UI benefit interruption in August for 30 states

[skrepo]

Originally Posted by iamrollinglow

I know someone in the same situation. This man I know is counting on getting laid off within the next year and still thinks that he'll get at least one year of UI benefits. I've been telling him that he will only get the initial six months of state funded benefits and nothing after that. He refuses to believe any truths and still insists on receiving 99 weeks.

Sadly, this man is also the kind of person that identifies himself as being extremely right of center in the political spectrum. He's the kind of person who would vote against his own self-interests even though he will directly benefit from them. In fact, he did exactly that last November when I told him that he better think twice about how he voted during the last election because he could be unemployed one day... well here we are today and this guy is counting on being on unemployment benefits soon. What I don't get is why these kind of people speak nothing but ill-will towards anyone receiving any kind of government benefit but when it comes time for them to receive those same benefits, they shut up and completely change their tone and think that government is their savior after all... Go figure. Sorry for the rant.

Unfortunately for some the epiphany hits hardest when one gets laid off in their 50's, where society deems you too old no matter how much experience you had and too young to collect social security. It runs counter to the arguments that hard work will always get you to the promise land and that everyone will recognize it and you will never be one of "those undesirables". That mentality worked in the 50's and 60's, not in 2011, people. If you get Social Security at least you have a modest income and can still "preach" about government waste, appreciably having nothing lost in the deal to learn anything counter to one's beliefs.

Like one said, until something happens to oneself that puts a person existence in jeopardy does only then one truly learn their place in society. Tell the guy welcome to the club for me okay. Don't let the door hit him in the you know what when he calls up the lovely people in unemployment. They will get him on the straight and narrow path that leads to a thing called reality in regards to his 99 week demand real quick.

[SAMMYQUERRY]

Originally Posted by raymond2

No Tea-Partier should collect unemployment benefits... especially not Ui extensions.

Voting on "what one thinks is right" but not practicing the principles he preaches in his own life proves is just political posturing because he doesn't expect his politics to affect himself adversely... just others.

I'm surprised he isn't talking about applying for a Mcdonald's job instead of expecting "a year of benefits."
If his friend gets only 6 months of UE next year, you can bet he'll scream bloody hell.

Extremists on either side, Liberal or Conservative, are always the most hypocritical people.

WHY not? It isn't welfare. This Is Paid For by employers (and in some cases employees). They are entitled to it as is anyone. His employer paid into It, and the employee himself paid into It, as in Wages That Could Potentially Have Gone to him Are Instead Paid by employer to UI Fund. Its his Money and he should get It

[SAMMYQUERRY]

Originally Posted by iamrollinglow

Regardless of which direction you or the person I mentioned earlier lean politically, unemployment insurance is a benefit that any working person can receive and fall back on. Despite how you or the person I mentioned earlier feel about receiving help when you need it, I am sure that when push comes to shove that you will take help where ever you can get it.

One's self-interests does not necessarily equate in what one thinks is "right". The real world is not black and white and full of absolutes and simple answers.





The person I mentioned earlier is actually a self-righteous individual that is too proud to receive any kind of payment from the government, including unemployment insurance, because it is seen as a "handout". In fact, at one point he said he would rather work at Mickey D's before taking any kind of handout because as he says, "You need to work for you money and not just take it from the government". Of course, that isn't the case any more as he's in his late-50's and wouldn't be able to do that kind of physical labor. I think at some point, some sliver of reality sunk and he realized the fact that it's going to be very difficult for him to ever get hired again at his age for any job and the fact that he wouldn't be able to work at Mickey D's.

At this point, push comes to shove and unemployment benefits doesn't seem like it's such a bad thing, go figure. Honestly, I can't wait for week 27 to come when he's collecting UI benefits and realizes that he's not going to get anything more, assuming that there isn't an extension of UI benefits beyond January 1. He'll scream bloody hell all right and say that the government isn't working now that he's on the receiving end of the stick.

