House GOP blocks bill to extend jobless benefits

gimmesometruth27

"if you are a millionaire we will fight til the death to give you a tax break, but if you are unemployed, fuck you, get a job!"

today, this move makes me ashamed to be an american.

seriously though, how can these people justify this position to the american people??? fight for the rich, fuck the out of work... :roll: get ready for more of this sort of thing to happen...hope you people are happy with what we are going to have come january...just don't get sick and god forbid, don't lose your job..

House GOP blocks bill to extend jobless benefits

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101118/ap_ ... s_benefits

WASHINGTON – Republicans in the House Thursday blocked a bill that would have extended jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed beyond the holiday season. An extension of jobless benefits enacted this summer expires Dec. 1, and unless they are renewed, two million people will lose benefits averaging $310 a week nationwide by the end of December.

The failed measure would have extended jobless benefits through the end of February at a cost of adding $12.5 billion to the nation's debt. Republicans opposing the legislation said the measure should be paid for by cutting unspent money from last year's economic stimulus bill.

The White House criticized Congress for failing to renew unemployment benefits with the holiday break approaching.

"I don't think we want to leave here having fought for tax cuts for millionaires and against unemployment insurance for those that have lost their jobs," spokesman Robert Gibbs said.

Democrats brought the measure to the floor under fast-track rules that required a two-thirds vote to pass, so the measure fell despite winning a 258-154 majority. Republicans blasted the move since it denied them an opportunity to try to offset its cost.

"The fact is, we can both provide this help and pay for it by cutting less effective stimulus spending," said Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La. "That's what we should be debating today."

Efforts to renew federally paid jobless benefits for people who have been out of work for more than half a year has bedeviled Congress for much of the year.

Every recession since 1950 has featured an extended federal benefits program financed with deficit dollars. That's a precedent Democrats refused to break when battling with Republicans for months earlier this year to extend the program.

Republicans didn't pay any political price for stalling efforts earlier this year to extend jobless benefits that provide critical help to the unemployed — including a seven-week stretch over the summer when jobless benefits were a piece of a failed Democratic tax and jobs bill.

But allowing benefits to expire in the holiday season may draw negative attention to Republicans, especially when measured against their insistence that tax cuts for upper-income taxpayers not be allowed to expire.

"We have never cut off benefits for out-of-work Americans where the unemployment rates have been this high," said Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash. "Without this extension, temporary federal extended benefits will shut down ... denying benefits to two million of our fellow citizens over the holiday season."

Senate Democrats say they have no plans to bring the measure up as a stand-alone bill, but efforts to renew benefits are likely to get drawn into negotiations over taxes and other important year-end legislation.

"We will continue to work for an emergency short-term extension to get families through the holidays," promised House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

youngster

despicable :twisted:

josevolution

Yeah that is a total fuck you to the people in need , so why don't the unemployed get a movement going and March on Washington ...

know1

So these benefits have been extended a bunch of times now, right?

Would you agree that AT SOME POINT jobless benefits should run out? So what point should that be?

And if they are to be indefinite, let's just call them welfare....oh and realize we've just given the incentive to a bunch of people to not work.

marcos

Haves and have nots forever!

gimmesometruth27

know1 wrote:

So these benefits have been extended a bunch of times now, right?

Would you agree that AT SOME POINT jobless benefits should run out? So what point should that be?

And if they are to be indefinite, let's just call them welfare....oh and realize we've just given the incentive to a bunch of people to not work.

2 million people will lose benefits on december first. shameful.

i do not have the answers, i am not an elected official, but i do know that my priority would be trying to find some sort of work for these people. spent money on infrastructure, that will employ millions of people. we have bridges built 50 years ago. thos things do not maintain themselves...

i would start by fining corporations for shipping jobs overseas and giving them a favorable tax incentive to move jobs back over here. if these politicians are so "patriotic" they would recognize that allowing jobs to be moved overseas and stopping benefits is the most unpatriotic thing they can do..

Jason P

If you are qualified to be denied an extension on benefits, how long have you been without work?

Jeanwah

Jason P wrote:

If you are qualified to be denied an extension on benefits, how long have you been without work?

I'm not sure, but I'd like to take a poll to see how many folks here are unemployed.
I am, but am currently considered 'disabled' and cannot work. I am entitled to no benefits, because I'm only disabled for about a year, which disqualifies me.

Jeanwah

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i would start by fining corporations for shipping jobs overseas and giving them a favorable tax incentive to move jobs back over here. if these politicians are so "patriotic" they would recognize that allowing jobs to be moved overseas and stopping benefits is the most unpatriotic thing they can do..

Ha!! Republicans actually blocked a bill last month that would have cut tax breaks to companies outsourcing, Obama was behind getting this bill passed. We give companies tax breaks if they outsource jobs, how fucked up is that!! Thank you GOP for killing the U.S. economy.

VINNY GOOMBA

I really never knew how long jobless benefits last for, so I did a quick google search, here's an article from March:
http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Sm ... st=1690318

"In deep recessions, it’s not unusual for unemployment benefits to be extended temporarily. About 11.4 million Americans are now receiving benefits, about half for more than six months, according to The Washington Post. They're available for nearly two years in the states with the highest unemployment rates."

The beginning of the article says that some people get it up to 99 weeks... That's damn close to two years to find work.

While I recognize the intent of extending benefits is supposed to help people through tough times, there certainly has to be a point where it stops. The fact is, people are being incentivized to NOT work the longer these last-- some aren't even attempting to find work. I know people who have lost their jobs and don't even entertain the idea of trying to find something for themselves until several months into their unemployment. Some are taking advantage of the money they've actually paid into this system (why not?), and some are just content with the levels of money the receive not working versus having to get up and work everyday.

