[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

Back to the Christians - My Bible tells me to help the widows and the orphans.  It tells me to help the poor and the needy.  It also says that if a man shall not work, neither shall he eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10).  I think this is where most Christians lose their giving spirit.  I can quote you all kinds of verses from Proverbs that talk about being lazy. 

BG - you're comment about the WWJD bumper stickers makes me think that Jesus would say get off your butt and go get a job.  There are way too many verses in the Bible that reference laziness, slothfulness, and work for me to think otherwise.  

Now, I also know that a lot of churches are willing to help those that come and ask for it.  I know my church has a fund, not a small one BTW, specifically designated for people who have lost their jobs and can't pay for the basics of life.  Every church I've ever been a part of has a similar fund.  In addition to that, most churches support some sort of shelter or food pantry to help people in need. 

I think there is a huge difference between the Biblical command to help the poor and needy and being OK with extending unemployment benefits. 

[/quote]

Spiff, this is a really good post.

navet - I agree that we all have the right to the unemployment insurance that we purchase.  For a limited time.  There have already been extensions of the original unemployment insurance terms.  Why would we extend them again? 

My BOA and I were talking about this thread this morning.  She said that someone in one of her college classes has been looking for a job for 2 years and her unemployment insurance extensions were about to run out.  2 years.  You can't tell me you've been seriously looking for a job for 2 years. 

In two years you can get certified to become a paramedic, dental hygenist, HVAC worker, medical technician, nurse.  You can get computer certificates.  You can become a paralegal.  This list could go on and on.  If you're out of a job, chances are you can get grants to go back to school.  Or you can get student loans that are paid back when you get a job.  Lots of options out there.  The point being, if you're getting a check from the government, figure out how to stop getting a check from the government.   

It's actually a little scary to think that our government would support this woman for a full two years.  I'm guessing she's received just a little bit more than she's put into the system.  Hmm...sound like Social Security.  That program is run incredibly well, don't ya think?

There are over 130,000 jobs listed right now on monster.com.  Add to that the number of small business owners who don't advertise on monster.com and I'll bet that there are a ton of jobs out there if people are willing to do the legwork and go find them. 

Or, maybe there could be more jobs if small business owners, and big corporations, weren't terrified of what's going to happen if all of the changes in the tax codes and health care program hit their businesses square in the nose.  That will certainly make you want to just hold onto what you've got and not add any more staff. 

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

navet - I agree that we all have the right to the unemployment insurance that we purchase.  For a limited time.  There have already been extensions of the original unemployment insurance terms.  Why would we extend them again? 

My BOA and I were talking about this thread this morning.  She said that someone in one of her college classes has been looking for a job for 2 years and her unemployment insurance extensions were about to run out.  2 years.  You can't tell me you've been seriously looking for a job for 2 years. 

In two years you can get certified to become a paramedic, dental hygenist, HVAC worker, medical technician, nurse.  You can get computer certificates.  You can become a paralegal.  This list could go on and on.  If you're out of a job, chances are you can get grants to go back to school.  Or you can get student loans that are paid back when you get a job.  Lots of options out there.  The point being, if you're getting a check from the government, figure out how to stop getting a check from the government.   

It's actually a little scary to think that our government would support this woman for a full two years.  I'm guessing she's received just a little bit more than she's put into the system.  Hmm...sound like Social Security.  That program is run incredibly well, don't ya think?

There are over 130,000 jobs listed right now on monster.com.  Add to that the number of small business owners who don't advertise on monster.com and I'll bet that there are a ton of jobs out there if people are willing to do the legwork and go find them. 

Or, maybe there could be more jobs if small business owners, and big corporations, weren't terrified of what's going to happen if all of the changes in the tax codes and health care program hit their businesses square in the nose.  That will certainly make you want to just hold onto what you've got and not add any more staff. 

[/quote]

Again, i believe you are oversimplfying the situation this unemployed person finds themselves in. Outside of our resident economist, Mily, most people can't forcast the future with any accuracy. The reason being that the future is unknowable. The woman in your BOA's class would first have to give up on her current career choice. If the recession is temporary as all recessions have been in the past what's her motivation to do this? Ok, no jobs today, look for work but hang in for your current career.

