Unemployment Benefits Expiring

[MrJim]

1.3 million unemployed won't get benefits restored (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100701/ap_on_bi_ge/us_unemployment_benefits)

WASHINGTON – More than 1.3 million laid-off workers won't get their unemployment benefits reinstated before Congress goes on a weeklong vacation for Independence Day.

An additional 200,000 people who have been without a job for at least six months stand to lose their benefits each week, unless Congress acts.

For the third time in as many weeks, Republicans in the Senate successfully filibustered a bill Wednesday night that would have continued unemployment checks to people who have been laid off for long stretches. The House is slated to vote on a similar measure Thursday, though the Senate's action renders the vote a futile gesture as Congress prepares to depart Washington for its holiday recess.

A little more than 1.3 million people have already lost benefits since the last extension ran out at the end of May.

"It is beyond disappointing that Republicans continue to stand almost lockstep against assistance for out-of-work Americans," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.

The measure, however, stands a better chance of passing after a replacement is seated for Sen. Robert C. Byrd, D-W.Va., who died Monday. The measure fell two votes short of the 60 needed to advance Wednesday night, but only because Reid, a supporter of the bill, voted "nay" to take a procedural step that would allow for a revote.

"We will vote on this measure again once there is a replacement named for the late Sen. Byrd," Reid said.

Byrd's successor will be named by West Virginia Gov. Joe Manchin, a Democrat.

Unable to deliver more stimulus spending for President Barack Obama, Democrats in Congress had hoped to at least restore the jobless benefits. Obama has urged lawmakers to spend about $50 billion to help states pay for Medicaid programs and to avoid teacher layoffs, but Democrats in Congress have been unable to come up with the votes.

Many Democrats see state aid and unemployment benefits as insurance against the economy sliding back into recession. However, many Republicans and some Democrats worry about adding to the growing national debt.

Republicans offered to support the unemployment bill if it was paid for with unspent money from last year's massive economic recovery package. Democrats rejected the offer, saying the money was needed for jobs programs.

"The only reason the unemployment extension hasn't passed is because Democrats simply refuse to pass a bill that doesn't add to the debt," said Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

Republicans, who have argued that the economic recovery package was a failure, say it included plenty of lawmakers' pet projects that could be cut to cover the $33.9 billion needed to pay for extended unemployment benefits.

Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, said, "My concern is that the Democrats are more interested in having this issue to demagogue for political gamesmanship than they are in simply passing the benefits extension."

The unemployment bill would have provided up to a total of 99 weekly unemployment checks averaging $335 to people whose 26 weeks of state-paid benefits have run out. The benefits would be available through the end of November, at a cost of $33.9 billion. The money would be borrowed, adding to the budget deficit.

=============================================

Knowing many who cheat the system, it's probably best to let a lot of these benefits run out, but I wonder how many more will become unemployed when millions lose their lifeline and stop spending?

[larry trainor]

you could ask singledad what he will do when the benefits
run out, he recently signed up for some abuse here in these forums,...

hes a perfect bastard to ask too, since he is uneducated & lazy &
is a 50+ individual who lives off his poor mother, meanwhile he spends
HOURS posting non-sense on the interwebs (while you, the taxpayer,
foot the bill) maybe he can give you some insight on how he will handle
that one....

[MrJim]

you could ask singledad what he will do when the benefits
run out, he recently signed up for some abuse here in these forums,...

hes a perfect bastard to ask too, since he is uneducated & lazy &
is a 50+ individual who lives off his poor mother, meanwhile he spends
HOURS posting non-sense on the interwebs (while you, the taxpayer,
foot the bill) maybe he can give you some insight on how he will handle
that one....

Yeah, I had someone like that in my family. I think he was about 70 when he got his first apartment.

[larry trainor]

Yeah, I had someone like that in my family. I think he was about 70 when he got his first apartment.

its a damn shame that after a lifetime, lazy fucks
can still go "run home to mama" you can bet NOT one
of my kids thinks they will ever come home to sit on the
internet & post stupid rants while mcdonalds needs a
burger flipper..
of course, hes an x-con, felon who now is as worthless
as the posts he makes, if i were his mom id put a louisville
slugger on his skull & see if he has a change of venue.

if your gonna make an omelete, you gotta break some eggs

[MrRee]

Well I gotta agree, singledud is one sorry assed person I would use as a prime example to support abortion if that were up for vote :)

[larry trainor]

Well I gotta agree, singledud is one sorry assed person I would use as a prime example to support abortion if that were up for vote :)

hell, ree..
in his case (& bubs) id support for a retro-active
abortion.