If these types of progams are going to exist, there is a very delicate balance as to how long they shoud exist for and how much. It does endanger businesses who are somehow surviving in the stagnant times which could be hiring people and getting productivity out of them instead of raising prices and trimming back their own workforces, and therefore being forced to pay for even more people to collect unemployment. An employer's ideas on this are simple: why pay for your people to be on the breadline and get nothing out of it, when you can pay them more and make more yourself by getting productivity out of it?

The idea of having benefits / extending them for the jobless is a noble, but the mechanics are incredibly flawed. Are some of the people voting against this cold-hearted pricks? Probably. Do some of them firmly believe that this will in fact only produce more joblessness and actually ARE voting compassionately? Absolutely.

There a million other places where our government really needs to cut back. Overseas military spending is number one, and that should be done first. At first glance, this does seem heartless, but there definitely are potential negative implications to extending these benefits.

gimmesometruth27

Jeanwah wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i would start by fining corporations for shipping jobs overseas and giving them a favorable tax incentive to move jobs back over here. if these politicians are so "patriotic" they would recognize that allowing jobs to be moved overseas and stopping benefits is the most unpatriotic thing they can do..

Ha!! Republicans actually blocked a bill last month that would have cut tax breaks to companies outsourcing. We give companies tax breaks if they outsource jobs!! Thank you GOP for killing the U.S. economy.

yeah, i thought they were gonna "fix it".

it is obvious what they are doing. they are going to wait until the new house is seated, then as a blow to obama and the dems, pass it and say "see, look what we got done, new unemployment benefits..." bastards..

Stone Is God

The reason why it was blocked was because they want to pay for it in a different way rather than just tacking it on to the national debt. It's like a person who keeps running up credit card bills and doesn't cut their own spending.

Before I get flamed, I was on unemployment for 14 months but I got off my ass, went to school (which I paid for) and got a job for $20 per hour.

There are jobs out there, it's just that people make more on unemployment. They don't want to cut their expendetures so they suck on the government tit.

unsung

They also don't want to do work that they think is beneath them.

When in a dryspell sometimes one must lower standards.

gimmesometruth27

unsung wrote:

They also don't want to do work that they think is beneath them.

where is your evidence of this? that is a VERY broad generalization.

Boxes&Books

I think the current numbers are- for every 1 job opening - there are 10 applicants. I've heard of people with degrees working a McDonald's (no joke)

We could spend 10+ billion a MONTH on a BULL SHIT WAR! We can give the Jewish State of Israel 3+ billion to kill innocent people, but we can't give a single American $300 to stay afloat- How much has that one American given to his country?
I know there are some people who take advantage of the system, but is that really any excuse to not help out the vast majority of unemployed American's? Besides that money goes right back to where it came from!! In CA you cannot survive on 300 a week! Average rent in my surrounding areas is about $1600.
Where are all the Conservative Patriots at? Where is Sarah Palin and why isn't John Boehner crying?

Give me a Freaking break! What f@!ing joke!

Boxes&Books

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

unsung wrote:

They also don't want to do work that they think is beneath them.

where is your evidence of this? that is a VERY broad generalization.

I'm sure it all ties back to illegal immigration. :roll:

cincybearcat

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

unsung wrote:

They also don't want to do work that they think is beneath them.

where is your evidence of this? that is a VERY broad generalization.

I don't think this applies to the majority, but I believe it. I've seen it with people I know personally. Does that mean it's everyone? No.

But think for a second...you were a highly paid salesman...now out of work...do you get a job at the convenience store? That would be a tough pill to swallow for most and if unemployment is there for a long time, no reason to drop your standards. So I think this could be part of the problem.

gimmesometruth27

cincybearcat wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

unsung wrote:

They also don't want to do work that they think is beneath them.

where is your evidence of this? that is a VERY broad generalization.

I don't think this applies to the majority, but I believe it. I've seen it with people I know personally. Does that mean it's everyone? No.

But think for a second...you were a highly paid salesman...now out of work...do you get a job at the convenience store? That would be a tough pill to swallow for most and if unemployment is there for a long time, no reason to drop your standards. So I think this could be part of the problem.

what about the "pull yourself up by the bootstraps" people" i am sure they would be willing to take the store clerk job. if not then they are a hypocrite.

i think we need to make these representatives live on unemployment benefits instead of their normal salary. either that or don't pay them at all. see how they like it...it is not like they are working for us or anything...

Bronx Bombers

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

i would start by fining corporations for shipping jobs overseas and giving them a favorable tax incentive to move jobs back over here.

I'm in complete agreement on this, we absolutely need to punish these corporations that are sending jobs overseas.

http://www.dailyfinance.com/story/taxes ... /19539812/

Foxconn, a Chinese computer, cell phone and electronics manufacturer, employs 800,000 people, while Silicon Valley unemployment remains higher than the national average. Foxconn, which has made headlines after a spate of worker suicides, has 250,000 employees making Apple (AAPL) iMacs, iPods and iPhones alone. For every Apple worker in the U.S., 10 people in China are manufacturing the company's products.

Commy

financial institutions, accounting for 1/3 of the profit made in the economy, while providing questionable services, responsible for the financial crisis in the first place, received trillions to keep them afloat. and we didn't even change how they do busniess. we didn't take ownership. absolutely criminal.


and now a few million americans need $300 a week (which does not even cover rent and utilities) and they are being denied?



this is a blatant glaring example of who the state serves. they serve the opulent minority at the hard working majority's expense.

TriumphantAngel

clearly they have their priorities all wrong.

lets deny two million people benefits which will average $310 a week.

the $60 billion dollar arms deal that the US government recently announced with the Saudis would cover that. yeah?

motherfuckers.

time to admit to yourselves that oil is more precious to your Government than you are.