Ok, so now were past that. Time to rethink the current career choice and get training in another disipline. It will take anywhere from one to three years to get the training needed to get a job on the new career path. Here's where it gets tricky. Which of the available careers will be in demand upon graduation from career school? The answer is nobody knows. All of the careers you mention in your post are in recession.  So, picking a new career and getting trained, not so simple as just do it!

That's not to say that there aren't jobs out there. There are. For most people ,not enough jobs to justify a complete career makeover.

1

[quote=Milyunair]

This isn't about feeling sorry for anyone. It's about helping your fellow man. Giving them a hand up. If you believe there is something wrong with that and it puts me out of touch, well then, so be it. I'm glad to be out of touch with the world of hate in which you live. And I mean that in the nicest way. - BG

I know folks who are absolutely opposed to war, and others who feel the need to defend themselves or their values.

Pacifists have to be respected.

It's okay to be a touchy - feelie liberal with your own money. When you start borrowing and spending other people's money, where does it stop?

You cross a line when you imply that those who fear debt live in a world of hate. The is where the discussion breaks down, the worst kind of mental diarhrea.

The fact that you can't forecast the future is the reason to be prudent. What gives you any cred here, when you just ignore questions, like, where are your good paying jobs going to come from? You can't answer the question, so you say, borrow money, in hopes that we can pay it back. But you don't really care, because you already got yours, so you're just having fun with us.

[/quote]

I agree with you. It's OK to be touch feely with your own money, as long as you don't start borrowing and spending other peoples money. But let's not just blame the left for that problem. We are currently fighting two wars using a Chinese credit card to pay for them. So it's OK to kill hundreds of thosands of people(directly or indirectly), using other peoples money, yet you stand in righteous indignation at the thought of helping folks out of tough times with other peoples money. And so many of the pro-war types are so-called christians. I have a little trouble with that. I would agree with the conservatives(I was one for most of my life) if they would have stuck to their principals. But considering the lions share of this economic mess was initiated under the conservative watch, yet they are the first to complain and finger point at any dem solution, it just smacks of hypocracy to me.

BG - For the most part, I am oversimplifying things.  It's not easy to just wake up one day and start a business for yourself.  My wife and I go through this once in a while because she has a talent that could morph itself into a business rather easily.   There are licenses, inspections, etc that she'd have to go through to get the business going.  Or, she can just keep doing it the way she is now, which is very small time, under the radar.  

My point is that there are a ton of people out there who either have worked in a particular industry and have some knowledge of that industry but no marketable skills otherwise, but are unwilling to take a leap and get some sort of training to change that. 

If we could funnel some of that unemployment money back into the small business arena, you'd see a drastic rise in employment.  If we could just give some of the existing small business owners reason to believe that they're not going to go broke paying for health care and their taxes, we'd see a rise in employment. 

I think the reason we don't agree on this issue is that we're seeing this issue from opposite sides of the coin.  On your side it's impossible to make changes, take a job that's not ideal, start a business, etc so the government, and therefore the working, taxpaying Americans are responsible for giving additional assistance to the unemployed.   I see this as an opportunity for the thousands of people out there who think they could be their own boss to actually try to give it a shot.  It's just a function of where my tax dollars go.  One ends up creating jobs, the other creating dependancy on the federal government. 

Which, is what the progressives want at the end of the day, isn't it navet?

1

[quote=Spaceman Spiff]

BG - For the most part, I am oversimplifying things.  It's not easy to just wake up one day and start a business for yourself.  My wife and I go through this once in a while because she has a talent that could morph itself into a business rather easily.   There are licenses, inspections, etc that she'd have to go through to get the business going.  Or, she can just keep doing it the way she is now, which is very small time, under the radar.  

My point is that there are a ton of people out there who either have worked in a particular industry and have some knowledge of that industry but no marketable skills otherwise, but are unwilling to take a leap and get some sort of training to change that. 