[Prometheus]

I wonder how many more will become unemployed when millions lose their lifeline and stop spending?
:eek::confused: .......................U turning "liberal" on us now Jim !?!?

[Prometheus]

I know here in Las Vegas there are tens of thousands on unemployment. At a business like the one I work at some days almost half of the customers are using unemployment benefits (they come on a particular card) it is how they survive the months it can take to find something here. When that money drops so will the sales at our store. Hours and positions will get cut all through the country as that money disappears and there will be a spike in the applications for welfare.

[MrJim]

:eek::confused: .......................U turning "liberal" on us now Jim !?!?

Nope. Just stating the facts and asking myself questions to follow up on them.

[MrJim]

I know here in Las Vegas there are tens of thousands on unemployment. At a business like the one I work at some days almost half of the customers are using unemployment benefits (they come on a particular card) it is how they survive the months it can take to find something here. When that money drops so will the sales at our store. Hours and positions will get cut all through the country as that money disappears and there will be a spike in the applications for welfare.

Yeah, I can see that happening nationwide. Could it be? An unemployment benefits bubble??

[LedZap]

Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/congress/Dems-refuse-compromise-to-extend-unemployment-benefits-97625324.html

[MrRee]

Yes LedZap, the damn demo-rats refuse to use the unspent stimulis money and want only to increase the national debt!!
Part of Obamas plan to distroy the USA.

[beelzebub]

Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/congress/Dems-refuse-compromise-to-extend-unemployment-benefits-97625324.html

What is going on here? I read your article and then found this:

http://www.fightbacknews.org/2010/7/2/federal-extended-unemployment-benefit-rolls-drop-375000-one-week

"On June 23, Republicans in the Senate were able to block funding to extend federal unemployment insurance for the third time. Republicans argued that extended unemployment benefits would cause the large federal budget deficit to grow. But under the Bush administration, Senate Republicans passed tax cuts for the rich that helped the federal debt to double from $5 to $10 trillion.

While all Democrats (with the exception of Ben Nelson of Nebraska) have been voting for funding Federal Unemployment Insurance benefits, the Democratic Senate leadership has refused to use the reconciliation process that would end debate by a simple majority vote and allow the bill to be passed. Democrats used this process to help pass their health care reform bill, which won’t take full effect for years, but are not willing to help the unemployed right now."

[Patt]

Right now the problem is this little widget.... it's putting a hitch in every get along. Well, that and the fact that the Democrats don't want to pay for any of the spending they're doing.

07/02/2010

Last night, as part of a procedural vote on the emergency war supplemental bill, House Democrats attached a document that "deemed as passed" a non-existent $1.12 trillion budget. The execution of the "deeming" document allows Democrats to start spending money for Fiscal Year 2011 without the pesky constraints of a budget.

The procedural vote passed 215-210 (http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2010/roll428.xml) with no Republicans voting in favor and 38 Democrats crossing the aisle to vote against deeming the faux budget resolution passed.

Never before -- since the creation of the Congressional budget process -- has the House failed to pass a budget, failed to propose a budget then deemed the non-existent budget as passed as a means to avoid a direct, recorded vote on a budget, but still allow Congress to spend taxpayer money.

House Budget Committee Ranking Member Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) warned this was the green light for Democrats to continue their out-of-control spending virtually unchecked.

"Facing a record deficit and a tidal wave of debt, House Democrats decided it was politically inconvenient to put forward a budget and account for their fiscal recklessness. With no priorities and no restraints, the spending, taxing, and borrowing will continue unchecked for the coming fiscal year," Ryan said. "The so-called ‘budget enforcement resolution’ enforces no budget, but instead provides a green light for the Appropriators to continue spending, exacerbating our looming fiscal crisis."

Key points from the House Republican Budget staff on the House Democrats’ deeming resolution:

- This is not a budget. The measure fails to meet the most basic, commonly understood objectives of any budget. It does not set congressional priorities; it does not align overall spending, tax, deficit, and debt levels; and it does nothing to address the runaway spending of Federal entitlement programs.

- It is not a ‘congressional budget resolution.’ The measure does not satisfy even the most basic criteria of a budget resolution as set forth in the Congressional Budget Act.

- It creates a deception of spending ‘restraint.’ While claiming restraint in discretionary spending, the resolution increases non-emergency spending by $30 billion over 2010, and includes a number of gimmicks that give a green light to higher spending.

