Sen. Bunning blocks unemployment benefits extension

page: 20
63
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:04 PM
link   
reply to post by nomorecruelty
 


Probably intentional. Maybe they are trying to keep it quiet. Everyone I work with knows about it though. Conservative radio has been quiet about it as well...at least from what I have heard the last few days. I have no idea if Fox news is talking about it....haven't watched it in a long time.

The more that know about this...the more that will be angry. Nearly 17 percent of all Americans are under employed or cannot find work.

That's a large voting block. Cut off benefits and they'll lose all their votes.

It's essentially the same as cutting SS for a chunk of senior citizens.

Political suicide.




posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Bunning got what he wanted...... paygo funding of the unemployment benefits. So he just agreed to pass the bill. So people get the extensions, and there is not a increase in deficit. People should thank Bunning for just preventing additional 10's of billions in deficit. Unemployment benefits are costing the US taxpayer and average of over $10 billion a month right now.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:08 PM
link   
How long do you pay people to not work?
When do you take individual responsibility ?
How much more can you take out than you put in?
Enquiring minds want to know...
And please, no bush bush bush...



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:14 PM
link   
reply to post by johnny2127
 





Unemployment benefits are costing the US taxpayer and average of over $10 billion a month right now.



With enactment of the FY2009 Supplemental (H.R. 2346/P.L. 111-32) on June 24, 2009, Congress has approved a total of about $944 billion for military operations, base security, reconstruction, foreign aid, embassy costs, and veterans’ health care for the three operations initiated since the 9/11 attacks: Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF) Afghanistan and other counter terror operations; Operation Noble Eagle (ONE), providing enhanced security at military bases; and Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF). Congress is currently considering the FY2010 War request that was submitted to Congress along with DOD’s baseline request. The House passed its bill on July 30, 2009 (H.R. 3326) and the Senate is expected to act on its version in late September 2009.

This $944 billion total covers all appropriations approved by Congress for FY2001 to meet war needs through FY2009, the current fiscal year ending September 30, 2009. Of that total, CRS estimates that Iraq will receive about $683 billion (72%), OEF about $227 billion (24%) and enhanced base security about $29 billion (3%), with about $5 billion that CRS cannot allocate (1%). About 94% of the funds are for DOD, 5% for foreign aid programs and embassy operations, and less than 1% for medical care for veterans.


If the Administration’s FY2010 war request is enacted, total war-related funding would reach $1.08 trillion, including $748 billion for Iraq, $300 billion for Afghanistan, $29 billion for enhanced security, and $5 billion that cannot be allocated. Of this cumulative total, 69% would be for Iraq, 28% for Afghanistan, and 3% for enhanced security. On August 30, 2009, General Stanley McChrystal, Commander in Afghanistan, submitted a strategic assessment and a request for additional troops was reportedly given to Secretary of Defense Gates on September 26 , 2009. That request is unlikely to be vetted either within DOD and the Administration until additional ongoing White House reviews of the strategy are completed. In



www.fas.org...

Where's paygo????????????????????????



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:19 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


Exactly buddy, you're making my point for me. Should have been paygo here as well. Fiscal irresponsibility before is not an excuse for continuing fiscal irresponsibility. Democrats and Republicans have both spent irresponsibly for decades, and we are paying the price now. Both sides blew it, and neither deserve our allegiance.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
They found that girl raped and dead in cali. No problem, the dude that killed her had needs and she could provide them, her needs were unimportant, right?. That's the same with paying people for not doing anything, year after year. After all from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs.
Enjoy...

[edit on 2-3-2010 by thatredpill]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:25 PM
link   
It looks like Bunning has relented. We dodged another bullet. At least for now.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by johnny2127
reply to post by David9176
 


Exactly buddy, you're making my point for me. Should have been paygo here as well. Fiscal irresponsibility before is not an excuse for continuing fiscal irresponsibility. Democrats and Republicans have both spent irresponsibly for decades, and we are paying the price now. Both sides blew it, and neither deserve our allegiance.

Which is why gov't has to be strictly limited, otherwise the sociopaths that are inevitably drawn to it will bugger all the rest of us. Big gov't always seeks out the worst in mankind, and then amplifies it to create turmoil. THere's no record of any other outcome..



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   
reply to post by thatredpill
 





They found that girl raped and dead in cali. No problem, the dude that killed her had needs and she could provide them, her needs were unimportant, right?. That's the same with paying people for not doing anything. After all from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. Enjoy...


Well whoppittido!! I can make the same comparison for a corporation profiting BILLIONS and paying their employees little when they "could" pay more but they have the "need" not too.

Way to take it to the extreme though man. Let's compare unemployment to rape and murder.

GOOD CALL.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by thatredpill
 





They found that girl raped and dead in cali. No problem, the dude that killed her had needs and she could provide them, her needs were unimportant, right?. That's the same with paying people for not doing anything. After all from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. Enjoy...


Well whoppittido!! I can make the same comparison for a corporation profiting BILLIONS and paying their employees little when they "could" pay more but they have the "need" not too.

Way to take it to the extreme though man. Let's compare unemployment to rape and murder.

GOOD CALL.


Are you really against corporations making profits?



