• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

House GOP blocks bill to extend jobless benefits

Try 99 wks and wanting another extention. As long as the unemployment checks are coming, many will not take a job they feel is beneath them.
I think those who have been unemployed for close to 2 yrs should have packed up and moved a long time ago. Their job is not coming back and apparantly there is no other work to be found.

I tend to believe this and goes along with what I just posted.
 
Sorry I still call BS. Persistance and will is all you need. I went 2 months without a job I thought that was a lot. I live in a area that currently, the unemployment is 19%--that was before I had the job I have now and damn wouldn'tcha now I found a job! I refuse to believe that it isn't because people are idiots and can't be more resourceful.
This is the US and you're free to believe whatever you like. And you are free to refuse to believe whatever you like. However, none of that makes you right.
That said, here are the facts from the BLS

http://www.bls.gov/web/jolts/jlt_labstatgraphs.pdf
Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey
Highlights
September 2010
Bureau of Labor Statistics
November 9, 2010

simon-w-moon-albums-pics-picture67113094-blsgraph.jpg
 
Last edited:
I keep waiting for someone of your superior intelligence and experience to educate me but like with all liberals I am always disappointed. Tell me exactly where my economics education is lacking and what I am missing regarding the Obama economy?

hell, you were asked several hours ago to please fill us in on the wages and benefits that wallyworld offers its employees, and to explain how they benefit the community...you havent done that...still waiting. you claim to have intimate knowledge, but refuse to give it to those who ask....with all due respect, i think you are full of it, and don't have anywhere near all this 'experience' that you claim, nor the knowledge, otherwise you would have stepped up to the plate by now, instead , you run and hide behind attacks and insults on people, or by trying to play word games, or behind useless platitudes. good day to you sir.
 
Right we have homeless people in this country because of the Iraq War? We have starving people in this country because of the Iraq War? Since when has lack of spending caused the problems of high unemployment, poverty, and homelessness? Too many here are very naive when it comes to actual facts and reality. I don't know why you or anyone else continues to buy the liberal rhetoric which does nothing but make you look foolish when countered with the facts.

This country has spent trillions on the "War on Poverty" and we still have poverty. I hate to break it to you but there were homeless people and people living in poverty before the Iraq War.

I was comparing saving the $100b/yr spent on unemployment compensation with saving the $900b/yr spent on the Iraq war.
 
hell, you were asked several hours ago to please fill us in on the wages and benefits that wallyworld offers its employees, and to explain how they benefit the community...you havent done that...still waiting. you claim to have intimate knowledge, but refuse to give it to those who ask....with all due respect, i think you are full of it, and don't have anywhere near all this 'experience' that you claim, nor the knowledge, otherwise you would have stepped up to the plate by now, instead , you run and hide behind attacks and insults on people, or by trying to play word games, or behind useless platitudes. good day to you sir.

That is a diverion, look it up, it is on line. anyone that seems to believe that a working Wal-Mart employee doesn't benefit the community really is economically challenged.
 
Last edited:
It costs tax revenue to fund unemployment benefits and that adds to the deficit which adds to debt service so tell me how that benefits the U.S. economy vs. forcing that unemployed individual to find a job, maybe not THE job but A job? If you truly care about tax revenue why would you support paying it out to people who can but don't work?
You said that the BLS has facts. The BLS has noted, there simply are not enough jobs to go around. There are several times more job seekers than jobs.

Can you explain how failing to extend these benefits will enable people to get jobs that don't exist? Will motivation be enough to create these jobs?

It seems that putting money into the economy will help to keep demand up. If demand doesn't come up, no employer will decide to hire more people.

This is demand problem, not a supply problem.
 
This is the US and you're free to believe whatever you like. And you are free to refuse to believe whatever you like. However, none of that makes you right.
That said, here are the facts from the BLS

http://www.bls.gov/web/jolts/jlt_labstatgraphs.pdf
Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey
Highlights
September 2010
Bureau of Labor Statistics
November 9, 2010

Sorry but I live in a area hit very hard by the economic downturn and I have a job. I also have a job in the least hiring sector according to the BLS. The statistics on there don't really match quite what you were saying, and the figures cut off at August, I actually found this job in August so who knows. Oh and I worked for 2 months straight 7 days a week 10 hours a day at a pre-assembly plant that employs roughly 120 people a shift. This is in an area that according to the Maysville, KY unemployment office job growth is projected at -.08% for the next 4 months, unemployment is 14% (compared to the 10.5% in Kentucky overall and 9% US average) I still am able to get this job. Is it the best thing in the world? Of course not. Am I saving money, and making sure my daughter isn't born into the world with her daddy being one of these lazy assholes hoping for unemployment? You bet.
 