- It continues relying on the flawed and over-sold pay-as-you-go [pay-go] procedure. Pay-go – which Democrats have used mainly to raise taxes, and have ignored when it was inconvenient – does nothing to reduce deficits or restrain spending growth in existing law.

- Outsourcing fiscal responsibilities. The measure is another hand-off by the Democratic Majority of Congress’s power of the purse – this time relying on the Fiscal Commission created by the President to do Congress’s job.

A full Republican Budget Committee staff analysis of the Majority’s Budget Deemer: "An Admission of Fiscal Failure (http://www.house.gov/budget_republicans/press/2007/notabudgetjun2010.pdf)"

[peepers]

They couldn't get rid of it sooner, I'm tired of driving buy the local meth dealers in my neighborhood getting rich off unemployment. While I work my ass off to get half what obama sends them a week

[MrJim]

Dems refuse compromise to extend unemployment benefits...

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/congress/Dems-refuse-compromise-to-extend-unemployment-benefits-97625324.html

A problem:

Those who are unemployed and can't find a job (with effort) will end up receiving Welfare. In the long run, that is (arguably) more costly than unemployment benefits. I think the problem states are running into is numerous system abusers that haven't looked for a job once in the past year. The states could have fixed this by implementing an online job search registry, something that is long overdue.

[peepers]

A problem:

Those who are unemployed and can't find a job (with effort) will end up receiving Welfare. In the long run, that is (arguably) more costly than unemployment benefits. I think the problem states are running into is numerous system abusers that haven't looked for a job once in the past year. The states could have fixed this by implementing an online job search registry, something that is long overdue.

thank you mr.jim
I haven't heard an intellegent idea like this to fix unemployment benifits like this in forever

[MrJim]

thank you mr.jim
I haven't heard an intellegent idea like this to fix unemployment benifits like this in forever

No problem. Now if only someone would let me fix some of this....

[beelzebub]

Right now the problem is this little widget.... it's putting a hitch in every get along. Well, that and the fact that the Democrats don't want to pay for any of the spending they're doing.
Last night, as part of a procedural vote ........ the President to do Congress’s job.

This is a cut and pase from: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37893 - a conservative website that is reporting skewed information.

I see this

"Controversially, the House bill funds the $10 billion for education jobs in part by taking away $800 million from the $4.35 billion Race to the Top program and other Obama administration education reform efforts. Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.) inserted that change. Democratic senators might change the provision when the bill comes back to the upper chamber. “The proposed education cuts are unacceptable,” 13 Senators, led by Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.), wrote to Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the head of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “Choosing between preserving teacher jobs and supporting vital education reforms is a false choice and would set a dangerous precedent.” President Obama is threatening to veto the bill when it makes it to his desk if it includes the education cuts." (http://washingtonindependent.com/90897/big-budget-provisions-pass-the-house[)

Where is the balance? I am all for getting corruption and injustice out of the government but you seem to be dictated by party politics and going after Obama with propoganda.

[MrJim]

This is a cut and pase from: http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=37893 - a conservative website that is reporting skewed information.

I see this

"Controversially, the House bill funds the $10 billion for education jobs in part by taking away $800 million from the $4.35 billion Race to the Top program and other Obama administration education reform efforts. Rep. David Obey (D-Wis.) inserted that change. Democratic senators might change the provision when the bill comes back to the upper chamber. “The proposed education cuts are unacceptable,” 13 Senators, led by Sen. Evan Bayh (Ind.), wrote to Sen. Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii), the head of the Senate Appropriations Committee. “Choosing between preserving teacher jobs and supporting vital education reforms is a false choice and would set a dangerous precedent.” President Obama is threatening to veto the bill when it makes it to his desk if it includes the education cuts." (http://washingtonindependent.com/90897/big-budget-provisions-pass-the-house[)

Where is the balance? I am all for getting corruption and injustice out of the government but you seem to be dictated by party politics and going after Obama with propoganda.

I agree. All posts shall be in MLA format with the appropriate documentation. Or not. :)

It's fucking BS.com. We can type anything if we can back it up.

[beelzebub]

I agree. All posts shall be in MLA format with the appropriate documentation. Or not. : It's fucking BS.com. We can type anything if we can back it up.

MLA format - How about just give me the fu__ing link and let me read the site for myself. Its a conservative right wing SKEWED site that I have to search for because they are passing it off as their own shit.

I am tired of all this hate on Obama from these conservative republican folk. Its like they are set against ANYTHING he does just because he is a democrat. Dosen't matter what it is and its ridiculous!

