Well it looks like Im the only one here that thinks this is a good idea. As a matter of fact I feel they should get rid of unemployment all together. What a joke...pay people who are not working with our taxes.
Food stamps too...talk about a nation dependent on its goverment,no wonder were in such a mess.
.

Originally posted by Maxmars


But I can say I fully expect them to turn this argument around and make it a 'problem' whose source lies with the unemployed... instead of the jokers who take our money - no matter what its for - and use it as they feel is politically expedient.

This is exactly what is going on in the UK.... and has done for many a year.

Some of us work and pay what we need and must.. others work and try to get by from day to day.. We all know the usual scenes..

Bu tht egovernment sets up schemes in order to help those who need help.
ie, the recently unemployed or single mothers.

But this benefit system has been used and abused to death and it is the long term unemployed and/or single parents that are blamed for the ongoing support handed out every day by the government funded by the workers.

We constantly hear about how many teenage girls get pregnant just to claim housing and benefits. We hear about the long term unemployed having their benefits cut due to their inability to find work. We know that the same people can quite easily get signed off sick for many a reason and continue to receive full housing benefit, council tax benefit and claim money to live on.

It is the system that is at fault here and it has led many in the UK to abuse it. "Look a gift horse in the mouth" springs to mind...

Then, of course, there is the migrant issue..but we don't really need to go there..

There has to be a point where it will all collapse... and it appears that the USA has now got to that point and this stop on benefits may be a cover...

The focus is aimed at those who use the system because they have to or simply want to instead of actually getting a job.
There is a fear in peoples faces when they mention they are unemployed. Many look on as though you are one of the long term 'scroungers'. Walking into the job centre is a task in itself. A loss of pride does a lot of damage to some.

All said and done, it simply cannot be the fault of the unemployed.

If these bankers and businesses and governments had done their jobs in accordance with the normal running of a country instead of racking up massive amounts of debt in order to make profit or go to war in order to make more profit, then surely we would all be in a better position right now.

Do not penalise the unemployed..

Penalise those who have brought the USA to this position..

Originally posted by Extralien
Jus t how does one man stop unemployment payments to so many people?
How do you get that kind of power?

In reality, he doesn't possess the "power" you may assume.

The "other" side of the political spectrum, the Democrats, have the ability to stop his disruption, but they're not. Instead of taking action to move forward, Bunning is allowed to continue his tactics for political effect. In other words, the Democrats could stop him and put people back to work and save benefits, but they'd rather exploit the controversy.

I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, people legitimately out of work deserve to be paid their benefits. After all, they paid for those benefits every week out of their wages. On the other hand, there are MANY who will take a job for the minimum length of time required to make them eligible for unemployment and then quit. They then work "Off the books" in some fashion and when the mandatory waiting period for quitting a job ends they apply and collect the unemployment while working "Off the books". I used to drive a taxi fo ra company that required that you sign a "Sub-contractor's Agreement". Almost all of the drivers would do this. They would cut a day or two a week to work a paycheck job so they could get their unemployment benefits back again. Also, you'd have Seasonal workers (Carpenters, farm hands etc..) who would Drive taxi off the books while collecting unemployment while laid off for the winter.

So yeah, I'm 50/50 on the issue. I've seen many a scumbag play that game. I even knew a few that made a killing driving taxi that collected Foodstamps and medicaid. It's not the programs that are wrong, it that the states/Feds are so lax in their rules and allow these lazy wastes of air to take advantage of it. I myself have state funded medical insurance and, due to my wife's present medical condition, foodstamps. What's the difference between me and them? When my wife starts getting her disability checks (finally) we'll be calling social services to let them know how much our income went up. Why? because it's the right thing to do and shows integrity. We may lose that assistance, but that just means we aren't as bad off any longer. When she finally goes back to work we'll lose it. That I'm sure of

So Congress is told to stop spending unless they find a way to be able to finance it. This man stands up for that simple belief, and now is being scolded for it.

The irony in all of this.

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
If the unemployment stops it will fall apart in short order it is the only thing holding this fragile nation together. Is 10 billion worth the collapse of the entire nation? If we do not see them extend this it is the beginning of the end. And you had better get your backyard in order before it is to late.

First, I disagree that unemployment benefits is the only thing that holds this nation together.

Second, the sooner a major upheaval comes, the better. The country, quite obviously, lost any capacity to function normally, ravaged by greed of endless special interest groups and marked apathy of the masses. You reap what you sow.

Originally posted by higns07
So Congress is told to stop spending unless they find a way to be able to finance it. This man stands up for that simple belief, and now is being scolded for it

You know full well that this hypocrite does NOT believe this. The war in Iraq was completely financed by debt, and he was all for it.

So is this still going on today? My understanding was that yesterday was the D day for this.

Are benefits now not extended and cut?

I'm so amazed how many people on here bash Obama and say he is a socialist and how our gov needs to stop spending and printing money. Then you come on here and say we should just keep paying for people by giving them money for nothing.

Make up your minds.

It seems like a large portion of people on this site are unemployed and hate jews. Hmmmm....