To which extension are you referring; the extension of the tax breaks for the wealthy or the extension of unemployment benefits? Letting the taxes on the wealthy revert to Clinton-era rates (which were much lower than the Reagan-era rates) would more than make up for the cost of the extension of unemployment benefits.

was refering to the unemployment. If the one cancels the other out, as you state, it does nothing to lower the US debt. Congress and then the President cannot continue down the road of spend and spend without having a way to pay for it and reduce our debt.
 
Predictions are worthless, results matter. I predict that people will stay unemployed as long as there is no incentive to find a job.
Unemployment exists WITH the incentive to find a job.
 
That is a diverion, look it up, it is on line. anyone that seems to believe that a working Wal-Mart employee doesn't benefit the community really is economically challenged.

you are a fine one to speak about diversions....i asked you, you conservative, to give me the numbers....you can't do it....you don't posess the knowledge, you never did, but tried to pass it off that you did, and threw up a link to the corporate wallyworld to try and take the heat off...there are terms to describe what you tried to pass off...but i wont go into them here.
 
You said that the BLS has facts. The BLS has noted, there simply are not enough jobs to go around. There are several times more job seekers than jobs.

Can you explain how failing to extend these benefits will enable people to get jobs that don't exist? Will motivation be enough to create these jobs?

It seems that putting money into the economy will help to keep demand up. If demand doesn't come up, no employer will decide to hire more people.

This is demand problem, not a supply problem.

Provide incentive and jobs will be created and businesses will start up. You really don't understand how the economy works. With all due respect how old are you and I don't mean this to come across negatively. My apology if it does. If this is what you truly believe then it is no wonder this country is a mess as too many buy the Obama rhetoric and ignore the very foundation upon which this economy was built.
 
Unemployment exists WITH the incentive to find a job.

What incentive? Pay someone not to work and you expect some to find a job. Wish all had the pride to do that but many don't. The papers are full of ads for employment, maybe just not in your community. Move if you have to. There are stories of that happening every day here in Houston as people are fleeing the high unemployment areas for the lower cost of living and high job potential in TX.
 
Sorry but I live in a area hit very hard by the economic downturn and I have a job. I also have a job in the least hiring sector according to the BLS. The statistics on there don't really match quite what you were saying, and the figures cut off at August, I actually found this job in August so who knows. Oh and I worked for 2 months straight 7 days a week 10 hours a day at a pre-assembly plant that employs roughly 120 people a shift. This is in an area that according to the Maysville, KY unemployment office job growth is projected at -.08% for the next 4 months, unemployment is 14% (compared to the 10.5% in Kentucky overall and 9% US average) I still am able to get this job. Is it the best thing in the world? Of course not. Am I saving money, and making sure my daughter isn't born into the world with her daddy being one of these lazy assholes hoping for unemployment? You bet.
So your anecdote is suppose to outweigh the national statistics? As I said before, you're free to believe whatever you want. No need to change your beliefs to fit facts. You should consider that you're belief is not withstanding exposure to reality. Rationalization is a helluva drug.
 
from Harshaw



It will do one of two things:

1- if we place a tariff on goods coming into the USA this money will go into the coffers of the Treasury and is badly needed by the USA.
or
2- Americans will still desire those products and will now be made here thus creating jobs for Americans.

That is what is called a WIN WIN situation.

more money from US citizens going to the government. and what happens to our balance of trade when foreign governments retaliate?
 
So your anecdote is suppose to outweigh the national statistics? As I said before, you're free to believe whatever you want. No need to change your beliefs to fit facts. You should consider that you're belief is not withstanding exposure to reality. Rationalization is a helluva drug.

As long as we are crystal on that point yes I will use my truthiness and you can have your "facts" in this matter.
 
If you have the knowledge and you are so smart and you have the evidence at your fingertips stop playing a childs game of Hide & Seek and just come out with it. Lay out the facts and figures to demonstrate beyond any doubt that cutting taxes on the rich translates into more jobs for the poor slobs underneath the wealthy.

But please, no theory, no ideology, no opinions of other fellow travelers, no opinion columns from the Cato Insititute or others of that ilk. Just the hard and cold stats about tax cuts on the wealthy in 2001 and 2003 creating jobs and prosperity for the rest of us.

Do it please.

Why do tax cuts for people who pay too much in taxes have to help you?
 
