Jim Bunning is a Dirtbag

[Azureleaf]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/01/AR2010030103767.html

This jackass decides to make his "stand" on spending by holding up unemployment benefits for working families?

So he is OK with the bank bailouts and trillions spent on war, but unemployment benefits need to stop?

Way to make political hay on the backs of unemployed Americans who PAID for all of his other priorities with the taxes they generated while working. Now that they are out of work I guess it's time to kick them in the teeth eh?

What an asshole.

[Denovin]

Lets see.. why the hell should I get an extension for an extension to extend my extended extension for unemployment benefits?

I gave up on going back to work at the nice wages I was making before, and found another job doing something else. Im making only slightly more then I would getting unemployment. If everyone else did this, we might have some incentive to get off our lazy assess, instead of further mucking the economy.

Jim Bunning is the hero of the hour. (Im not saying the other decisions he made were correct)

The intention for unemployment isnt to keep dishing money out to people not doing anything, but an intermediary amount of cash flow in a time of crises to get to the next job.

The rest of then that dont understand we will be an Annex of China if we dont cut out the hand outs are the assholes.

Maybe if they could come up with something that didnt include paying for all the extra stuff, he might vote for it. But you throw in all the other crap, and its exactly that, like the Healthcare gargantua, a stupid pork factory. Bureaucrats, complete idiots.

[Skel]

What's the appropriate duration for unemployment benefits?

[Denovin]

certainly not over a year. Id say 1 month, maybe a month and a half tops, but I have no time to look for, or at statistics of time to get a new job in the same industry after a loss of job from lack of work. Some industries live off unemployment.. however everyone else pays for it. Why couldnt they just get a hefty savings account? I know I had one, though since unemployment was available for me, I took it.

[Jhi'Vok]

I'm a huge fan of you should be able to pick and choose which programs as a american that you pay taxs to support. now i'm not saying not pay taxs at all obviously you have to. But say someone like myself who has had a IRA since right before the age of 21. Why should I have to pay into social security? I don't need that broke ass thing, and don't believe I should have to pay for it. Now at the sametime i believe if I choose to opt out of it there would be no 40 years later oh... i'm gonna pay into it for 2 months now gimme it.

But if americans could choose what they paid into? man that would be great. I would axe medicare and social security straight from my paycheck, and refuse to support certain welfare programs.

I believe welfare is a excellent program for real people that need it. But I believe there should be restrictions and limitations not just free boating. like regular drug tests, if you pop bye bye welfare. or maybe a drug test just to start it. documented job applications etc I dunno something along those lines. Something to show your not just being some wasting asshole that ties up money for the ones who need it.

And I can see why this guy is opposing it. I support him there will be no easy way to oppose certain spending. But if America does not get in check we wont have to worry about welfare or anything else. We'll be broke.

[Azureleaf]

First of all, you pay into unemployment as you work. That being the case you should be able to collect it when you need it. Also, this really had little to do with unemployment and everything to do with grandstanding.

Secondly, this is about more than unemployment. This guy decides to take a big stand against spending on the backs of the unemployed, how brave.... So he was just fine with spending all the tax dollars collected from workers when they were working. Then when they need a hand back he tells them "Tough Shit".

If he is serious about cutting spending then he should be talking about Medicare or Military spending. Where was he when Congress was deciding to build jets that the Pentagon didn't want(http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2009/06/congress-raptor-jet-revolt-could-mean-pentagon-budget-showdown/) or when when the Bush administration pushed through an unfunded medicare prescription drug benefit?

Social programs are small potatoes. If you really want to limit spending you have to go after the big dogs. What he did is just gutless.

[Skel]

Social programs are small potatoes.

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the looming budget implications of medicare and social security? These are no small potatoes.

As far as your argument that he's not trying to stop all bad spending, so it's wrong to stop any bad spending... really? You actually think it's justifiable to be angry about someone finally getting something right after getting a lot of stuff wrong? Or are you saying that we should continue to extend unemployment duration indefinitely? Or something else?

[Jhi'Vok]

And you pay into so you can get it is false... sorry! I have seen too many people get welfare after welfare and not work real jobs there whole life. my sister being one of them.

Now if your talking about the middle class etc that worked most there lives and got laid off in the economy then yeah I agree. but most of welfare is spent on losers who work on burger king occasionaly when they need to buy that next crack rock, and then sit back and collect unemployment along with other social programs.

If your a waste of space you should be treated like one imo there needs to be a limitation on our social programs. hence the reason why congress would never allow americans to choose if they support certain social programs like social security, medicaid the list goes on. because I think you would see them rapidly dry up.

Oh, and skel is right heh... if Social security and medicare is small potato's then the military budget is just a medium order of frys

[Azureleaf]

Social programs are small potatoes.

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the looming budget implications of medicare and social security? These are no small potatoes.

As far as your argument that he's not trying to stop all bad spending, so it's wrong to stop any bad spending... really? You actually think it's justifiable to be angry about someone finally getting something right after getting a lot of stuff wrong? Or are you saying that we should continue to extend unemployment duration indefinitely? Or something else?

I'm saying that cutting unemployment and furloughing workers just so that he can make a point is a douchebag move. He is obviously too chickenshit to take on the real problems with spending. Clearly unemployment should not be paid out forever, but it is not unreasonable to extend those benefits in the event of an extended economic downturn.