The worst part is that this person was born into poverty. He worked his entire life and managed to do a lot better than his parents. But in the end, he is still poor. How is it that a working-class person, who would directly benefit from a program like unemployment, looks down upon it until he needs it?





I agree.

The person I mentioned earlier identifies himself as an ultra-conservative but upon closer examination of his political leaning, I would categorize him as a hard Libertarian/soft Tea-ba..Partier. Definitely the kind of person that doesn't think that the government needs to be handling benefits but wouldn't deny them if he needed them.





Agreed.

We should limit nanny state entilements. Right Now (temporarily) UI needs to be extended..but should be done so only when necessary (As In Now)....right left, tea party or not has nothing to do with it

[raymond2]

Originally Posted by SAMMYQUERRY

We should limit nanny state entilements. Right Now (temporarily) UI needs to be extended..but should be done so only when necessary (As In Now)....right left, tea party or not has nothing to do with it

UI Extensions are technically "nanny entitlements"
Many conservatives felt it's been extended too long already.
You do realize that some states didn't want to accept the federal money offered to them for UI extensions?

Giving the wealthy "extended" tax breaks is what convinced the republicans to vote for extensions of UI to be negotiated and finalized.. until the end of this year.
Otherwise it was just borrowing more money and spending to them.

Why would a tea-partier like yourself support collecting benefits from UI extensions that aren't paid for?
Are you collecting UE by any chance?

Originally Posted by SAMMYQUERRY

WHY not? It isn't welfare. This Is Paid For by employers (and in some cases employees). They are entitled to it as is anyone. His employer paid into It, and the employee himself paid into It, as in Wages That Could Potentially Have Gone to him Are Instead Paid by employer to UI Fund. Its his Money and he should get It

Congratulations.. spoken like a Liberal.
Employees actually pay little to nothing for UI depending on which state you live.

Medicare and Social Security isn't welfare either and also "deducted" from your paycheck, but they are on the chopping blocks for deep spending cuts as entitlement programs as well.

The Extreme Republican "Tea party" viewpoint:

"The unemployed could be working at Mcdonalds if they really wanted to work, why punish the businesses who need to make profits by forcing them to pay people not to work???
The Unemployed won't work if they get paid not to!!!
Businesses paying UI tax to the state for UE is unfair entitlement!!!

...And Extensions??? What gives those lazy bums the right to take my tax money so they can sit on the couch and do drugs!!!!"


Btw, I don't have a problem with moderate Republicans but the Tea Party has warped the Republican party into a cesspool of extremism.
On the other hand, the Democrats have become spineless wimps.

[iamrollinglow]

Originally Posted by SAMMYQUERRY

We should limit nanny state entilements. Right Now (temporarily) UI needs to be extended..but should be done so only when necessary (As In Now)....right left, tea party or not has nothing to do with it

...

Originally Posted by raymond2

UI Extensions are technically "nanny entitlements"
Many conservatives felt it's been extended too long already.
You do realize that some states didn't want to accept the federal money offered to them for UI extensions?

Giving the wealthy "extended" tax breaks is what convinced the republicans to vote for extensions of UI to be negotiated and finalized.. until the end of this year.
Otherwise it was just borrowing more money and spending to them.

Why would a tea-partier like yourself support collecting benefits from UI extensions that aren't paid for?
Are you collecting UE by any chance?

Now that you mention it and by the tone of his or her last post, it does sound like he or she is currently receiving unemployment benefits. Otherwise, there would be no need to flip-flop on an issue about receiving a government benefit like unemployment insurance.

This is exactly what I mentioned earlier in the thread, when a person like this becomes unemployed themselves and they have no other recourse, unemployment benefits are all of a sudden a great thing and needs to be defended. But any other time, if it doesn't affect them directly, "Pft, fuggitaboutit".

And if you really want to talk about nanny entitlements, these unpaid-for extensions of tax cuts for rich and corporations is nothing more than a nanny entitlement for a handful of people who don't need it.

[JMT]

This thread started out as harmless but has turned into more political diatribe. Time to close it.