Dont you want the truth?

[MrJim]

MLA format - How about just give me the fu__ing link and let me read the site for myself. Its a conservative right wing SKEWED site that I have to search for because they are passing it off as their own shit.

I am tired of all this hate on Obama from these conservative republican folk. Its like they are set against ANYTHING he does just because he is a democrat. Dosen't matter what it is and its ridiculous!

Dont you want the truth?

This never was a conservative forum. There have been more liberals here than my stomach can stand, actually. :)

I never wanted a conservative forum, just a logical display of real world events. Can't find either on both sides of the fence.

[Rec]

MLA format - How about just give me the fu__ing link and let me read the site for myself. Its a conservative right wing SKEWED site that I have to search for because they are passing it off as their own shit.

I am tired of all this hate on Obama from these conservative republican folk. Its like they are set against ANYTHING he does just because he is a democrat. Dosen't matter what it is and its ridiculous!

Dont you want the truth?



Who's truth?????

[beelzebub]

Who's truth?????

THE Truth.. I am tired of spin on both sides... I just want to know what is happening without all the BS.

[Patt]

THE Truth.. I am tired of spin on both sides... I just want to know what is happening without all the BS.

The only way you get the ACTUAL truth about what congress is doing is to ACTUALLY read the bills that are proposed, debated, reconciled and signed.

Other than that, you'll only get spin from inside the Beltway.

I invite you to become a friend of Thomas and do as I do - READ the legislation - ignore the hype.

In doing so, I can bet you buttons to bows you'll want to bitch slap Obama and every other assjack in the White House or the Democrat party right now, just like I do more and more every day. The actual Legislation compared to the rhetoric post election and pre-election are entirely different animals. Add in that whack-a-doodle cabinet of his and you'll be as angry as a nest of hornets who've just been hit with a broom.

God Forbid you read the CBO reports too, ya know?

[Patt]

HEY - I want to remind you --- and every other person here of one little fact that seems to have escaped every liberal who's been mouthing off for some time now...

We are, this November, coming up on FOUR FULL YEARS of complete and total control of both Houses of Congress by the DEMOCRATS.

Just how far back are we supposed to go before they finally begin to take responsibility for what they've done to our nation?

A budget that's 'Deemed as passed' my ASS !

[Rec]

The only way you get the ACTUAL truth about what congress is doing is to ACTUALLY read the bills that are proposed, debated, reconciled and signed.

Other than that, you'll only get spin from inside the Beltway.

I invite you to become a friend of Thomas and do as I do - READ the legislation - ignore the hype.

In doing so, I can bet you buttons to bows you'll want to bitch slap Obama and every other assjack in the White House or the Democrat party right now, just like I do more and more every day. The actual Legislation compared to the rhetoric post election and pre-election are entirely different animals. Add in that whack-a-doodle cabinet of his and you'll be as angry as a nest of hornets who've just been hit with a broom.

God Forbid you read the CBO reports too, ya know?




When the statement is made that the truth has to be taken from what the "sides" say as what is reality, as opposed to the suggestion that Patt makes to read the bills for oneself, the difference is staring one in the face.
Most average people do not read, there is no excuses with the computer, the public information available to each one of us. If it is the truth one is seeking, take the ideology tinted blinders off, read and
think, for oneself, and view the real things that are in black and white that become part of us all enacted
by our fearless leader and the Congress. It is not party, it is the Congress that backs agendas of the suit front of the Obama.......and yes, I can say that, much to my chagrin, I voted for him and am sincerely regretfully because of it.

[MrJim]

59% of those who responded to the question … said if they were in Congress they would vote to renew the extension of unemployment compensation for up to 99 weeks, a proposal that is stalled in the Senate amid partisan maneuvering and worries about the federal deficit.

"An abrupt end to unemployment benefits could do more to damage the deficit than repair it by weakening the recovery and forcing the long-term unemployed to apply for more costly long-term benefits, such as Social Security," said Diane Swonk of Mesirow Financial.

But 19 economists oppose an extension. It "increases incentive to be unemployed," said Ram Bhagavatula of Combinatorics Capital LLC.

I honestly don't know which side to take in this regard.

[Patt]

If it were the only thing in the bill and the so-called budget were pared down to pay for it, I say we have no choice.

BUT - with everything else in that bill - Hell No. Enough is enough. Pain's got to start somewhere. It might as well be with those who voted for this fool, Obama, in the first place. 53% of the voting public voted him in and are probably the bulk of the one's that have been out of work the longest.