If we could funnel some of that unemployment money back into the small business arena, you'd see a drastic rise in employment.  If we could just give some of the existing small business owners reason to believe that they're not going to go broke paying for health care and their taxes, we'd see a rise in employment. 

I think the reason we don't agree on this issue is that we're seeing this issue from opposite sides of the coin.  On your side it's impossible to make changes, take a job that's not ideal, start a business, etc so the government, and therefore the working, taxpaying Americans are responsible for giving additional assistance to the unemployed.   I see this as an opportunity for the thousands of people out there who think they could be their own boss to actually try to give it a shot.  It's just a function of where my tax dollars go.  One ends up creating jobs, the other creating dependancy on the federal government. 

Which, is what the progressives want at the end of the day, isn't it navet?

[/quote]

No, it's not what progressives want. It's insurance. The insurance should go to the person for whom the premiums were paid. What progressives want is justice. And a viable middle class.

Spiff, you are expanding my answer. I view welfare programs as creating government dependancy. Unemployment, by comparison is a blip on the radar. Unemployment does not create a culture of dependancy.

I agree, your wife should step out of her comfort zone and start the business. Many small businesses start that way.

Where i don't agree is in the use your skills to start a business type of thinking. And, the thinking that says if you don't do this it's because you are lazy. Most unemployed people are not in a position to start a business. Both financially or from a peace of mind POV. No money coming in, limited resources, and dooms day financial thinking takes over. The thought of blowing through the savings kitty on something that 'Might" work is usually off the table in these homes. Unlike your wife's situation, there is no stable income to fall back on as the business grows and if the biz doesn't produce. Most businesses take years to produce a sustainable income. Those started on a shoestring budget even more so. Going out on your own is a non starter in most cases in this situation.

Not to mention the risk. Most of you guys are preaching fiscal responsibility and conservatism. What could be more risky than starting your own business?

Navet - good catch on the hypocrisy of what the conservatives consider money well spent.

0

1

1

0

BG- I just continue to disagree with your points. And they are a bit long winded man. I think that your "points" empathize the larger issue.

First - Dead wrong on the Wendy's job. It is actually really really hard to get fired from these places. Why? B/C Wendy's knows there are a lot of people who think the job is beneath them. Also if you are calling in sick all the time you should be fired. Right?

Second - The orginal problem still persists. Why should anyone think that Wendy's is beneath you? Really? Nothing is beneath me if I want to pay the bills.

Lastly - If you work 39 hours at Wendy's and you can't pay the bills, it looks like you will put in 31 hours at the local gas station too. Is that soooooo wrong? To ask people who are not working and still living ABOVE their means (notice not your means or my means) their means.

Sir if you don't have a job, maybe you shouldn't have the 4 bedroom house with the 3 car garage? I just don't get what point you are making. In fact maybe you just got caught up in Milnayair's crazy posts and got aggravated but you basically have made the other's sides point.

BG - If you have a "level 8" job on a 1-10 range I really doubt you have to go all the way to fry cook at Wendy's to find a job. You may have to go from "level 8" to a "level 4" job maybe. You kill me with your EXTREME examples.

Also, you never answered my question so I will ask it for the third time. Do you see anything wrong with asking for college credit hours or community service hours etc. worked for exchange of unemployment benefits? I would even bite my tongue and say this would be a requirement after the first 6 weeks have passed so they can make a decent effort to gather their thoughts and get together a game plan of what to do next. What about winding down unemployment benefits? For example start off with 100% and reduce that amount by 1% each week until they are back to work or two years have passed.

I am going to go out on a limb and say you and Navet are disagree with this quote - "When government accepts responsibility for people, then people no longer take responsibility for themselves" George Pataki

[quote=N.D.]

BG - If you have a "level 8" job on a 1-10 range I really doubt you have to go all the way to fry cook at Wendy's to find a job. You may have to go from "level 8" to a "level 4" job maybe. You kill me with your EXTREME examples.

