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.
You and I have different ideologies on this. I don't consider working as punishment. It's an agreement.
So is living in a society.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
I don't think the left would agree to a system like Bermuda's. They'd lose votes.
No they wouldn't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
I think everyone has to put something in to get something out.
Then why not make it so that everyone can?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
We have so many programs available. Here in NJ we have retraining opportunities just like Glenda Bell did in order to find a new job. There is nothing wrong with that at all.
Except that there aren't enough jobs doing the work Bell was retrained for, and because there are so few jobs even the people who get those jobs still need public assistance to pay for basic essentials; and the rest have to take odd jobs cleaning other people's houses, which provides far less money than what is necessary to afford to live.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
I feel that there needs to be less handouts and more responsibility.
But why not support a system that works that way, by ensuring that there are more than enough jobs people can do that pay enough to keep people off public assistance? Why just complain and support actions that harm people, just because you're frustrated that the system isn't working perfectly?
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestPhillyDude75
So will a unemployed person be required to get health insurance???
An unemployed person is supposed to be covered by Medicaid. Some state governments are refusing to do what's right in that regard, and some leaders of those states are even apparently gleeful about the prospect of such people effectively being "left to die in the streets".
I am hearing that even if you are unemployed you are still expect to get healthcare when you will already be living on a small amount of money from UC??
Please tell me this is not true because if it is Obama has to be the dumbest man who ever stepped foot in the white house.
Except that there aren't enough jobs doing the work Bell was retrained for, and because there are so few jobs even the people who get those jobs still need public assistance to pay for basic essentials; and the rest have to take odd jobs cleaning other people's houses, which provides far less money than what is necessary to afford to live.
But why not support a system that works that way, by ensuring that there are more than enough jobs people can do that pay enough to keep people off public assistance? Why just complain and support actions that harm people, just because you're frustrated that the system isn't working perfectly?
An unemployed person is supposed to be covered by Medicaid. Some state governments are refusing to do what's right in that regard, and some leaders of those states are even apparently gleeful about the prospect of such people effectively being "left to die in the streets".
I wanna know does a unemployed person have the option to have NO HEALTHCARE in 2014?
I do support a system that helps people get jobs. I'm not complaining that some of my taxes goes toward workforce reinvestment. I'm also not complaining about Glenda from NC. She is working. She is paying taxes. She is helping herself. My first job doesn't pay enough so I work a second. Sometimes you have to do these things especially in this economy.
For someone like her, it's a hand up. I don't think you'll find many people on the right or left if the aisle that have a problem with it.
The whole ACA is flawed. It is causing a major hardship for business owners and employees alike. There are very few full time jobs to be found.
Any time someone says you have to buy something before they will tell you what it's about should be a huge red flag. Ex: I have a car for you to buy but you have to give me the money before you can see it or drive it. Really?
Bingo. That would be a hand up. Someone that has just lost their job is not in the same lines as someone that has never had one and makes their livelihood on hand outs. They have worked and are looking to work again. I have nothing against unemployment or any other temporary help. Key word being temporary.
Right.
The OP was talking specifically about collecting unemployment, so why go off on a tangent about something else?
Right.
The OP was talking specifically about collecting unemployment, so why go off on a tangent about something else?
And I still have not received a answer
Is Obama requiring a unemployed person next year to get health insurance? Can a unemployed person who is young and healthy say........."I can't afford healthcare and don't wish to have it at this time"
I do support a system that helps people get jobs. I'm not complaining that some of my taxes goes toward workforce reinvestment. I'm also not complaining about Glenda from NC. She is working. She is paying taxes. She is helping herself. My first job doesn't pay enough so I work a second. Sometimes you have to do these things especially in this economy. For someone like her, it's a hand up. I don't think you'll find many people on the right or left if the aisle that have a problem with it.
So you and I agree completely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
The whole ACA is flawed.
Everything is flawed. Nothing will ever be perfect. The important point here is that ACA is less flawed than how healthcare was before ACA. Why?
Guaranteed Issue
Essential Benefits
Medical Loss Ratio
Age Rating
And so on.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jerseyt719
It is causing a major hardship for business owners and employees alike.
The net effect of ACA is positive. Some people are unhappy with it, and aren't getting as good of a deal as before, but those that are getting a better deal are being substantially lifted out of such a horrible situation that it makes the downside experienced by others look trivial. It is a matter of having reasonable perspective - with a reasonable weighting of the positives and negatives, it is very significantly a net positive. If, instead, you choose to narrow your view, and look only on how ACA affect certain people you care about, then surely you can see it differently. It is always possible to focus on the negatives and thereby erroneously conclude that something is negative.
Right.
The OP was talking specifically about collecting unemployment, so why go off on a tangent about something else?
It was a rebuttal to another tangent from someone else that was off topic. I didn't start the off topic points but I shouldn't have responded to it either. It just made it continue. Disregard.
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.