[MrJim]

If it were the only thing in the bill and the so-called budget were pared down to pay for it, I say we have no choice.

BUT - with everything else in that bill - Hell No. Enough is enough. Pain's got to start somewhere. It might as well be with those who voted for this fool, Obama, in the first place. 53% of the voting public voted him in and are probably the bulk of the one's that have been out of work the longest.

Yeah, that's the beauty of bipartisanship - losing reasonable solutions amidst extras that they try to sneak into the bills. Unfortunately, lengthy unemployment will prevent the recovery from picking up steam.

[LedZap]

Looks like they're voting for it tomorrow...they got their 60 votes.

[MrJim]

Looks like they're voting for it tomorrow...they got their 60 votes.

I suppose they'll have to pass this one... what's the alternative?

[Patt]

I suppose they'll have to pass this one... what's the alternative?

60 to move it to a vote or 60 on both the cloture and the vote? I've not yet heard the vote counts. This just before the Kagan vote? That's going to be dicey.

I mean how hard is it for the Democrats to play by their own rules? They voted in PayGo - they should abide by PayGo.

[LedZap]

60 to move it to a vote or 60 on both the cloture and the vote? I've not yet heard the vote counts. This just before the Kagan vote? That's going to be dicey.

I mean how hard is it for the Democrats to play by their own rules? They voted in PayGo - they should abide by PayGo.

They've got the 60 to move to vote tomorro ...http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100720/ap_on_bi_ge/us_unemployment_benefits

[MrJim]

60 to move it to a vote or 60 on both the cloture and the vote? I've not yet heard the vote counts. This just before the Kagan vote? That's going to be dicey.

I mean how hard is it for the Democrats to play by their own rules? They voted in PayGo - they should abide by PayGo.

The PayGo system cracks me up. There are no funds to do jack. :D

I think that if they let the unemployment benefits expire, it would effectively destroy the economy because the unemployment rate may be elevated for 5 more years or so (best case = ~8.5% at the end of 2011). This translates into a 9-10% profit loss for industries across the board.

[Patt]

Democrats have been one vote short of pushing the measure through the Senate. But on Tuesday, a new Democratic senator from West Virginia will be sworn in to succeed Robert C. Byrd (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/robert_c_byrd/index.html?inline=nyt-per), who died last month, putting Democrats in position to overcome the Republican blocking tactic and bring the bill to a final vote.

With a dude standing in who doesn't know jack shit about the bill or the argument surrounding it. Peachy - just like the democrats, isn't it?

[Patt]

The PayGo system cracks me up. There are no funds to do jack. :D

I think that if they let the unemployment benefits expire, it would effectively destroy the economy because the unemployment rate may be elevated for 5 more years or so (best case = ~8.5% at the end of 2011). This translates into a 9-10% profit loss for industries across the board. The average check is $309/week x 7 million unemployed = $2.16 billion in spending loss per week = L-shaped reccession becomes a \-shaped recession. Ouch.

Add to that the expiration of the Bush tax cuts + the new taxes imposed in the health care bill + the cap and tax bill which is a hike in your electricity payments * + the Democrats are now calling for a middle class tax increase and you know what you have on January 1, 2011?

A whole lotta pain for the next two years and a massive change in political leadership 2012.

* “CBO and JCT estimate that this legislation would increase revenues by about $751 billion over the 2011-2020 period and direct spending by $732 billion over that 10-year period.” —Congressional Budget Office letter to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), 7/7/2010

[MrJim]

Add to that the expiration of the Bush tax cuts + the new taxes imposed in the health care bill + the cap and tax bill which is a hike in your electricity payments * + the Democrats are now calling for a middle class tax increase and you know what you have on January 1, 2011?

A whole lotta pain for the next two years and a massive change in political leadership 2012.

* “CBO and JCT estimate that this legislation would increase revenues by about $751 billion over the 2011-2020 period and direct spending by $732 billion over that 10-year period.” —Congressional Budget Office letter to Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), 7/7/2010

Scratch my math at the end - those figures are progressive, not static (my mistake). But still, pretty bad.

I agree with all of those issues that you listed. Any way you look at it, there is going to be plenty of pain for years to come. As it stands, the economy is not getting worse, but it's not getting better any time soon, either.

