login
UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO?
-
No new posts
| Other Resources | The Political Joe » UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? | Rss Feed  |
 2013-12-04 9:33 AM |
Member  1293    Pearland,Tx |  Subject: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO?Fellow BTers: I would like to request the feedback of all. Should Unemployment benefits extension go? or not? http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-congressional-bud... I always believe better teach a person how to fish and not to feed him fish everyday. There are a good number of unemployed people that are relying on unemployment extension benefits because its higher than minimum wage pay, but there are people who lost their homes and can barely provide ample food on the table. I am not going to be hypocrite i was jobless once and benefited from unemployment ext. for about 90 weeks which state law is normally 24 weeks. While i am applying for old white collared job no body is hiring therefore i used my unemployment benefits extension to go back to school while applying and get a degree which is lucrative to the job market. Basically i went from White to blue collar and paid every cent of what i spent to school  . |
| 2013-12-04 10:22 AM in reply to: strykergt |
Pro 9391  Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by strykergt Fellow BTers: I would like to request the feedback of all. Should Unemployment benefits extension go? or not? http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-congressional-bud... I always believe better teach a person how to fish and not to feed him fish everyday. There are a good number of unemployed people that are relying on unemployment extension benefits because its higher than minimum wage pay, but there are people who lost their homes and can barely provide ample food on the table. I am not going to be hypocrite i was jobless once and benefited from unemployment ext. for about 90 weeks which state law is normally 24 weeks. While i am applying for old white collared job no body is hiring therefore i used my unemployment benefits extension to go back to school while applying and get a degree which is lucrative to the job market. Basically i went from White to blue collar and paid every cent of what i spent to school . Do not extend, is my vote. I think unemployment (and assistance as a whole) is a good thing because there are people in need through no choice of their own. However, all good things can quickly turn into a bad thing when they come without strings, limitations, or deadlines. Many people take the path of least resistance in life and if I'm sitting at home playing World of Warcraft all day making just as much as I could getting a job, then I'll work on leveling my Mage vs. slinging burgers. Growing up with a family of slackers, I can assure you that able bodied people will all find work if their assistance gets cut off, but until that day they will take the path of least resistance/effort. |
| 2013-12-04 11:40 AM in reply to: tuwood |
Champion 6993 Chicago, Illinois | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Tupuppy problem with the McJob is one there are no infinite jobs there. in 2009 when we had 10 million unemployed people even if you divided those among the top 5 fast food companies you would still over double the number of employees McDonald's has. Even if at there 2013 numbers if they could use 10% more employees world wide that means they only need 180k jobs. I would guess in the USA that number would be more like 50K at most. Plus Maybe its not in all cases but I also know when I finished a 2.5 month assignment as a PL-SQL developer I had a hard time getting a job as a java developer because I was told even though I had 2 years of experience being a Java developer I could only be hired as a PL-SQL Developer because that was my last job. No one would take me with 2.5 month experience as a PL-SQL developer. |
| 2013-12-04 2:30 PM in reply to: strykergt |
Member 465 | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Unemployment insurance is funded by employers like me to ease the economic hurt of business cycles. With that said, you are asking me if an employee works at least the minimum base period (I think it is 6 weeks in my state), I am liable for potentially 2 years plus of insurance claims against my unemployment tax ratings if business turns bad? I'll pass. By the way, I fund 100% on my company's contribution to the unemployment insurance pool while my employees fund 0%. If I go out of business, my employees received 100% of the benefit of my company's participation in the insurance pool and I receive 0%. I have nothing against unemployment insurance but I do have a problem with turning what should be a temporary insurance program to a welfare program especially when I fully contribute knowing I will never be vested. |
| 2013-12-04 3:37 PM in reply to: Jackemy1 |
Extreme Veteran 1190 Silicon Valley | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by Jackemy1 Unemployment insurance is funded by employers like me to ease the economic hurt of business cycles. With that said, you are asking me if an employee works at least the minimum base period (I think it is 6 weeks in my state), I am liable for potentially 2 years plus of insurance claims against my unemployment tax ratings if business turns bad? I'll pass. By the way, I fund 100% on my company's contribution to the unemployment insurance pool while my employees fund 0%. If I go out of business, my employees received 100% of the benefit of my company's participation in the insurance pool and I receive 0%. I have nothing against unemployment insurance but I do have a problem with turning what should be a temporary insurance program to a welfare program especially when I fully contribute knowing I will never be vested. Employers like you and I pay for state unemployment benefits, the federal extensions are added on to our mounting debt. Two years ago I got a notice from the state that my unemployment tax rate was going to triple because of my claims history. What??? I have never had a claim for unemployment filed against me in 15 years. So I called them and asked what was up. It was explained that because of all the claims being filed state wide, all small businesses in CA were having their rate increased to the state maximum regardless of claims history. Is it any wonder that even more businesses had to lay people off? |