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs

It looks like Bunning has relented. We dodged another bullet. At least for now.

No bullet dodged, to pay for largess, everything of value loses more of it, until it's worth nothing at all and there are none left with anything. When failure and sloth is rewarded equally with effort and success, all will fail and none will succeed.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by johnny2127
 


Hey...I'm against deficit spending...but I'm against people in my own country not getting help when they are trying to stay on their feet.

If we had payed every bill we've had before..this wouldn't have been an issue in the first place...yet it is because of crazy ass spending in the past....much due to war and other programs.

Yes...it's from both sides...but it's been going on since Reagan. We went from the a creditor nation to debter nation and it's been getting worse since.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by johnny2127
 





Are you really against corporations making profits?


NO. Proving a point. Of course there has to be profits or business won't exist.

Come on.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by thatredpill
 





They found that girl raped and dead in cali. No problem, the dude that killed her had needs and she could provide them, her needs were unimportant, right?. That's the same with paying people for not doing anything. After all from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs. Enjoy...


Well whoppittido!! I can make the same comparison for a corporation profiting BILLIONS and paying their employees little when they "could" pay more but they have the "need" not too.

Way to take it to the extreme though man. Let's compare unemployment to rape and murder.

GOOD CALL.


Rape is taking what is unearned. I fail to see any difference in demanding unearned dividends. It would be one thing to ask you circle of friends for donations for your support ( although you keep saying youhave a job) and living on the results, it's another thing entirely to suborn extortion of funds from strangers with their own problems for yourself. NOBODY put in enough money in unemployment to live on it for years, Do the math.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by thatredpill]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 06:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by David9176
reply to post by johnny2127
 


Hey...I'm against deficit spending...but I'm against people in my own country not getting help when they are trying to stay on their feet.

If we had payed every bill we've had before..this wouldn't have been an issue in the first place...yet it is because of crazy ass spending in the past....much due to war and other programs.

Yes...it's from both sides...but it's been going on since Reagan. We went from the a creditor nation to debter nation and it's been getting worse since.


Fiscal irresponsibility has been part of every party and administration further back than Reagan, with varying degrees of severity.

So let me ask you, how long should people receive unemployment benefits? I am not asking rhetorically.... I want to know what you think is reasonable.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 07:27 PM
link   
$10b more for unemployed and er.. "roads" .. 10b more dished.. but mind you, we won't pay for it, we will just auction more debt (and most likely buy it ourselves)

Lick the hand that feeds you, it should keep you satisfied for a few more months.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:11 PM
link   
reply to post by johnny2127
 





So let me ask you, how long should people receive unemployment benefits? I am not asking rhetorically.... I want to know what you think is reasonable.


I don't know honestly. Trust me, I know people sap on the system. I know someone personally who didn't do anything to find a job...and waited till the last minute to start looking.

I get it. SOME people are lazy...but so many are not. Most simply cannot afford to pay their bills anyway when they are on unemployment. Yes, those who already are used to getting 300 dollar checks each week will be more apt to sit on their butts....but someone who was making more than that and had a long line of bills to pay that took up much of their income...they will go out and hunt for jobs to keep from losing their homes. Some may just lose hope altogether.

It's going to be tough for a long time...and I do agree that we are going to have to face the music soon.

It's not just unemployment benefits...it's everything else. I'd like to see at "at least" a tax increase on the top 1 percent that we had under Reagan. Cuts...lots of cuts....and tough decisions.

The war has to end or we will go bankrupt. There is no way around it. Everyone screams about all of the spending but ignores the 600 pound gorilla in the room that is eating up all of us.

Hopefully we can get our bearings and get out of this insane mess.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


I would go a bit further and say "most" people are quite lazy when handed free money.

In reality we should totally cut unemployment right now. This is getting dumb. "Joe" should snap back into reality and realize he was vastly overpaid at his last job and should come to the realization that he is pretty much worth what the market will give him at his new telemarketing job paying closer to $10.00 an hour.

I was on unemployment before and I can say it made me quite lazy. Nothing wrong with that, who wouldn't be with free money?

Once this happens consumer confidence rises again and spending picks right back up. The bad part is you may get a few more calls at dinner time asking you to switch long distance carriers.



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by GreenBicMan
 


I wasn't when I was on unemployment. Couldn't stand it and constantly was out looking for work....but I also lost my job to outsourcing and I could have sat on it for up to 2 1/2 years if I had went to school..which also would have been payed for.

Instead I was on it for 1 or 2 months and got working again. I moved to another state to get a job. It was tough then and I didn't sit on my butt eating potato chips. I can only imagine what it's like now. Much of it may depend on the state we live in. I live in Michigan which has the worst unemployment rate in the country. There isn't much out there.

There are plenty of problems...and blame...to go around.





[edit on 2-3-2010 by David9176]



posted on Mar, 2 2010 @ 09:35 PM
link   
reply to post by David9176
 


I hate all politicians so I do not side with anyone. I shouldn't say hate, but I am not a fan of the "knot" of media+politics.

This is ANOTHER populist proposal being passed. Like I said just getting old.





top topics
 
63
<< 17  18  19    21  22 >>

log in

join