[Patt]

Americans Continue to Yell “Stop” in New Poll: A newly released national poll (http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/June-2010-IER-Questionnaire.pdf), conducted in late June 2010 by Mark Blakenship Enterprises, shows that Americans continue to be overwhelmingly opposed to legislation such as the Kerry-Lieberman bill or the House version, Waxman-Markey, that would increase taxes on energy. The poll which surveyed 1,005 voters (more Democrats than Republicans) has a 3 percent margin of error. The poll finds that:

94 percent of voters say that new energy taxes would hit lower- or middle-income citizens the hardest.
70 percent of voters oppose public policy that would include new energy taxes in order to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
70 percent of voters believe that taxing energy will not “reduce global warming.”
64 percent of voters say the BP oil spill makes no difference in their support for a climate bill.
61 percent of voters oppose any increase in gasoline taxes.
47 percent of voters believe that new energy taxes would kill jobs; 15 percent believe jobs would be created.
3 percent of voters believe that global warming is the issue which Congress should address first. Out of environmental issues, global warming places behind boosting energy efficiency and reducing water pollution.

[Patt]

Scratch my math at the end - those figures are progressive, not static (my mistake). But still, pretty bad.

I agree with all of those issues that you listed. Any way you look at it, there is going to be plenty of pain for years to come. As it stands, the economy is not getting worse, but it's not getting better any time soon, either.

Oh, then on this Wednesday when Obama signs the Financial Legislation Reform bill, you'll be happy to hear that 3.2 TRILLION from investment bankers that should be available credit in small business loans here is no longer going to be generated here but is going to move overseas, won't you?

[LedZap]

Oh God.....

[Patt]

Oh God.....

Financial Reform Will Cause Credit Crunch: Sen. Judd Gregg (http://climateerinvest.blogspot.com/2010/06/sen-judd-gregg-financial-overhaul-bill.html)
The US will face a severe credit crunch if the financial regulation bill passes in its current form, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) told CNBC Thursday.
"This bill as it's presently written is going to create a massive contraction in credit, I believe, in the financial markets and on Main Street over the next year to year and a half as people try to adjust to the new standards that are put in this bill," said Judd.
Judd, who is a member of House-Senate conference committee hammering out the final version of the bill, said the derivative language in the bill is one of the main reasons there could be a major credit squeeze.

[MrJim]

That's great....

[Patt]

That's the wonder of Chris Dodd who said ........... No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.

[eyeonyou]

That's the wonder of Chris Dodd who said ........... No one will know until this is actually in place how it works.

How come all this new crap they keep coming up with, no one will know how it will work till it gets going. Some of the crap like Health Care they won't even know then, or after years even.

One thing for sure, SingleDud will know how after 2 years on unemployement to suck 2 more years out of it.

OK, my foray into the political spectrum today is over.

[Patt]

That's how it is when you live on Planet Blago as most Democrats do !! http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:gsjDg_JZz1t9SM:

[MrJim]

Long-term unemployed people become desparate.

Desparate people get dangerous.

Any questions?

[Patt]

Pay for the bill and it's not a problem any longer.

Any questions?

[MrJim]

Pay for the bill and it's not a problem any longer.

Any questions?

Just one... is mass violence cause for concern? It's increasing as of late.

[Patt]

Just one... is mass violence cause for concern? It's increasing as of late.

It's NOT because of the bill being delayed - it's ALL that's happened since Obama's been elected. Most of us are really pissed that what we've been saying isn't being listened to.

It'll cool off after the Mid Term elections --- OR, it'll totally go nuclear - LOL

Well, that and the fact that summertime makes hot people and hot people are pissy in general.

[MrJim]

It's NOT because of the bill being delayed - it's ALL that's happened since Obama's been elected. Most of us are really pissed that what we've been saying isn't being listened to.

It'll cool off after the Mid Term elections --- OR, it'll totally go nuclear - LOL

Well, that and the fact that summertime makes hot people and hot people are pissy in general.

Ah, somewhat I guess. For most people, nothing is more depressing than becoming unemployed with no end in sight. It only gets worse after the money is gone. After a while, rationalization is out the window and vengeance takes the stage. We have close to twenty million of them. I wonder what's next...

[Patt]

You know what Biden said after they took office --- JOBS is Number One.

They must have forgotten, eh?

[MrJim]

You know what Biden said after they took office --- JOBS is Number One.

They must have forgotten, eh?

Believe it or not, the hard-line democrats are still stuck in the 'Bush Recession' mentality. I honestly thought that maybe the change of leadership would play enough on consumer sentiment to help things. Boy was I wrong!

[Patt]

Believe it or not, the hard-line democrats are still stuck in the 'Bush Recession' mentality. I honestly thought that maybe the change of leadership would play enough on consumer sentiment to help things. Boy was I wrong!