| 2013-12-04 4:36 PM in reply to: chirunner134 |
Pro 9391 Omaha, NE | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by chirunner134 Tupuppy problem with the McJob is one there are no infinite jobs there. in 2009 when we had 10 million unemployed people even if you divided those among the top 5 fast food companies you would still over double the number of employees McDonald's has. Even if at there 2013 numbers if they could use 10% more employees world wide that means they only need 180k jobs. I would guess in the USA that number would be more like 50K at most. Plus Maybe its not in all cases but I also know when I finished a 2.5 month assignment as a PL-SQL developer I had a hard time getting a job as a java developer because I was told even though I had 2 years of experience being a Java developer I could only be hired as a PL-SQL Developer because that was my last job. No one would take me with 2.5 month experience as a PL-SQL developer. I still stand behind people finding a job if they're properly incentivized. If you have no assistance and are able bodied, you will find work somewhere period. you will not starve or let your family starve. Now you may not find a job doing what you want to do in the city you want to live, but you will find a job. There are jobs all over this country, but most people are far more comfortable living off the gubmint where they currently are until they can find another job making what they want doing what they want whenever that day may or may not come. If I tell my kids I'll just give them a $500/mo. allowance and they can live with me as long as they want. Guess what, they'll be 40 years old and still living in the basement. However, if I boot them out the door and say have fun, don't forget to write they will find something somewhere to do and get by. Our government is the epitome of the parent that won't let their kids go because they want to control what they do with the purse strings. |
| 2013-12-04 5:20 PM in reply to: tuwood |
Member 1293 Pearland,Tx | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by tuwood Originally posted by chirunner134 Tupuppy problem with the McJob is one there are no infinite jobs there. in 2009 when we had 10 million unemployed people even if you divided those among the top 5 fast food companies you would still over double the number of employees McDonald's has. Even if at there 2013 numbers if they could use 10% more employees world wide that means they only need 180k jobs. I would guess in the USA that number would be more like 50K at most. Plus Maybe its not in all cases but I also know when I finished a 2.5 month assignment as a PL-SQL developer I had a hard time getting a job as a java developer because I was told even though I had 2 years of experience being a Java developer I could only be hired as a PL-SQL Developer because that was my last job. No one would take me with 2.5 month experience as a PL-SQL developer. I still stand behind people finding a job if they're properly incentivized. If you have no assistance and are able bodied, you will find work somewhere period. you will not starve or let your family starve. Now you may not find a job doing what you want to do in the city you want to live, but you will find a job. There are jobs all over this country, but most people are far more comfortable living off the gubmint where they currently are until they can find another job making what they want doing what they want whenever that day may or may not come. If I tell my kids I'll just give them a $500/mo. allowance and they can live with me as long as they want. Guess what, they'll be 40 years old and still living in the basement. However, if I boot them out the door and say have fun, don't forget to write they will find something somewhere to do and get by. Our government is the epitome of the parent that won't let their kids go because they want to control what they do with the purse strings. exactly what I meant |
| 2014-01-04 3:27 PM in reply to: strykergt |
| 286 , | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Wihle there are certainly exceptions in every situation, I'd like to believe that the average person who has been laid off from their prior employer, and seeks unemployment assistance, does so with the full intent of finding gainful employment in a definitive period of time. I was on unemployment for about two months when I lost a job, but thankfully...found gainful (nearly comparable to what I was once earning as a salary, in my prior position) employment in a very short period of time. I'm in sales/marketing however, and it's a bit easier for lack of a better word ...to find another well paying sales position, even if you must look at different industries. Not everyone who loses his/her job, can find a suitable replacement...even one that pays a little less...simply because they may be very specialized...or the industry they serve is not doing well, as a whole. Even if they were to seek a minimum wage job or two to support themselves/families...they might be turned down because they are over qualified. It is unfair to broad brush those who are receiving benefits as complacent...thinking that human nature is such that a person will just do the bare minimum to get by. Of course, there are people who do operate like that in life...but, I'd like to believe that most people who are receiving unemployment, would love the opportunity to be gainfully employed, again. Therefore, I'm not against extending the benefits. FWIW, just my thoughts. |