As far as Mecicare and SS go I mentioned Medicare specifically in my above post. Instead of saying "Social Programs" I should have said Welfare, unemployment insurance, and food stamps. For some reason people like to point out those programs as massive money wasters when in fact they are minuscule in comparison to the big 3 (Medicare, SS, and the Military).

As far as the McDonald's crack rock thing, first of all the unemployment benefits would be next to nothing for a McDonalds worker and they would likely not get anything. The insurance is primarily used by middle class workers who are laid off. Are you saying that we should get rid of the entire program because some people might abuse it. If that is the case then by your logic we should get rid of anything that could be abused (gun ownership for example).

[Falokis]

I think Azure was just stating the guy is a douche by the way he votes and not the legitimacy of what he did or didn't vote for or against. I agree the guy is a numb nuts.

[Denovin]

Social programs are small potatoes.

Perhaps you're unfamiliar with the looming budget implications of medicare and social security? These are no small potatoes.

As far as your argument that he's not trying to stop all bad spending, so it's wrong to stop any bad spending... really? You actually think it's justifiable to be angry about someone finally getting something right after getting a lot of stuff wrong? Or are you saying that we should continue to extend unemployment duration indefinitely? Or something else?

I'm saying that cutting unemployment and furloughing workers just so that he can make a point is a douchebag move. He is obviously too chickenshit to take on the real problems with spending. Clearly unemployment should not be paid out forever, but it is not unreasonable to extend those benefits in the event of an extended economic downturn.

As far as Mecicare and SS go I mentioned Medicare specifically in my above post. Instead of saying "Social Programs" I should have said Welfare, unemployment insurance, and food stamps. For some reason people like to point out those programs as massive money wasters when in fact they are minuscule in comparison to the big 3 (Medicare, SS, and the Military).

As far as the McDonald's crack rock thing, first of all the unemployment benefits would be next to nothing for a McDonalds worker and they would likely not get anything. The insurance is primarily used by middle class workers who are laid off. Are you saying that we should get rid of the entire program because some people might abuse it. If that is the case then by your logic we should get rid of anything that could be abused (gun ownership for example).

unemployment benefits for a McDonalds worker are at least 100 for a single person having worked for over a year in food stamps per month, and at least 100 in unemployment check per week.
that is over 500 dollars a month.
If you happen to utilize your vehicle (which insurance and gas are paid for by funemployment) to sell drugs, and collect on that as well as pinching, you can make even more.. Yes I speak from knowing someone who does this personally.
Just when should there benifits run out? They happen to not work for mcdonalds, but at a farm doing hard labor for about 6 months at a time, till unemployment runs out, then pick up another job.

[Skel]

I think Azure was just stating the guy is a douche by the way he votes and not the legitimacy of what he did or didn't vote for or against. I agree the guy is a numb nuts.

I can definitely agree here. I'm not at all trying to defend this guys' status as a mostly worthless politician. I just see what I thought was Azure's argument about some random GOP not doing the right thing earlier, so it's wrong for them to do the right thing now. Blog comment sections about healthcare policy almost always dredge up that one. "GOP X wasn't concerned about spending too much on Y, so why should he be concerned about the deficit/healthcare/etc" It's just not a useful argument when all we can do is try and find the best course of action from today forward. So maybe I read in to Azure's argument too much.

[Skel]

As long as we're sorta talking about unemployment, I thought this was interesting. In the mid 80s, some dudes did a study on unemployment in Pittsburgh. They found that people were *ten times* more likely to get a job the week after their unemployment benefits dried up compared to any other week. Of course, this is obvious to anyone who stops and thinks about it, but it's always good to have some empirical evidence.

This is not to say that all unemployment benefits are bad or that the system in general is bad on net, but it does suggest that there is absolutely a balance to be had in regards to the duration of unemployment benefits. My 2 cents is that 1 month is too short and 1 year is too long. Beyond that, I'm not sure where the balance should be.

Anecdotally, I have a software engineer buddy who graduated with me who is currently on unemployment. I have a really difficult time finding qualified people to hire in his exact field, and he's spent the last year on unemployment (been extended twice so far). He paid ~120k to go to a top engineering school and had a job paying ~65k out of school. After being laid off, he decided to randomly move to another city and get his bartenders license, even though he's never worked in any kind of restaurant. Now he's decided to at least go back to school because his unemployment is running out. Perverse incentives do effect people.

[Falokis]

unemployment benefits for a McDonalds worker are at least 100 for a single person having worked for over a year in food stamps per month, and at least 100 in unemployment check per week.
that is over 500 dollars a month.
If you happen to utilize your vehicle (which insurance and gas are paid for by funemployment) to sell drugs, and collect on that as well as pinching, you can make even more.. Yes I speak from knowing someone who does this personally.
Just when should there benifits run out? They happen to not work for mcdonalds, but at a farm doing hard labor for about 6 months at a time, till unemployment runs out, then pick up another job.

I understand your point because I agree. I knew a woman that tried to sell me food stamps where I worked before I went back to school. She was a nurse working full time (probably $20/hour). She was in school full time and tried to get anything free she could, so she got food stamps and lived in a project for free. It's amazing because she was formally educated and made good money. She still chose to take advantage of the system not because she needed it, but because her parents taught her to do it.

[Azureleaf]

I am just pleased that every time I ome to the boards I see this subject line at the top. It makes me smile.