars that the last Republican President pushed us into and we'll keep feeding the rich lobbyists and their corporate employers with more and more pork and we'll keep sending out foreign aid and we'll probably do another "stimulus" package that will make the fat cats happy, and bail out another industry or two so that the CEOs can collect huge bonuses; but in the meantime those who can't find jobs in their industries just have to suck it up and go work in the tomato fields.

At the end of January when I lost my job, I was sending resumes out to every job posting that was put out in my area for accounting positions. Most are frigging scams! They are not hiring people. A lot are simply temp agencies fishing for workers, but there are not any damned jobs out there to even send the temps on.

I have found myself damned near depressed, because I want to go back to work, but I don't want to take any frigging job that is out there. I'm too old to work as an A/P clerk! With my experience I'd be bored stiff in three hours. No one even wants to hire me for those jobs, because they can see that I am over-qualified.

I hate like hell to be living on unemployment right now. But, thanks the the current economy, I don't have a lot of choice in the matter. I don't blame Bush and I don't blame Obama, I blame Washington.

I'm one of those who believes that the morons in Washington spend way too much money, but as far as I am concerned if we are going to spend money then damn it we should be spending it on those in our society that actually need it an not some SOB with votes to sell.

Why extend unemployment, the GOP logic says. Let them apply for welcare and foodstamps. It is just another pot of money from another area. Who wins that one?

GOP logic?

What about basic logic that if they lose iunemployment benefits, they will do what they gotta do to earn a living.

There are jobs out there.

Sorry if they are "beneath" them.

Beneath them? There is nothing "beneath" me. But there are positions that I can't get hired for because people think that I am over qualified for and that I am over qualified for. There are jobs out there that I cannot do because I am not physically capable of doing. There is no such thing as a job that is beneath me; but there are jobs that I do not fit into, some I am not at all qualified to do, some I am over qualified for and some that I am under qualified to do. Hey and quess what! There are even a few out there that are just right for me!!! Guess what... there are also 5000 or more other people in this area that have similar qualifications as I do and we are all competing for a couple hundred jobs in our field. Sucks to be me.

Would you hire a person that was qualified to run your business to write a few checks for you; someone that you know will be looking for a job more suitable to his or her qualifications or would you rather hire someone that was young and willing to learn and grow with your company? I would take the youngster in that case every time. Turn the tables around, would you hire the youngster with no experience to run your business or would you hire the person with the experience?

It is a fallacy to think that the jobs are out there. Employers are not hiring right now. They are cutting back on staff because of the economy. Things WILL eventually turn around, but that is not going to be overnight.

Could I go to work as a greeter for Walmart? Maybe. Would I? Yeah, if the job were offered I probably would, just to do something with my life. I might even be able to start my own business, but I do not have the entrepreneur spirit.

This post has gone on long enough.

Go ahead and take the benefits from me. I will survive. But, don't for a minute think that everyone can.

Immie

PS The tone of this may sound a bit angry. It is not intended to be that way. I'm frustrated. I'm ready to give up. For those of you that are employed right now... good for you, but don't be deceived, jobs are not out there for everyone. Everyone on unemployment is not lazy and milking the G.D.d system.

That's okay for you, Immie, but you're a conservative. Most people collecting unemployment are lazy assholes that never worked a day in their life and are now happily living large on unemployment benefits.



Seriously, maybe you should be going to school in the meantime for something else?

 

[Immanuel]

Sometimes if a person can't find work it is because they won’t take a job unless it is of a certain type, or in a certain field that suits them; something they are invested in. It may be better for some people to finally lose their home and be forced to move to another city where there are jobs in their desired occupational field; a move they would never make unless conditions precipitate that move.

That could be the best thing for them, rather than waiting for certain job openings that will never come. Too often maybe, people need to be forced to begin at a lower level occupation - maybe even working a second part time job until they get a raise - just so that they can get back into the game. Once back in the game they can be more comfortable, earning a check, while attempting to again find work in their desired field. That may never happen, but by having some work they have more leverage than as an unemployed person.

You are right, there are some of us who won't or at least are not willing to take any old job just to go back to work, and quite frankly, I am one of those. I will be 50 years old next year. I have been in the accounting field for 30 years. I am not (yet) willing to take an entry level position just so that I can be off unemployment. I've worked in jobs that I was over-qualified for and I don't particularly care to do so again, ever. Currently, I am looking for a position as a controller of a non-profit organization because that is where I feel my services would fit very well. I am looking at other industries and I will even consider a staff accountant or senior accountant position, but I don't have a whole hell of a lot of experience or skills in other fields, not that I could not learn or take a position in another field, but I'm not ready to do so.