So you have no way of knowing that extending unemployment benefits will be detrimental.

also

How does non-spending on the part of however many thousands of people provide more benefit to the economy than spending by thousands of people--even if only on what is needed?

extensions would be nothing more than additional income redistribution. Is your solution-as a "conservative" to keep paying unemployment benefits as long as you think that there are not enough jobs? Just curious
 
Provide incentive and jobs will be created and businesses will start up.
Sure. There needs to be incentives to create jobs. Who will hire if their business isn't selling it's goods or services? Why aren't either parties promoting the payroll tax holiday?
The place you said provides facts provided facts that don't support you opinion. You can change your opinion or rationalize.
What incentive? Pay someone not to work and you expect some to find a job.
Do you or do you not think that the BLS provides facts? It's not that American have suddenly become lazy assholes. Take a look at the facts from the BLS--there are 5 times as many job seekers as there are jobs.
The papers are full of ads for employment, maybe just not in your community. Move if you have to. There are stories of that happening every day here in Houston as people are fleeing the high unemployment areas for the lower cost of living and high job potential in TX.
The BLS statistics are national statistics.
 
more money from US citizens going to the government. and what happens to our balance of trade when foreign governments retaliate?

That of course would depend on whether or not the US goods can be substituted by goods from other countries or not
 
Far more unemployed workers than job openings
Heidi Shierholz
October 7, 2010
This morning the Bureau of Labor Statistics released the August report from the Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey (JOLTS), showing that job openings increased by 60,000 in August (and upward revisions to earlier data reveal that there were 99,000 more jobs openings in July than previously reported).

The total number of job openings in August was 3.2 million. From the August Current Population Survey, we know that the total number of unemployed workers was 14.9 million. This means that the ratio of unemployed workers to job openings was 4.6-to-1 in August, unchanged from the revised July ratio. It is important to note that this ratio does not measure the number of applicants for each job. There may be throngs of applicants for every job posting, since job seekers apply for multiple jobs. The 4.6-to-1 ratio means that for every 46 unemployed workers, there are only 10 available job openings.​

You're looking at all wrong if you're looking for a job. There are 10 job openings (that's what's important)and they will be hiring 10 people. Maybe only 10 will apply or maybe 100 will. Gee... maybe you could be one of the 10 who gets hired.
Now, if there were 0 job openings, I'd say we should extend benefits as long as needed.
 
What incentive? Pay someone not to work and you expect some to find a job. Wish all had the pride to do that but many don't. The papers are full of ads for employment, maybe just not in your community. Move if you have to. There are stories of that happening every day here in Houston as people are fleeing the high unemployment areas for the lower cost of living and high job potential in TX.

The problem is some people are just idiots and if they aren't in the paper go somewhere give a resume, go everywhere and harrass the people until they hire you. Let me give another anecdote about this. I moved into the area I am in currently to live with family because well, I crashed and burned. Had little to do with who was in office, more to do with my own bad decisions. I am living with family to horde money, and am going to rent a house next month finally, just a few weeks before my daughter is born. ANYWAYS...my younger brother has been living in this area for quite sometime and hasn't been able to find a stable job for over a year. This has nothing to do with the ecnomy, and more to do with he is less resourceful, and has less initiative. His wife works, I asked why doesn't he get a job where she works? "Screw that that's why" is his answer. So instead of suffering the fact he would work the same crappy place his wife works as kitchen help (she is a nurse aid at the same place my mom is a nurse) he would rather be jobless. Just saying, some people are idiots and can keep being jobless for all I care.
 
You're looking at all wrong if you're looking for a job. There are 10 job openings (that's what's important)and they will be hiring 10 people. Maybe only 10 will apply or maybe 100 will. Gee... maybe you could be one of the 10 who gets hired.
Now, if there were 0 job openings, I'd say we should extend benefits as long as needed.

You are looking at it wrong

If their are 10 job openings and 100 people applying for those jobs, 90 people will not be one of the 10 who get a job
 
from Harshaw



It will do one of two things:

1- if we place a tariff on goods coming into the USA this money will go into the coffers of the Treasury and is badly needed by the USA.
or
2- Americans will still desire those products and will now be made here thus creating jobs for Americans.

That is what is called a WIN WIN situation.

Your idea raises taxes on the poor, and almost exclusively so given the market for these cheaper goods. In fact, as these terms go, this is about as regressive a tax as you can get. Why do you hate the poor?

And then our exports get slaughtered in the ensuing trade war, causing more jobs to be lost.

Brilliant strategy.
 
Sure. There needs to be incentives to create jobs. Who will hire if their business isn't selling it's goods or services? Why aren't either parties promoting the payroll tax holiday?
The place you said provides facts provided facts that don't support you opinion. You can change your opinion or rationalize.
Do you or do you not think that the BLS provides facts? It's not that American have suddenly become lazy assholes. Take a look at the facts from the BLS--there are 5 times as many job seekers as there are jobs.
The BLS statistics are national statistics.

BLS does indeed provide facts, it shows what has happened, are you telling me there aren't any jobs at all out there? BLS doesn't predict it reports. Just because there are 4 million more unemployed today than when Obama took office doesn't mean there are 4 million less jobs available. They are just jobs that some people don't have an incentive to take. It may be A job not THE job but it sure beats unemployment. Doesn't look to me like you understand the Bureau of Labor Statistics data.
 
Back
Top Bottom