View Single Post
  #4  
Old 12-03-2010, 07:47 PM
Riot's Avatar
Riot Riot is offline
Keeneland
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 14,153
Default

[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by SOREHOOF View Post
Why does the govt. put a price tag on what it's going to cost to extend unemployment, if they (we?) aren't paying out the overwhelming cost.
Because our whole economy is affected, and they are talking about the federal extensions.

There are two types of unemployment. The first is paid by employers paying into a pool within your state. That is the vast majority. The federal government only steps in to support the states for extended benefits after the state's two types of benefits are exhausted. States have the option to have the feds pay shared or all of the most extended benefits. For the states that are letting the fed pay it all, those folks are getting cut off earlier than other people in other states whose states share the burden.

The recession is so severe, the feds have millions of people on extended benefits. These people have exhausted their savings, their houses don't sell readily now - the only thing keeping many of them from literally homelessness and starvation is $300 a week.

Quote:
Does the overwhelming cost mean anything to you? Are you gainfully employed? Have you ever drawn Unemployment Benefits? Sorry Riot .
Yes, of course the cost matters. But not when unemployed people are starving in a recession. We're Americans, and we help our fellow Americans. I'm not going to let another hard-working American and his kids starve because "it costs money to give them help".

We're broke. We don't buy new weapons systems now. We do help keep our fellow Americans from starving.

If we follow the "can't spend money when we're broke" logic, the next natural disaster (another Katrina, an earthquake in LA, massive flooding), the feds should NOT help, simply because it costs money.

Yes, I am employed, no I have never drawn unemployment. I've paid unemployment insurance for multiple employees for many years as a business owner.

I know a couple people who have been on unemployment in the past three years. And they are NOT lazy drug addicts living off the government. They were highly qualified, hard-working people who were laid off their jobs.

Quote:
I don't trust these guys running the show
Who, the federal government? Or the states? (who approve who gets unemployment funds from the fed government) Or the employers? (who always have a say in an employee getting unemployment or not in the first place)
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts
Reply With Quote