Also, you never answered my question so I will ask it for the third time. Do you see anything wrong with asking for college credit hours or community service hours etc. worked for exchange of unemployment benefits? I would even bite my tongue and say this would be a requirement after the first 6 weeks have passed so they can make a decent effort to gather their thoughts and get together a game plan of what to do next. What about winding down unemployment benefits? For example start off with 100% and reduce that amount by 1% each week until they are back to work or two years have passed.

I am going to go out on a limb and say you and Navet are disagree with this quote - "When government accepts responsibility for people, then people no longer take responsibility for themselves" George Pataki

[/quote]

Extreme examples? What extreme examples? You, along with RW, spiff, and Miliy have all taken the "any job in a storm" position.

By " You kill me" I hope you mean you are, at the least , entertained? Maybe not so much?

The Wendy's post is an amalgam of people and some of the things they've experience down in the low pay lane. All of the trials and tribulations of our out of luck no count lazy f*cker example are taken from real life. Every event I posted is from real life experience. Either myself or someone i know. Some details changed for net security purposes. The Werner trans example is exactly what happened. The rookie driver was dispatched with directions from his dispatcher. Those directions put him on a dead end street from which he had to back out. Apparently a big nono at Werner. He called the dispatcher, who apologized, said ops it was a right turn, not left, and rerouted him to his pick up. Three weeks later he was fired for the wrong turn. The dispatcher claimed ignorance. The rookie with copies of the wrong routing tried to fight it but his trucking career was effectively over.

My son couldn't find a part time job easy to get because the town he was going to school in was and is flooded with out of work Pratt and Whitney engineers. They were working at Mickey Ds. So much for level 8 going down to level 4! I might add that none of you guys were making any such "job level" qualifications in previous posts.

The point is that along with being hard work, and low pay, these jobs are easy to lose. I find it interesting that by my bringing to life the reality of what each of you has been saying,  you and RW are backing away from the any job rhetoric and calling my reality extreme. Reality is not extreme.  Reality is a bitch.

About your question - I think a work for benefits or college credit/skills training in lieu of program is an excellent idea. It could reduce taxes while creating substance. Unfortunately, the state workers unions in most states would never let this happen.

I agree with George's statement, but i don't think he was the first to say it. Regardless, one need look no further than the Society Islands to see the result of too much government dependance.

[quote=RealWorld]

BG- I just continue to disagree with your points. And they are a bit long winded man. I think that your "points" empathize the larger issue.

First - Dead wrong on the Wendy's job. It is actually really really hard to get fired from these places. Why? B/C Wendy's knows there are a lot of people who think the job is beneath them. Also if you are calling in sick all the time you should be fired. Right?

Second - The orginal problem still persists. Why should anyone think that Wendy's is beneath you? Really? Nothing is beneath me if I want to pay the bills.

Lastly - If you work 39 hours at Wendy's and you can't pay the bills, it looks like you will put in 31 hours at the local gas station too. Is that soooooo wrong? To ask people who are not working and still living ABOVE their means (notice not your means or my means) their means.

Sir if you don't have a job, maybe you shouldn't have the 4 bedroom house with the 3 car garage? I just don't get what point you are making. In fact maybe you just got caught up in Milnayair's crazy posts and got aggravated but you basically have made the other's sides point.

[/quote]

Long winded? I prefer verbose!

On that count, no one's forcing you to read my posts.

As i've said, every example in that post is taken from a real life example. Either my own or someone I know. If anything i cut out some of the more disturbing details. Like getting fired from a retail job for being 15 minutes late. Or, getting fired for filing a sexual harrassment complaint against your boss. This shit really happens. And, by the way, the harrassment complaint resulted in a six figure settlement. But, still, the low pay employee found themselves on the street with no money and no paycheck simply because she was tired of the unwarranted advances. How scary is that?

Wendy's isn't beneath anyone. It just doesn't pay the bills. Nor would cobbling together two or three of these types of jobs. Taking three low pay jobs that together might bring in 12k before tax doesn't replace an 80k salary as an engineer. Nor does it replace the 150k a project manager could make. Again, you are speaking from a positon of the unknowing oversimplified solution.