I figure this next position that I take had damned well better be THE career choice because the next job search I'm looking at will be very close to 60 and that makes things even worse. In fact, I'm hoping never to have to go through this again.

To be quite frank with you, I don't know what I will do if they don't extend benefits. If you ask me, it kind of sucks. I know of people that have been on unemployment for years and now, when I need it, they decide its time to end the extensions? When the economy is in the worst condition it has been in my life time! They tell me the recession is over and things are getting better. I say that they are damned liars. Sucks to be me I guess. Yet, we'll keep throwing billions of dollars every year at two un-winnable wars that the last Republican President pushed us into and we'll keep feeding the rich lobbyists and their corporate employers with more and more pork and we'll keep sending out foreign aid and we'll probably do another "stimulus" package that will make the fat cats happy, and bail out another industry or two so that the CEOs can collect huge bonuses; but in the meantime those who can't find jobs in their industries just have to suck it up and go work in the tomato fields.

At the end of January when I lost my job, I was sending resumes out to every job posting that was put out in my area for accounting positions. Most are frigging scams! They are not hiring people. A lot are simply temp agencies fishing for workers, but there are not any damned jobs out there to even send the temps on.

I have found myself damned near depressed, because I want to go back to work, but I don't want to take any frigging job that is out there. I'm too old to work as an A/P clerk! With my experience I'd be bored stiff in three hours. No one even wants to hire me for those jobs, because they can see that I am over-qualified.

I hate like hell to be living on unemployment right now. But, thanks the the current economy, I don't have a lot of choice in the matter. I don't blame Bush and I don't blame Obama, I blame Washington.

I'm one of those who believes that the morons in Washington spend way too much money, but as far as I am concerned if we are going to spend money then damn it we should be spending it on those in our society that actually need it an not some SOB with votes to sell.

GOP logic?

What about basic logic that if they lose iunemployment benefits, they will do what they gotta do to earn a living.

There are jobs out there.

Sorry if they are "beneath" them.

Beneath them? There is nothing "beneath" me. But there are positions that I can't get hired for because people think that I am over qualified for and that I am over qualified for. There are jobs out there that I cannot do because I am not physically capable of doing. There is no such thing as a job that is beneath me; but there are jobs that I do not fit into, some I am not at all qualified to do, some I am over qualified for and some that I am under qualified to do. Hey and quess what! There are even a few out there that are just right for me!!! Guess what... there are also 5000 or more other people in this area that have similar qualifications as I do and we are all competing for a couple hundred jobs in our field. Sucks to be me.

Would you hire a person that was qualified to run your business to write a few checks for you; someone that you know will be looking for a job more suitable to his or her qualifications or would you rather hire someone that was young and willing to learn and grow with your company? I would take the youngster in that case every time. Turn the tables around, would you hire the youngster with no experience to run your business or would you hire the person with the experience?

It is a fallacy to think that the jobs are out there. Employers are not hiring right now. They are cutting back on staff because of the economy. Things WILL eventually turn around, but that is not going to be overnight.

Could I go to work as a greeter for Walmart? Maybe. Would I? Yeah, if the job were offered I probably would, just to do something with my life. I might even be able to start my own business, but I do not have the entrepreneur spirit.

This post has gone on long enough.

Go ahead and take the benefits from me. I will survive. But, don't for a minute think that everyone can.

Immie

PS The tone of this may sound a bit angry. It is not intended to be that way. I'm frustrated. I'm ready to give up. For those of you that are employed right now... good for you, but don't be deceived, jobs are not out there for everyone. Everyone on unemployment is not lazy and milking the G.D.d system.

That's okay for you, Immie, but you're a conservative. Most people collecting unemployment are lazy assholes that never worked a day in their life and are now happily living large on unemployment benefits.



Seriously, maybe you should be going to school in the meantime for something else?

Actually, I have thought about going back to school. In fact, I have been trying to remember if I ever prayed, "Dear Lord, if you want me to go to seminary just open the doors." Problem is that I don't want to move to St. Louis or Fort Wayne which is where the seminaries are for my denomination.

And I have volunteered for a hospice center here locally. They require training and I will go through that training next month.

Where did you come up with that crock about lazy people who have never worked a day in their lives?

Immie

 

[Ravi]

Sarcasm.

 

[Jarhead]

Sarcasm.

Entitlement

 

[Immanuel]

Sarcasm.

