More tax breaks

[noonereal]

for the working and no unemployment for those not working. Please explain the rational for this.

The religious right and teabaggin' right think this is a great plan. Can someone explain?

I have about lost all faith in these fellow Americans.

thanks

[merrylander]

There are probably 8 people after every new job that is available. Our friends on the right believe that the wee amount of unemployment payout discurages people from looking for work. Sending in applications to the fat cat corporations sitting on near 2 trillion in hard cash, and never getting even an acknowledgment is of course, not in the least discouraging.

[mossbacked]

Originally Posted by noonereal

for the working and no unemployment for those not working. Please explain the rational for this.

The religious right and teabaggin' right think this is a great plan. Can someone explain?

I have about lost all faith in these fellow Americans.

thanks

The rationale is that virtually every study ever done shows that people get jobs when benefits run out.

Some few WILL slip through the cracks.

If those crack slippers can swallow their atheism, their church is there to help.

Additionally, CONGRESS: Quit screwing around causing uncertainty about next years taxes. Businesses will hire when they know the tax landscape that you cowards were unwilling to declare prior to the midterms. How did that work out for them, anyway?

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by mossbacked

The rational is that virtually every study ever done shows that people get jobs when benefits run out.

Some people WILL slip through the cracks.

If those crack slippers can swallow their atheism, their church is there to help.

(1)How do you reconcile the huge disparity between people looking for work and the number of available jobs? 5 out of every 6 or 4 out of every 5 isn't exactly a few slipping through the cracks. (2) And why would you believe that a tax cut for the wealthiest individuals would create jobs, when the current evidence is that that same economic class is just sitting on their cash? (3)Virtually everything paid out in unemployment benefits is put back into the economy, but giving a tax break to people who already have more than enough is going to take it out of circulation and into their piggy banks. Doesn't it make sense that continuation of unemployment benefits is going to do more for the economy?

(4)It also looks like you are suggesting that only Godly people deserve help. Is that accurate?

At least we have a new moniker for poor people - "crack slippers." And the right wing has been complaining about liberal elitist attitudes.

I have numbered my questions for easy identification.

Regards,

D-Ray

[Charles]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

(1)How do you reconcile the huge disparity between people looking for work and the number of available jobs? 5 out of every 6 or 4 out of every 5 isn't exactly a few slipping through the cracks. (2) And why would you believe that a tax cut for the wealthiest individuals would create jobs, when the current evidence is that that same economic class is just sitting on their cash? (3)Virtually everything paid out in unemployment benefits is put back into the economy, but giving a tax break to people who already have more than enough is going to take it out of circulation and into their piggy banks. Doesn't it make sense that continuation of unemployment benefits is going to do more for the economy?

(4)It also looks like you are suggesting that only Godly people deserve help. Is that accurate?

At least we have a new moniker for poor people - "crack slippers." And the right wing has been complaining about liberal elitist attitudes.

I have numbered my questions for easy identification.

Regards,

D-Ray

I'll never understand why people think that giving more money to the government will help the poor.

The poor are a commodity as far as the government is concerned. Look at all of the programs set up to help the poor, administered by people who do quite well by comparison.

Case in point, HUD subsidized housing. It's a money making operation for those in the know.

And you can't starve to death in America, unless you have the intelligence and ambition of a house plant, or pride.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not down on the poor. But I am down on those who use them as a means to their ends.

Chas

[mossbacked]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

(1)How do you reconcile the huge disparity between people looking for work and the number of available jobs? 5 out of every 6 or 4 out of every 5 isn't exactly a few slipping through the cracks. (2) And why would you believe that a tax cut for the wealthiest individuals would create jobs, when the current evidence is that that same economic class is just sitting on their cash? (3)Virtually everything paid out in unemployment benefits is put back into the economy, but giving a tax break to people who already have more than enough is going to take it out of circulation and into their piggy banks. Doesn't it make sense that continuation of unemployment benefits is going to do more for the economy?

(4)It also looks like you are suggesting that only Godly people deserve help. Is that accurate?

At least we have a new moniker for poor people - "crack slippers." And the right wing has been complaining about liberal elitist attitudes.

I have numbered my questions for easy identification.

Regards,

D-Ray

Look, I'm not going to work with your enumerated punch list. After all, your most powerful female icon can simply smile her plastic smile and wave her grotesque, bony fingers and flippantly quip something to the effect of, "we'll just have to pass the (2000+ enumerated pages) Bill before we can see what's in it", unchallenged.