While I understand the point of identifying the people responsible for policy decisions and government actions, it is difficult for me to accept that it can be narrowed down beyond the political machinery itself (and whomever it is that really controls them).

Often I see a particular elected official bashed, but in the end, doesn't it appear obvious that the party supports, or may even direct, their actions?

Perhaps it's just easier to blame a person rather than an institution, but if the institution itself is the culprit, we will never resolve our problems by focusing on their "fall-guy of the week."

All of these politicians know they are essentially powerless in the big picture, but none of them seem inclined to challenge that paradigm, perhaps for fear of ending their career, or at least, losing their cult-celebrity status.

[edit on 2-3-2010 by Maxmars]

Originally posted by Grayelf2009
Well it looks like Im the only one here that thinks this is a good idea. As a matter of fact I feel they should get rid of unemployment all together. What a joke...pay people who are not working with our taxes.
Food stamps too...talk about a nation dependent on its goverment,no wonder were in such a mess.
.

Originally posted by pyrael
I have mixed feelings about this. On one hand, people legitimately out of work deserve to be paid their benefits. After all, they paid for those benefits every week out of their wages. On the other hand, there are MANY who will take a job for the minimum length of time required to make them eligible for unemployment and then quit. They then work "Off the books" in some fashion and when the mandatory waiting period for quitting a job ends they apply and collect the unemployment while working "Off the books". I used to drive a taxi fo ra company that required that you sign a "Sub-contractor's Agreement". Almost all of the drivers would do this. They would cut a day or two a week to work a paycheck job so they could get their unemployment benefits back again. Also, you'd have Seasonal workers (Carpenters, farm hands etc..) who would Drive taxi off the books while collecting unemployment while laid off for the winter.

Grayelf2009, I hope you don't end up losing your job. Unemployment is pretty much the only thing keeping most families off the street. We have a friend ofthe family living with us because he was fired. He does not receive any unemployment specifically because he was fired. If we had not been there to help, he would be living on the streets right now. He has been *ACTIVELY* looking for a job for a year now.

pyrael, I am not disputing your allegory, but I would have to say, at least in Texas, you cannot quit your job and automatically qualify for unemployment. You have to quit because of "unfavorable" conditions such as an antagonistic work environment or unsafe work conditions... Basically something that made it bad for you to continue at your employer.

For the record, this is why I think he is doign this

Mr Bunning's Republican colleagues may agree with his general sentiment but no-one has publicly supported the senator who is retiring in November.

Originally posted by higns07
Edit: What I'm getting at is, maybe this man is finally putting down his fist and voting on his beliefs.

I think he's voting not on his beliefs, but on his last chance for grand standing!

I'm kind of torn on this. I feel for ANYONE who loses a job or the ability to feed themselves and their families. (Let alone shelter them and so on.) It's a horrible experience to go through sleeping anywhere other than your home and wondering where the next meal will come from. Believe me, I know from first hand experience. I had to take care of my younger brother and sister when I was 10 while living under a cardboard box in a park in Tacoma, WA. My mother would leave us all day while she did whatever she could to either find us a place to stay the night or something to eat.

She would eventually find places but eventually it would mean the streets again as well.

You see, my problem is that the senator is right. We MUST stop the bleeding now. I don't think you guys realize what kind of dangerous ground we find ourselves at this moment in time in this nation. With a deficit that is predicted to nearly double before the 4 years of office is complete for this president we are looking at more than a million mouths going hungry. We're talking about the majority of mouths in this 300 million + nation going hungry. Complete bankruptcy and collapse of a nation. It's going on in Greece. Not on this scale because the U.S. is a much larger and more prominant nation. So when it happens here it is going to dwarf this little act of a representative that is trying to do his duty to his country.

He's not doing it out of spite. He is doing it because he sees what is on the horizon.

Also, do you honestly want a nation where the populace is dependant upon the government? Seriously? If we get that then we lose that much more to the human desire to succeed and grow. We create a lazy nation that sits around waiting for others to take care of them.

We need to stop the bleeding now. Even though I feel that it may be just a tad bit too late.

Originally posted by dariousg
Also, do you honestly want a nation where the populace is dependant upon the government? Seriously?

Seriously, if we concede that it's OK that the average compensation of a Goldman Sachs employee is $700k a year, we might as well try and feed those whose misfortune was brought about by the excesses of the system.

Originally posted by dariousg

.....

Also, do you honestly want a nation where the populace is dependant upon the government?

....

No, but I do want my money back. The government extorted out of my paycheck based on the promise of coverage. This is not a 'benefit' for me, this is the fruits of my contribution over the last 25-30 years.

Now I know realistically that it can't happen; that money is gone - they took it.

But Some seem to feel that we should 'keep on truckin' as if this was they was it should be.

I know we are out of money, and I know that we will not be covered; but I resent the characterization that this is some kind of charitable handout when I have paid into it all my working life.

(Not saying that is how you characterize it, just pointing out to those who would walk passed a homeless/unemployed person and mutter 'Get a job, you bum!")