I'm not in the mood for sarcasm. I've been expecting a call back on THE JOB I want since yesterday morning and every time the frigging phone rings it is a frigging jerk that wants to sell me something or wants a frigging donation! By the way, thank God for caller ID because I haven't had to cuss them out.

Which is probably why I sounded so frustrated in that long post I made a little while ago.

Immie

 

[FA_Q2]

It's the policy with the single most upside in terms of job creation potential.

Cumulative Effects of Policy Options on Employment in 2010 and 2011, Range of Low to High Estimates

Are you attempting to put fourth that increasing unemployment bennies creates jobs

Of course. That's the entire rationale for having automatic stabilizers like unemployment insurance that kick in during economic downturns. From that CBO report:

Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment. A variant of this option would extend assistance with paying health insurance premiums, which would allow some recipients to maintain health insurance coverage they would otherwise have dropped. This variant would result in increased demand for health care services, and it would increase the income available to purchase other goods and services for recipients who would have purchased insurance even without this special assistance. Both policy options could dampen people’s efforts to look for work, although that concern is less of a factor when employment opportunities are expected to be limited for some time.

CBO estimates that the policies would raise output cumulatively between 2010 and 2015 by $0.70 to $1.90 per dollar of total budgetary cost. CBO also estimates that the policies would add 8 to 19 cumulative years of full-time-equivalent employment in 2010 and 2011 per million dollars of total budgetary cost.​

Economies are based on people buying good and services. For example, that's why deficit spending on food stamps during downturns has similar effects to unemployment compensation and for a similar reason. Empirical data shows that every additional $5 spent on them--through emergency spending--spurs up to $9.20 in economic activity. Moreover, as Hanson and Golan conclude in that brief:

Ultimately, whether growth in the Food Stamp Program stimulates economic activity depends on the funding mechanism—emergency financing stimulates economic activity in a recession, while budget-neutral financing does not. However, in either scenario, the increase in FSP expenditures raises the budgets of food stamp recipient households, stabilizing recipients’ food consumption and their well-being during economic downturns. Both scenarios also result in increased demand and production in the agriculture and food sectors, stabilizing economic activities in these key rural sectors during downturns in the economy.​

That's why the stimulus (emergency funding) contained a large amount of money for food stamps:

Today, USDA Under Secretary Kevin Concannon marked the one year anniversary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) of 2009, also known as the stimulus or recovery package, by announcing that ARRA invested more than $8 billion in local economies to feed the hungry through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program with approximately $830 million more invested each month. In addition, through the Emergency Food Assistance program, States received an additional $150 million to support local food banks, food pantries and soup kitchens.​

There really are reasons that programs like these have been extended during this recession.

Interesting point. I understand what you are getting at but there is also the mitigating factor that unemployment discourages job seeking. There is a balance to be had here and I believe that we are at it. I have no problem with the extensions that have been put in place and supported those extensions because people need a safety net for when times are rough like now. There is a point at which that net should end though and I believe we are at it. Under your argument it would be best for NO LIMIT AT ALL. That, I believe, is simply not true at all.

 

[FA_Q2]

Senate Republicans Kill Unemployment Measure | The State Column


Without looking into it too much I am on board with letting it die. If we do this yet again, when will it cease? Many people stop looking for work after they begin to draw until the benefits are coming close to an end. That is the sad truth and if we continually push the benefits out there is no reason for people to look for work.

What say you?

What they need to do is cut spending in other areas to make up this $35 billion (or whatever it is) and have certain stipulations on receiving the benefits, like drug tests, or find some way to make sure people are actually looking for work.

Drug tests no, job hunting yes. The issue is that they already do have stipulations on looking for a job but they are pathetic and, at some point, looking simply is not good enough. Like jarhead pointed out, just because you are looking does not mean that you are willing and will take a job that opens up in front of you. I would like drug testing to be a requirement for government funds as much as anybody but the operating costs of such an endeavor and logistical issues that are involved with it are prohibitive. Wasting money on something of that nature is more that I can accept.

By the way - shame on you jarhead! Do you not realize that employers lying are as much of a problem as those that are working the system are!

 

[Immanuel]

Are you attempting to put fourth that increasing unemployment bennies creates jobs

Of course. That's the entire rationale for having automatic stabilizers like unemployment insurance that kick in during economic downturns. From that CBO report:

Extending additional unemployment benefits would directly help those who would otherwise exhaust their unemployment benefits between March and December of this year. Households receiving unemployment benefits tend to spend the additional benefits quickly, making this option both timely and cost-effective in spurring economic activity and employment. A variant of this option would extend assistance with paying health insurance premiums, which would allow some recipients to maintain health insurance coverage they would otherwise have dropped. This variant would result in increased demand for health care services, and it would increase the income available to purchase other goods and services for recipients who would have purchased insurance even without this special assistance. Both policy options could dampen people’s efforts to look for work, although that concern is less of a factor when employment opportunities are expected to be limited for some time.