What means do you speak of? The previous long term lifestye that the newly unemployed has work a lifetime to achieve or the new unemployed means? When should they adjust an how do they adjsut? For example, who do they sell their house to?

You are absolutely correct, an unemployed person shouldn't own a 3 bedroom home with a three car garage. So, when Mr. production manager loses his job because the company execs above him sold the company and bolted with their golden parachutes, the new bosses closing the doors, when exactly should he sell the home he worked his entire life to buy? And, in this economy who, exactly who would he sell it to? Honestly RW, do you think before you post? Or are you just spewing more Glen beck dribble? I ask, because this statement "don't have a job shouldn't own a big house" is assinine. And, i think if you really think about it you'll agree. After-all, if you lose your job today are you going to sell your house tomorrow? I think not.

 Help!!!!

For the record, this has been one of the most entertaining threads we've had on here in a while.  And even though, BG, you and I are on different sides of the table, it's nice to have a civil discussion without a lot of the other sophomoric posts we normally see. 

What's up with Mily's posts?  Did he get banned for something?

Found this report on Yahoo this morning: http://finance.yahoo.com/career-work/article/110013/debate-on-jobless-benefits

I find it interesting that the studies are showing that unemployment benefits are actually increasing the length of time some folks are out of a job. 

Spiff, good article.

I thought the article had balance. Hits on both sides of the issue. The 58 year old JP Morgan employee said it best that no one can live on unemployment benfits. Everyone she knows is looking for work every day. Which makes my point. So both sides covered.

I thought Mily's 1's and 0's were just a new level of insanity. The term +1 is used to show agreement. But, there wasn't any reference to what was being agreed to. The zero made no sense, but again par for the poster. I guess we'll see. I didn't see anything recently that was a bannable submission. It could have been something he tried to post. And then there is this: There are a large number of ex-patriot posters who are banned. I've suspected that Mily, who has zero'd in on me is one of these people. Just one of the many dual personalities that populate this site. Maybe even someone i'm friendly with on the outside who has decided to bust my chops and liven things up here a bit. It's a possibility and now they got busted by the RR forum police? His recent absence corresponded neatly with some known vaca time of some people I know.

And then again, maybe not!

You can't take any of this stuff too seriously.

[quote=BondGuy]About your question - I think a work for benefits or college credit/skills training in lieu of program is an excellent idea. It could reduce taxes while creating substance. Unfortunately, the state workers unions in most states would never let this happen.[/quote]

UNIONS?? We could start another entire thread on this bullshit topic.

Anyway, excuses are just that, freakin excuses. Everybody has the option to get up and put on a pair of work boots or they can open the dresser drawer and shake out that folded up wrinkle free "poor pitiful me" attitude. I have roofed houses, sold and serviced automobiles at a dealership, called for donations from the local firefighters hall, hauled off junk, went back to school, help start a business, held office in my local district, and now I am trying to build my idea of the perfect career, all on top of volunteer work that continues regardless of the economy. None of these jobs/careers relate to one another. I started each one at the very bottom. The ones I realized were not for me I left at the bottom. Trust me when I say if I can find something to do, then anybody willing to humble themselves somewhat can do the same. 

Your life is what you make of it. Anyone receiving unemployment benefits while sitting on their couch complaining is not worth my air that they breathe. If they are putting on some type of work/school/volunteer boot each morning to try and make sure tomorrow is better than today, I congratulate them. But facts are facts and the longer someone is on unemployment benefits the higher the probability they are not humble enough to make a difference for themselves or the community they live in. But instead choose to blame their situation on everything but their self.

BG - Just so I understand what you are saying let me ask you this question. How long after someone starts unemployment benefits do you think it is acceptable for them to wake up and pile on the couch in anticipation of watching Ellen instead of indulging themselves in the possibilities of a job search or the excitement of furthering their education or the rewarding feeling they could get from giving back to their community in some way?