Well, first out of the box, (post Lilly Leadbetter), was earmarks out the wazoo in the 'Stimulus package'. Under 8 percent unemployment and adding 4 million jobs by the second quarter of 2010 ????

Shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa - and a monkey might fly out of my butt !!!

[MrJim]

Well, first out of the box, (post Lilly Leadbetter), was earmarks out the wazoo in the 'Stimulus package'. Under 8 percent unemployment and adding 4 million jobs by the second quarter of 2010 ????

Shaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa - and a monkey might fly out of my butt !!!

Do you have a source for those numbers? I'd love to see it.

[Patt]

Do you have a source for those numbers? I'd love to see it.

Christine Romer - meet the press - just prior to the Stimulus Package release.

March 16, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kntE8gZyZZ4

July 14, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2-7R8LSrG0&feature=related

October 24, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DQ9y73On0GY&feature=related

November 6, 2009
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mfg0vwXG0n4&feature=related

She doesn't know what the fuck she's doing and Obama hasn't stopped her or Larry Summers yet !!!


The following is a rush transcript of the March 22, 2009, edition of "FOX News Sunday With Chris Wallace." This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,510148,00.html)

CHRIS WALLACE, HOST: Well, it's been quite a week in the nation's capital — congressional outrage over those AIG bonuses, a new estimate of trillion-dollar budget deficits as far as the eye can see, and the White House about to finally unveil its financial rescue plan.

Here to discuss it all is Christina Romer, chair of the White House Council of Economic Advisers.

And, Mrs. Romer, welcome to "FOX News Sunday."

ROMER: Great to be here.

WALLACE: The non-partisan Congressional Budget Office came out with its projection, its analysis, of the Obama budget on Friday — and let's put up the staggering numbers, and you can see them right there.

The CBO says the deficit will be $9.3 trillion over the next decade. There are a lot of zeros there. That's 2.3 trillion more than the Obama White House is saying. The president's budget director says those kinds of deficits are not sustainable. Will the president scale back his budget?


We're at 13 plus Trillion Now --- aren't we?

[Paisleyspeaker]

Ah, somewhat I guess. For most people, nothing is more depressing than becoming unemployed with no end in sight. It only gets worse after the money is gone. After a while, rationalization is out the window and vengeance takes the stage. We have close to twenty million of them. I wonder what's next...

I have wondered this too. There are roughly five job seekers for every job opening. The number of long term unemployed hasn't really changed. And we have so many in Washington holding back the unemployment extension and calling them lazy for not having found a job yet. How long before they start to crack.

[LedZap]

I have wondered this too. There are roughly five job seekers for every job opening. The number of long term unemployed hasn't really changed. And we have so many in Washington holding back the unemployment extension and calling them lazy for not having found a job yet. How long before they start to crack.

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody's holding back anything. The Republican Party just want it paid for which Obama refuses to do.

[Patt]

That's bullshit and you know it. Nobody's holding back anything. The Republican Party just want it paid for which Obama refuses to do.

Don't discount the Democrats here - Obama doesn't pass legislation PRIOR to getting it to the President's desk for signature.

We can lay this squarely on the Democrats in both houses - those who've passed "Pay-Go" and those who refuse to abide by their own legislation.

Freaking hypocrites !! Remember, they've not yet passed a budget because the Democrats don't WANT the American Public to know what's in that. As I recall, it was a HUGE increase in spending that would add to the deficit. Not one of the Democrats have the wherewithall to stand against Obama ---- Why is that?

Because they were tanked during the election and they can't force themselves to admit that he's been a failed President to this point who's policies, that they endorsed and passed, have caused a 'mess' to become a 'catastrophe'!

http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/Jobs-Gap-July-cropped.gif


Facing the home crowds this August is going to be a nightmare for them. And good - they should be jobless come the Mid Terms for not listening to who they represent!


“Once this latest round of stimulus (in the form of expanded unemployment benefits) has gone out the door, we will have spent more trying to stimulate the economy than we spent on the Iraq war and the Afghanistan war — combined. To what end? Ten percent unemployment? A tottering recovery? The Democrats will argue that things would have been worse without the stimulus, that it would have worked better if it had been larger, etc. That hypothesis has the political advantage of being unfalsifiable. But we can look around the world and see that other countries that have enacted proportionally smaller stimulus programs have fared better than we have. (The Germans, of all people, are wondering what has gotten into us, why we seem to be going all Italian.)”