CBO estimates that the policies would raise output cumulatively between 2010 and 2015 by $0.70 to $1.90 per dollar of total budgetary cost. CBO also estimates that the policies would add 8 to 19 cumulative years of full-time-equivalent employment in 2010 and 2011 per million dollars of total budgetary cost.​

Economies are based on people buying good and services. For example, that's why deficit spending on food stamps during downturns has similar effects to unemployment compensation and for a similar reason. Empirical data shows that every additional $5 spent on them--through emergency spending--spurs up to $9.20 in economic activity. Moreover, as Hanson and Golan conclude in that brief:

Ultimately, whether growth in the Food Stamp Program stimulates economic activity depends on the funding mechanism—emergency financing stimulates economic activity in a recession, while budget-neutral financing does not. However, in either scenario, the increase in FSP expenditures raises the budgets of food stamp recipient households, stabilizing recipients’ food consumption and their well-being during economic downturns. Both scenarios also result in increased demand and production in the agriculture and food sectors, stabilizing economic activities in these key rural sectors during downturns in the economy.​

That's why the stimulus (emergency funding) contained a large amount of money for food stamps:

Today, USDA Under Secretary Kevin Concannon marked the one year anniversary of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (AARA) of 2009, also known as the stimulus or recovery package, by announcing that ARRA invested more than $8 billion in local economies to feed the hungry through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly the Food Stamp Program with approximately $830 million more invested each month. In addition, through the Emergency Food Assistance program, States received an additional $150 million to support local food banks, food pantries and soup kitchens.​

There really are reasons that programs like these have been extended during this recession.

Interesting point. I understand what you are getting at but there is also the mitigating factor that unemployment discourages job seeking. There is a balance to be had here and I believe that we are at it. I have no problem with the extensions that have been put in place and supported those extensions because people need a safety net for when times are rough like now. There is a point at which that net should end though and I believe we are at it. Under your argument it would be best for NO LIMIT AT ALL. That, I believe, is simply not true at all.

You may be right that there is a point at which that safety net should be removed, but I have to tell you, that in times like these, 26 weeks is not enough time for many people to find a new job. There are simply too many people looking for work right now.

Immie

 

[FA_Q2]

Supporters of this bill are missing a very important fact - unemployment has already been extended! If you back this then you need to answer one very important question: at what point does it end and benefits should no longer be extended? All of the arguments put forth so far could be used indefinitely to extend benefits and that simply is not a good thing.

 

[Immanuel]

Supporters of this bill are missing a very important fact - unemployment has already been extended! If you back this then you need to answer one very important question: at what point does it end and benefits should no longer be extended? All of the arguments put forth so far could be used indefinitely to extend benefits and that simply is not a good thing.

There are people who have been on unemployment for 2 1/2 years that have just recently lost benefits. One I know of is only in his early 20's so he has not paid into it all that much when he lost his job. Well, we don't actually pay into it, but rather we work for the benefit of receiving it.

Now we are talking about ending the extensions flat out. I lost my job on 1/29/10. If the extension ends then I will only get 26 weeks. Granted, I don't have the right to expect even that, but I can tell you that in today's market, it is not easy to find work in middle management positions in 26 weeks. It takes time and not only in my field but others as well.

I'm telling ya, its tough out there and our esteemed President and Congress are not doing all that much to make it any better.

Immie

 

[Political Junky]

It's disability insurance. The employees pay into the fund.
Apparently the cons are OK with health insurance companies refusing to pay bills as well.

 

[Rinata]

I don't understand what the problem is exactly. My knowledge of unemployment is not strong. I worked for 35 years in government programs for a major Los Angeles insurance company. I never collected unemployment. I was so lucky that I was never affected by staff cuts in all that time.

However, I did pay into it, right?? It's not money that comes from our government. I always thought that it was our money anyway. Do I think people should abuse it??? Of course not. I never needed it. But I want my fellow Americans to benefit from what I contributed if they really need it. And I see people every single day that really need it. So why did the Republicans and that lone democrat not want benefits extended??? I think that with the economy the way it is, there is no good reason. And don't people have to prove they are looking for work before they can get it?? Can somebody answer my questions?? I'd appreciate it. I really don't know.