[Boompa]

Don't blame Scott he was only following the orders of his Koch Brother Masters

[crazynip]

Originally Posted by chi_tino

If you don't like it, move to a state that will pay you much more in government handouts. California, for example, will pay you $450 a week indefinitely, plus free food and maybe a housing voucher or two.

Then again, their full (U-6) unemployment rate is over 20%, but it sure beats working!

^ teabagger

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by chi_tino

If you don't like it, move to a state that will pay you much more in government handouts. California, for example, will pay you $450 a week indefinitely, plus free food and maybe a housing voucher or two.

Then again, their full (U-6) unemployment rate is over 20%, but it sure beats working!

IIRC the maximum unemployment benefit in FL is $275. (we've discussed this on CD before) I don't know how anyone expects a family to live on that. Yet some are acting as if people actually want to remain unemployed and live on less than $1,200 a month.

The housing/food assistance is a difficult subject for me to discuss, since I believe in helping those people who really need help. After all, any of us could end up in a tough situation. However, I also realize there are a lot of low life moochers living in Florida. But this is going off-topic, since we were talking about unemployment benefits.

Edit: I just looked up the unemployment rate for CA. It's 11.9%. Where do you get 20%?

[dalmain]

Governor Scott seems to be keeping this campaign promises. What he said he would do..he is doing. It would not be pretty, but he seems to be improving the unemployment rate in the State. When you make cuts it's going to hurt. Not everyone is going to like it, but in the long run it most likely will reap benefits. All the newspapers and unions seem to hate him..that makes sense. I just hope the next Gov. will not put the state into the hole again and further.

[justNancy]

Originally Posted by dalmain

Governor Scott seems to be keeping this campaign promises. What he said he would do..he is doing. It would not be pretty, but he seems to be improving the unemployment rate in the State. When you make cuts it's going to hurt. Not everyone is going to like it, but in the long run it most likely will reap benefits. All the newspapers and unions seem to hate him..that makes sense. I just hope the next Gov. will not put the state into the hole again and further.

I know $9,000 isn't huge amount of money, but why did he have to add his name to signs on the highway? Doesn't that mean we also have to change them when we elect a new FL Governor? Is this being fiscally responsible?

[newyorker24]

Originally Posted by chi_tino

If you don't like it, move to a state that will pay you much more in government handouts. California, for example, will pay you $450 a week indefinitely, plus free food and maybe a housing voucher or two.

Then again, their full (U-6) unemployment rate is over 20%, but it sure beats working!

I hope you lose your job, blow through all your years worth of savings trying to stay afloat, lose your home, see your credit score drop from 800 to 400, and finally end up with a job that pays 1/3 of what you used to make. Then maybe you'll understand that most people on unemployment are not "cheating the system". Honestly, how well can someone live on $275 a week?

That being said, I do strongly believe that unemployment benefits should be based on your income when you were working. If someone had a full-time minimum wage job and lost it, what incentive do they have to find another job when unemployment is giving them the same amount of money they were making before? They are living an equal lifestyle to when they were working, while the person that was making $80k a year can't afford anything. There should be a tiered schedule- maybe with the minimum weekly benefit at $150 for minimum wage workers and the highest at $400 for higher wage earners. The minimum wage earner would still be getting half of what they used to make while the person with the $80k salary is getting 1/4, but it makes things a bit more fair.

[annerk]

Originally Posted by newyorker24

I hope you lose your job/source of income, blow through all your years worth of savings trying to stay afloat, lose your home, see your credit score drop from 800 to 400, and finally end up with a job that pays 1/4 of what you used to make. Then maybe you'll understand that most people on unemployment are not "cheating the system". Honestly, how well can someone live on $275 a week?

That being said, I do strongly believe that unemployment benefits should be based on your income when you were working. If someone had a full-time minimum wage job and lost it, what incentive do they have to find another job when unemployment is giving them the same amount of money they were making before? They are living an equal lifestyle to when they were working, while the person that was making $80k a year can't afford anything. There should be a tiered schedule- maybe with the minimum weekly benefit at $150 for minimum wage workers and the highest at $400 for higher wage earners. The minimum wage earner would still be getting half of what they used to make while the person with the $80k salary is getting 1/4, but it makes things a bit more fair.

It is tiered and based on your earnings for the previous two or three quarters, something like that. If you were only making minimum wage, your u/e benefit is going to be under $100 a week. Not everyone gets the $275.

[newyorker24]

Originally Posted by annerk

It is tiered and based on your earnings for the previous two or three quarters, something like that. If you were only making minimum wage, your u/e benefit is going to be under $100 a week. Not everyone gets the $275.

I know someone that was making $8 an hour and gets the full amount. I guess it depends on how long you had the minimum wage job and what you were making before it.

[annerk]

Originally Posted by Tampaite

Link: Florida Gov. Rick Scott signs bill decreasing unemployment benefits | The Washington Independent (http://washingtonindependent.com/111974/florida-gov-rick-scott-signs-bill-decreasing-unemployment-benefits - broken link)

"Starting in January, the maximum number of weeks someone can receive state unemployment benefits in Florida will fall from 26 weeks to 23. If the state’s unemployment rate continues to fall, benefits could be shortened to as little as 12 weeks"

Maybe you all missed where it said that the number of weeks would be tied to the u/e rate. Back in 2005 you only needed to fog a mirror to get a job. Many McDonald's in the Orlando area were paying $12-$14/hour for ordinary shift workers--not managers. Anyone who wasn't working was a slacker. There's no reason to offer more than three months benefits to anyone with an u/e rate that low.

I moved to Florida in July of 2005 (u/e rate was around or under 2%), and was working a temp job that paid $14 an hour to basically perform data entry within two weeks, and within six weeks had a full time permanent job with a good salary and benefits. My son found work within a month, he had several offers that he turned down as he had a specific type of work he wanted to do that he was willing to wait for.

I'm not advocating reducing benefits when the u/e rate remains high, but the length of time in which you can claim benefits should be tied to the unemployment rate. There's no reason for our tax dollars to pay a slacker to stay home and play video games for six months when u/e is low and there are plenty of jobs to be had in all fields.

[annerk]

Originally Posted by newyorker24

I know someone that was making $8 an hour and gets the full amount. I guess it depends on how long you had the minimum wage job and what you were making before it.

Then they must have had credits from another job that paid a lot more prior to collecting. Even if they had worked that minimum wage job for eight years, they wouldn't qualify for the full benefit.