[beelzebub]

Don't discount the Democrats here -
BLA BLA BLA
. And good - they should be jobless come the Mid Terms for not listening to who they represent!

Come on Pat! You are using The Foundry's (http://blog.heritage.org/) website to push stuff off as fact??? PLEASE! Thats one of the most biased conservative websites on the internet.

Talk about SPIN!

[Patt]

Come on Pat! You are using The Foundry's (http://blog.heritage.org/) website to push stuff off as fact??? PLEASE! Thats one of the most biased conservative websites on the internet.

Talk about SPIN!

Do you dispute what I said ? Have Democrats NOT passed Pay-Go and then refused to adhere to that law? Have they NOT spent, with the passage of this bill, an accumulated amount of money that is more than both wars? Do Democrats NOT say that 'it would have been worse' without the Stimulus Package but have no factual basis for that statement? Were the bailouts outside of the US NOT proportionately smaller than ours and have they not proportionately NOT suffered less economic impact?

Or is your beef only that the web site I used looks at the issue from the conservative side? Because, if you say that, then are you NOT saying that conservatives, simply because they are conservatives, have no basis for any opinion and should therefore NOT be heard from?

Doesn't that take you down the road of liberal bias in that you are unwilling to listen to the other side of the story? Isn't it about time you, like the Democrats in Congress, try that very novel approach? Seems so as the way the liberal mindset is taking this nation, we're NOT doing well at all. Nope, NOT at all under a Progressive ideology enforced by a Democrat majority.

That's NOT spin, my friend - it's reality. Cold, hard, factual reality.

[Patt]

I stumbled across a pic of Obama behind the wheel of 'that car' that he's constantly talking about.... God help us all !!

http://michellemalkin.cachefly.net/michellemalkin.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/obcar.jpg

[beelzebub]

That's NOT spin, my friend - it's reality. Cold, hard, factual reality.

Naw,... thats you thinking their SPIN is reality.

[Patt]

Naw,... thats you thinking their SPIN is reality.

Well - answer the questions put to you instead of just saying it's THEIR spin if you disagree.


Do you dispute what I said ? Have Democrats NOT passed Pay-Go and then refused to adhere to that law? Have they NOT spent, with the passage of this bill, an accumulated amount of money that is more than both wars? Do Democrats NOT say that 'it would have been worse' without the Stimulus Package but have no factual basis for that statement? Were the bailouts outside of the US NOT proportionately smaller than ours and have they not proportionately NOT suffered less economic impact?

Or is your beef only that the web site I used looks at the issue from the conservative side? Because, if you say that, then are you NOT saying that conservatives, simply because they are conservatives, have no basis for any opinion and should therefore NOT be heard from?

Doesn't that take you down the road of liberal bias in that you are unwilling to listen to the other side of the story? Isn't it about time you, like the Democrats in Congress, try that very novel approach? Seems so as the way the liberal mindset is taking this nation, we're NOT doing well at all. Nope, NOT at all under a Progressive ideology enforced by a Democrat majority.

Cat got your tongue?

[MrJim]

I have wondered this too. There are roughly five job seekers for every job opening. The number of long term unemployed hasn't really changed. And we have so many in Washington holding back the unemployment extension and calling them lazy for not having found a job yet. How long before they start to crack.

I don't know where these numbers on job seekers come from, but most entry-level positions are attracting hundreds of applications from overqualified job seekers that can't find a job in their field. At least the unemployment extension was signed into law - it's rare that I agree with congress, but allowing tens of millions to end up on the streets would be disasterous any way you look at it.

[Paisleyspeaker]

I don't know where these numbers on job seekers come from, but most entry-level positions are attracting hundreds of applications from overqualified job seekers that can't find a job in their field. At least the unemployment extension was signed into law - it's rare that I agree with congress, but allowing tens of millions to end up on the streets would be disasterous any way you look at it.

The numbers are from combining two different reports from the Department of Labor. The reason there are hundreds of applications is most people are applying for more than one job at a time. Last time I was looking I aimed for 10 applications a day.

[MrJim]

The numbers are from combining two different reports from the Department of Labor. The reason there are hundreds of applications is most people are applying for more than one job at a time. Last time I was looking I aimed for 10 applications a day.

That was my best guess as well. People in between 'careers' are getting more desparate by the day, so the numbers are probably a LOT worse at the entry level.

[freakazoid]

That was my best guess as well. People in between 'careers' are getting more desparate by the day, so the numbers are probably a LOT worse at the entry level.

Hey Jim, long time no see. How are ya, mang? How are things going?