Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-28-2012, 06:48 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,593 posts, read 37,308,419 times
Reputation: 29336

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
Well I see where you're coming from but I still have to respectfully disagree. I can only imagine where I'd be had I not had ample time to find work. Many hundreds of thousands more people would have likely added to those already on the streets. That would have also meant that that many more people wouldn't be spending those checks either. This would have been worse for an already bad economy. I'm willing to be the the millions spending unemployment checks on rent, food and gas as well as bills is likely what kept is out of another depression. Im not sure but I don't think unemployment was around in the 30's. If this is correct I wonder how different things may have been?
Makes me wonder what the impact would have been if, instead of bailing out the "1%" banks and [big time union-centric] auto industry, programs like the WPA and CCC had been revived.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-28-2012, 06:50 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by ZhugeLiang View Post
I could have it wrong, admittedly I haven't kept up on the precise allotment, but that wouldn't give me cause to change my premise. It's the idea that the longer unemployment is extended, the more we're encouraging people not to work.

I get that **** happens, really I do and I'm not dismissing your point. However, extending the amount of time that someone can collect unemployment is both a disservice to the individual and to the public, IMO.
12.5 million looking for work (at least) ... 3.5 million positions hiring.
So, if we take away benefits sooner, that will encourage the 9 million difference to work where sooner exactly?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gentoo View Post
Well I see where you're coming from but I still have to respectfully disagree. I can only imagine where I'd be had I not had ample time to find work. Many hundreds of thousands more people would have likely added to those already on the streets. That would have also meant that that many more people wouldn't be spending those checks either. This would have been worse for an already bad economy. I'm willing to be the the millions spending unemployment checks on rent, food and gas as well as bills is likely what kept is out of another depression. Im not sure but I don't think unemployment was around in the 30's. If this is correct I wonder how different things may have been?
Correct.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 06:54 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Makes me wonder what the impact would have been if, instead of bailing out the "1%" banks and [big time union-centric] auto industry, programs like the WPA and CCC had been revived.
Unfortunately, we HAD to bail out the sociopathic bankers -- because, well, they actually create the money to pay the debt we owe them ... neat trick they got going, huh

But the real sin was in not doing the other bailouts as well: housing correction and instituting WPA / CCC type programs.

With what money, you ask?
With the new money created by the fractional reserve bankers we bailed out who would then earn the interest.

... neat trick they got going, huh
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:04 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,593 posts, read 37,308,419 times
Reputation: 29336
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
Unfortunately, we HAD to bail out the sociopathic bankers -- because, well, they actually create the money to pay the debt we owe them ... neat trick they got going, huh

But the real sin was in not doing the other bailouts as well: housing correction and instituting WPA / CCC type programs.

With what money, you ask?
With the new money created by the fractional reserve bankers we bailed out who would then earn the interest.

... neat trick they got going, huh
Very neat. The country borrows money the Fed authorizes to be printed from them and pays them interest on the "loans" instead of the other way around.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:08 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Very neat. The country borrows money the Fed authorizes to be printed from them and pays them interest on the "loans" instead of the other way around.
"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."
- Mayer Amschel Rothschild
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:27 PM
 
256 posts, read 613,762 times
Reputation: 231
I don't get why people don't go to where the jobs are? 100+ years ago people traveled to where jobs were because they had too. There were no government handouts. You either moved or starved. Several states in the midwest have low unemployment. Yes the weather is crappy, but the cost of living is less and there are jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:38 PM
 
Location: SW MO
23,593 posts, read 37,308,419 times
Reputation: 29336
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponypenny View Post
I don't get why people don't go to where the jobs are? 100+ years ago people traveled to where jobs were because they had too. There were no government handouts. You either moved or starved. Several states in the midwest have low unemployment. Yes the weather is crappy, but the cost of living is less and there are jobs.
Actualy, about 70-80 years ago - the Depression and the Dust Bowl. Times have changed and entitlement attitudes are rampant. Inconvenience themselves? Really?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:39 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponypenny View Post
I don't get why people don't go to where the jobs are? 100+ years ago people traveled to where jobs were because they had too. There were no government handouts. You either moved or starved. Several states in the midwest have low unemployment. Yes the weather is crappy, but the cost of living is less and there are jobs.
I repeat: there are over 12.5 million people looking for work ... there are no more than 3.5 jobs available ... anywhere ... total in the US ... including where the crappy weather is ...

Do you think that by "going somewhere" more jobs will appear?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 07:41 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curmudgeon View Post
Actualy, about 70-80 years ago - the Depression and the Dust Bowl. Times have changed and entitlement attitudes are rampant. Inconvenience themselves? Really?
I repeat: there are over 12.5 million people looking for work ... there are no more than 3.5 jobs available ... anywhere ... total in the US ... including where the crappy weather is ...

Do you think that by "going somewhere" more jobs will appear?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-28-2012, 08:09 PM
 
Location: Declezville, CA
16,806 posts, read 39,760,092 times
Reputation: 17678
Quote:
Originally Posted by nullgeo View Post
I repeat: there are over 12.5 million people looking for work ...
Yet crops are rotting... unharvested.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top