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.
Sorry, but he is being nasty. That's the way I feel. It's really not his business, it is the business of NCESC, to which we keep spotless documentation. I have finally had a few more opportunities to apply for jobs than were available before and I am up for two now and praying.
I think you should have sent a set of questions to him and asked him to answer honestly and to the point instead of the run around they have been giving.
1. Why did you not vote on the standalone bill that originated as HR 676?
2. Why other than political gamesmanship did you attach the bill to the budget, knowing it would be vetoed?
3. Now that it has happened, why don't you vote to extract the bill and fix the problem?
The money is federally funded and sitting there. It is not paid for by the state. So what is your reasoning?
I'm sorry, but when you have worked hard all your life stayed at a company for 20 yrs to be laid off because they closed, always paid your taxes, never took drugs and voted only to be looked at because you need EB as a deadbeat, it hurts and it makes me angry. Until you live my life and worry how you will pay your bills, because you can't get a job, don't be sarcastic and unfeeling. That's how LaRoque's responses make me feel.
I am sorry but I disagree, you made it his business by contacting him about the issue. If I was in his shoes I would try to vet the people as well.
Here's my response:
Why can't you answer a simple question? Your sarcasm and insincerity is more than disgusting, especially coming from someone who was elected to lead and serve the people of North Carolina.
I am a successful college graduate who's been in the workforce for decades and never been unemployed before. I am a single mother trying to keep my son in a healthy environment while I find another position.
Despite your obvious opinion, which is ignorant I might add, not all unemployed people are drug addicts.
Holwager, I'm glad you didn't wait, because your response to LaRoque was perfect!
this is email he LaRoque just sent me. appreciate you answering my questions.
What kind of job are you looking for? Is there a minimum wage/salary
that you are requiring? Are you willing to work at any job that you are
physically able to perform? Are you willing to relocate for a new job?
How many hours per day do you spend looking for work and what does that
consist of? (Describe a typical day looking for work). Have you
contacted a temporary agency and filled out the necessary documents?
These are innocuous questions that I would ask anyone in your position.
Same response. I typed to him some more. Answered all questions. No $ figures though. I said just enough for food, gas, mortgage, and utilities. Dollar amounts are between employer and I.
Holwager, I'm glad you didn't wait, because your response to LaRoque was perfect!
Not sure how it was perfect, it was confrontational, and unhelpful.. His email lacked any details to believe he was attacking Holwager.. It could have been as simple as he may have helped you find a job...
To be honest I feel you are thinking emotionally, and not with reason..
Sorry, but he is being nasty. That's the way I feel. It's really not his business, it is the business of NCESC, to which we keep spotless documentation. I have finally had a few more opportunities to apply for jobs than were available before and I am up for two now and praying.
I think you should have sent a set of questions to him and asked him to answer honestly and to the point instead of the run around they have been giving.
1. Why did you not vote on the standalone bill that originated as HR 676?
2. Why other than political gamesmanship did you attach the bill to the budget, knowing it would be vetoed?
3. Now that it has happened, why don't you vote to extract the bill and fix the problem?
The money is federally funded and sitting there. It is not paid for by the state. So what is your reasoning?
I'm sorry, but when you have worked hard all your life stayed at a company for 20 yrs to be laid off because they closed, always paid your taxes, never took drugs and voted only to be looked at because you need EB as a deadbeat, it hurts and it makes me angry. Until you live my life and worry how you will pay your bills, because you can't get a job, don't be sarcastic and unfeeling. That's how LaRoque's responses make me feel.
Gemini1girl, you should email LaRoque with your questions and concerns. I can tell you, that as a Republican, he doesn't view the federal money as "free." They are opposed to excessive spending and Quantitative Easing, etc. So their refusal of this money I think is somewhat of a statement to the Federal deficit. This is similar to what happened in Wisconsin.
Gemini1girl, you should email LaRoque with your questions and concerns. I can tell you, that as a Republican, he doesn't view the federal money as "free." They are opposed to excessive spending and Quantitative Easing, etc. So their refusal of this money I think is somewhat of a statement to the Federal deficit. This is similar to what happened in Wisconsin.
I would hope not.. His job is not to worry about the federal budget.. His job is only to worry about moving NC forward.
Not sure how it was perfect, it was confrontational, and unhelpful.. His email lacked any details to believe he was attacking Holwager.. It could have been as simple as he may have helped you find a job...
To be honest I feel you are thinking emotionally, and not with reason..
Thaylin, it's impossible not to be thinking emotionally when the well being of your child is hanging on being held hostage as a bargaining chip.
I commended LaRoque for at least responding which is more than the Governor or majority of the other legislators have done.
Like I said before, there might be a few gaming the system but when one million people apply for 62,000 jobs at McDonalds, there's obviously a real problem on our hands that goes beyond people sitting around eating Bon Bons all day and not trying to find work.
The stereotype that the jobless are lazy and aren't trying to find employment just adds insult to injury, so yes, LaRoque's response to a long email was not taken in a good light.
To his defense, he is willing to communicate. I will give him kudos for that.
Not sure how it was perfect, it was confrontational, and unhelpful.. His email lacked any details to believe he was attacking Holwager.. It could have been as simple as he may have helped you find a job...
To be honest I feel you are thinking emotionally, and not with reason..
I didn't find Holwager's response to LaRoque either confrontational or defensive (as LaRoque characterized it). I have no problem with emotion when it's backed by reason.
Thaylin, it's impossible not to be thinking emotionally when the well being of your child is hanging on being held hostage as a bargaining chip.
I commended LaRoque for at least responding which is more than the Governor or majority of the other legislators have done.
Like I said before, there might be a few gaming the system but when one million people apply for 62,000 jobs at McDonalds, there's obviously a real problem on our hands that goes beyond people sitting around eating Bon Bons all day and not trying to find work.
The stereotype that the jobless are lazy and aren't trying to find employment just adds insult to injury, so yes, LaRoque's response to a long email was not taken in a good light.
To his defense, he is willing to communicate. I will give him kudos for that.
The problem is you assumed he was calling you a drug addict, however there are many reasons why one would fail a drug test other then being an addict, and he never said you were gaming the system, but you have to understand his need to block those folks... I would recommend instead of replying immediately, pause and think about how it could have been meant, a not just write an emotional email, those can be ripped a part very easily.
I didn't find Holwager's response to LaRoque either confrontational or defensive (as LaRoque characterized it). I have no problem with emotion when it's backed by reason.
I am not sure how you could not see it that way.. It was based around the assumption that LaRoque was saying he was a drug addict, which LaRoque never said, that is being defensive, without even writing what he wrote.
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.
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.