| 2014-01-06 12:23 PM in reply to: SGirl |
Master 2946 Centennial, CO | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by SGirl Wihle there are certainly exceptions in every situation, I'd like to believe that the average person who has been laid off from their prior employer, and seeks unemployment assistance, does so with the full intent of finding gainful employment in a definitive period of time. I was on unemployment for about two months when I lost a job, but thankfully...found gainful (nearly comparable to what I was once earning as a salary, in my prior position) employment in a very short period of time. I'm in sales/marketing however, and it's a bit easier for lack of a better word ...to find another well paying sales position, even if you must look at different industries. Not everyone who loses his/her job, can find a suitable replacement...even one that pays a little less...simply because they may be very specialized...or the industry they serve is not doing well, as a whole. Even if they were to seek a minimum wage job or two to support themselves/families...they might be turned down because they are over qualified. It is unfair to broad brush those who are receiving benefits as complacent...thinking that human nature is such that a person will just do the bare minimum to get by. Of course, there are people who do operate like that in life...but, I'd like to believe that most people who are receiving unemployment, would love the opportunity to be gainfully employed, again. Therefore, I'm not against extending the benefits. FWIW, just my thoughts. I don't think anyone is saying that there should be no Unemployment benefits, only that there is and should be a limit to how long they are paid. If someone works in a niche market, that is a choice. If they can't get another job in their field, it is time to change fields. They are not over qualified for everything. |
| 2014-01-14 3:25 PM in reply to: SGirl |
| 297 Arden, North Carolina | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? Originally posted by SGirl Wihle there are certainly exceptions in every situation, I'd like to believe that the average person who has been laid off from their prior employer, and seeks unemployment assistance, does so with the full intent of finding gainful employment in a definitive period of time. I was on unemployment for about two months when I lost a job, but thankfully...found gainful (nearly comparable to what I was once earning as a salary, in my prior position) employment in a very short period of time. I'm in sales/marketing however, and it's a bit easier for lack of a better word ...to find another well paying sales position, even if you must look at different industries. Not everyone who loses his/her job, can find a suitable replacement...even one that pays a little less...simply because they may be very specialized...or the industry they serve is not doing well, as a whole. Even if they were to seek a minimum wage job or two to support themselves/families...they might be turned down because they are over qualified. It is unfair to broad brush those who are receiving benefits as complacent...thinking that human nature is such that a person will just do the bare minimum to get by. Of course, there are people who do operate like that in life...but, I'd like to believe that most people who are receiving unemployment, would love the opportunity to be gainfully employed, again. Therefore, I'm not against extending the benefits. FWIW, just my thoughts. Well said. "Painting everyone with a broad brush" eliminates the need to actually think beyond the surface about what's happening. Seems that nearly everyone on this thread is stereotyping those on unemployment...oh except for the one's that were on it themselves, they were the exception. I was on it too, for all of 5 months before it ran out. I was out of work for another 13 months. This area sucks for work, but we bought a house and couldn't move. The only reason we didn't foreclose was due to a state foreclosure prevention program(you know, another one of those programs to help lazy people like me), and finally after over 18 months out of work found a job. I couldn't even help feed my 2 yr old son, but I chose that out of laziness. I applied for probably 200 jobs in that time period, and had zero interviews until the final month when out of nowhere I had several. Oh, and I"m as hire able as they get. 35, masters degree, healthy. I have no intention of revisiting this thread because the heartless libertarians that comprise 99% of the responses here make me sick. I just can't stand reading from people who have no clue what its like to struggle attack those who are struggling and make up stories about how they're "choosing to stay at home and play xbox." You also realize that unemployment pays around half of what you were making right? Who the hell would choose that? |
| 2014-01-14 8:41 PM in reply to: strykergt |
Elite 3972 Reno | Subject: RE: UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? At my place of work, we have had a bloom of job applicants come in for applications. It had been quiet for months. I am guessing that these people are those affected by this. At the beginning of the down turn, we had 20 people a day come in, and it petered down to a few per week. We are at about 5 per day now, and that is just the in person applicants. |
| Other Resources | The Political Joe » UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS EXTENSION SHOULD OR SHOULD NOT GO? | Rss Feed |
|
|
|
| |||
| Let Kids Drink at Your House and You Could Go to Jail, Maine Couple Warns | ||
| If new rules from the "fiscal cliff fiasco" didn't go into affect until 1 Jan... |
| ||||
|
| |||
|
| |||
|
|
View profile
Add to friends
Go to training log
Go to race log
Send a message
View album
CONNECT WITH FACEBOOK