So, I'm goung to wave MY bony hand and you're just gonna have to run with this to find out.

And by the way, Pelosi interned (whored for votes) for a Democratic Senator right out of college. She's never had a job in her life. I've never not made payroll in 30 years of running several companies, none of which were ever sued and none of which ever declared bankruptcy. Basically, I'm infitely more qualified to wave my magic hand than she.

People dont' find jobs because they have been brainwashed by progressives to believe the are ENTITLED to a job. They don't find jobs because first, they don't know how, and second, entitlements are easy. In fact, Entitlements are what progressives WANT because those on the receiving end are automatic votes.

Those poor bastards are never taught to try, because some progressive wag is there dangling a carrot telling them everything is a right, and by the way it's free because there are evil people who have money out there and we'll just go get theirs.

If I had to shine shoes, I would turn that into a profitable business, If I had to clean commodes or empty Porta-Pots, I would turn that into a money making business. If I had to sell apples on the street . . . ya get my drift?

Elitist, my ass!

Regards,
Alan

[Charles]

Originally Posted by mossbacked

Look, I'm not going to work with your enumerated punch list. After all, your most powerful female icon can simply smile her plastic smile and wave her grotesque, bony fingers and flippantly quip something to the effect of, "we'll just have to pass the (2000+ enumerated pages) Bill before we can see what's in it", unchallenged.

So, I'm goung to wave MY bony hand and you're just gonna have to run with this to find out.

And by the way, Pelosi interned (whored for votes) for a Democratic Senator right out of college. She's never had a job in her life. I've never not made payroll in 30 years of running several companies, none of which were ever sued and none of which ever declared bankruptcy. Basically, I'm infitely more qualified to wave my magic hand than she.

People dont' find jobs because they have been brainwashed by progressives to believe the are ENTITLED to a job. They don't find jobs because first, they don't know how, and second, entitlements are easy. In fact, Entitlements are what progressives WANT because those on the receiving end are automatic votes.

Those poor bastards are never taught to try, because some progressive wag is there dangling a carrot telling them everything is a right, and by the way it's free because there are evil people who have money out there and we'll just go get theirs.

If I had to shine shoes, I would turn that into a profitable business, If I had to clean commodes or empty Porta-Pots, I would turn that into a money making business. If I had to sell apples on the street . . . ya get my drift?

Elitist, my ass!

Regards,
Alan

Anyone who's always made payroll for 30 years, never been sued, or gone belly up deserves to be commended.

It ain't that easy.

Chas

[mossbacked]

Originally Posted by Charles

Anyone who's always made payroll for 30 years, never been sued, or gone belly up deserves to be commended.

It ain't that easy.

Chas

Thank you, sir, but I'm guessing most of the more vocal posters here will simply write that somehow I had too much power, certainly too much money, and that I must have been secretly evil and cheating somehow because a mere person (and not the government) was able to do it.

By the way, those people receiving those payroll dollars, in addition to being productive, made enough to not qualify for entitlements and paid taxes.

[mossbacked]

Originally Posted by merrylander

There are probably 8 people after every new job that is available. Our friends on the right believe that the wee amount of unemployment payout discurages people from looking for work. Sending in applications to the fat cat corporations sitting on near 2 trillion in hard cash, and never getting even an acknowledgment is of course, not in the least discouraging.

When the economy cycled alternately weak and strong during 30+ years that I have been business-aware, I received an average of 200 applications per job available, so my number's bigger than yours.

Additionally, there is nothing wrong with sitting on cash when the future is as murky as it is today, and virtually 100% of the people in power have never worked a real day in their lives. It's a wonderful thing when companies and/or people actually save some money.

If that much cash really is stashed away, it will be multiplied into 10 trillion or more when these clowns are out of office instead of SPENT at face value as 2 trillion.

Last, sticking with the savings theme, I commend those corporations on saving postage by not sending out acknowledgements.

Christ, villified for saving money, why don't you go spend some more of yours?

[finnbow]

Maybe I'm being a bit callous, but unemployment benefits are actually "unemployment insurance benefits." You pay your money for a prescribed level of unemployment coverage and that's what should be provided. Extending said benefits is, in effect, providing more than you bargained for at somebody else's expense.

The forced comparison between extending Bush's tax cuts for the rich and unemployment benefits is a bit specious IMHO. Each issue should stand or fall on its own merits. Personally, I think I'm against both on for both fiscal and public policy reasons.