the rebs aren't going to help unless your rich

get rid of your house and move in with mom-start paying your own way!!

How many people 50-60 and over even have a Mom to move in with? One of the major problems is that those who have been on a job for 15-20-25 years are making 2-3-4 times as much as newly hired college grads or even HS kids, A lot of business's are laying folks off just before retirement and skating out on employees who have worked faithfully for them through good times and bad.

The Tax burden imposed by the Democrats will kill more jobs and increase unemployment. If you want things to get better you will need to vote Republican in 2012. The Democrats have waster time in Congress on frivilous causes like Obama Care, Gay Issues (Don't Ask Don't Tell), Climate Change. They should have focused on how to pay for unemployment benefits a long time ago when they had a super majority and also focused on Tax cuts. Now at the last hour and when their super majority has been cut they are blaming everyone. Now it's up to the voters to make CHANGE in 2012

John Smith-2351185,
You must forget the trillions of chinese dollars un-curious george wasted on a fake war. Or the trillions georgie spent on the banks after he de-regulated the market. Oh let us not forget georgies unfunded medicare part D was throwing mone to his pharmacy buddies. Oh thats right cons always LIE!

What have you done to help youself. 99 weeks of unemployment benefits and you haven't adjusted your cost? Sold house, moved into apartment. If you can't sell your house, maybe you have to walk away and find something you can afford. Has your husband taken any job offered to him, or is he looking for something comparable in pay and position. Sometimes it's hard but you have to start at the bottom making a lot less to get by until things improve. Extending it another 12 weeks will just put off your pleas for help for another 10 weeks.

jeez; could it be folks lived beyond their means? everytime i ever bought a home, it was based on my income ALONE. my wife's income was called "frosting on the cake" and never included in what I could afford on mine. sure we could have bought bigger houses for more money; but WHY? never felt the need to keep up with the jones'. my wife was never happy with that as she is filipina and they always buy to the limit to impress each other and the folks back home. yet, now retrired with no increases in two years; escalating health care (thanks obama) and tough times; we are weathering better than some.

blondmom....I feel for your husband and know what he is going as I've been in his shoes and have had my unemployment benefits run out around this time when I was unemployed....There are several things your husband needs to realize...the 1st being that he may need to look outside of your geographic area to find work...2nd, you made need to take ANY job to put food on the table for your family...I needed to take a job as a car salesman until I was able to land a job in my area (IT). You are fortunate in one respect...you have each other and he has support...as I did luckily....Keep the faith, but you need to do whatever is necessary, even if it means taking a job and Xmas help at Walmart....It completely stinks, but unfortunately that is reality...I wish your husband best of luck in finding work...

Folks, the ugly truth is that you need to realize that finding work is in your hands and not the hands of the gov't....Anyone out of work needs to do, individually, anything necessary to find work....even if at a lower pay rate...unemployment benefits provide a temporary cushion to achieve this...It's unrealistic to think you can wait around for the perfect job...It's not going to happen and frankly you are not in a position to take that chance....

If you want things to get better you will need to vote Republican in 2012.

Will things be better when we become a property of China? Apparently you believe it will, and so do all the other Republics. I doubt it.

First they create a tax loophole to give tax breaks to corporations to move jobs overseas, and then they don't want to give unemployment to the people that just had their jobs shipped overseas. That's something I would consider TREASON!

I lost a job in May, 2008. After searching for about 6 months, I gave up looking for work in my field and any expectation of earning what I previously earned. I started applying for any job that I thought I could do without any regard to what the pay would be. After 10 months I landed a job earning less than half what I previously earned and the job itself had absolutely nothing to do with what I previously did. I have two college degrees, but my job only requires a GED or high school diploma. I threw humility out the window, swallowed my pride, and eat humble pie every morning when I walk through the door. I've had my new job for almost two years now and have the best benefits that I've ever had in my life. The pay sucks, but it's incentive work, so I've been able to increase my income somewhat over time. I've learned that I'm extremely adaptable to adversity. And the fact that we've never lived beyond our means has helped. We've been a one income family from the beginning, so our lifestyle was always based on one income, including the home we own. We have lost one automobile and fallen behind with some bills, including having our electricity shut off for a week last spring, but we're slowly climbing out of the hole we were in.

My heart goes out to each and every person who continues to be unemployed during this terrible time in our country. It is truly un-American that we have sent so much work off shore and still continue to hire HB1 VISA folks over Americans. It is truly un-American that today's executive level employees earn 300% more than their subordinates. And it is simply unethical that business decisions over the past 20 years have been geared towards bloating the pockets of a few and foresaking the very employees that serve as customers for other business in the process. Anyone that has been paying attention could have seen this coming. I did - and said so at a company wide meeting back in 2006. I stuck my neck out for every American out there by asking the president of our business if it ever occured to him that if we continued to send our jobs overseas, eventually there would be no work for Americans. His response - everyone else is doing it so we have to do it to compete. I'd love to ask him that question again today, but he sent my job to India, so I don't work there anymore. I might add that I was forced to train my "off shore" partner to take my job so that I could receive a severance package. I was also forced to sign a contract that I would not sue for wrongful termination if I wanted that severance package. Truly a sad day in this country. Our forefathers would be absolutely, positively appalled.

John Smith-2351185

The Tax burden imposed by the Democrats will kill more jobs and increase unemployment. If you want things to get better you will need to vote Republican in 2012. The Democrats have waster time in Congress on frivilous causes like Obama Care, Gay Issues (Don't Ask Don't Tell), Climate Change. They should have focused on how to pay for unemployment benefits a long time ago when they had a super majority and also focused on Tax cuts. Now at the last hour and when their super majority has been cut they are blaming everyone. Now it's up to the voters to make CHANGE in 2012
#1.4 - Wed Dec 1, 2010 8:42 AM EST

John, the root problem here is the Republicans are holding the middle class hostage for the sake of tax cuts for the wealthiest 20%. It's a little tit-for-tat game being played. If tax cuts for the topmost money mongers will not be forthcoming, we will simply refuse to approve unemployment benefits for those most desperately effected. And the saddest part is people will begin losing their homes which will, in turn, weaken the economy even further. This, following the logical progression, will cause still more people to lose their jobs which will then put more people on unemployment who will, after their six months of not being able to find jobs because their are about 1800 qualified people for each available job, they will be without income and they will lose their homes, which will put still more people out on the street ... See where this is going?

Now, as far as Obama Care, I suppose you don't care how many people die because they have serious medical problems and cannot afford medical care. Perhaps it isn't important to you how many children will now go without basic innoculations because their parents cannot afford to take them to the doctor. This will lead to even more government intervention as children will be banned from school without proper immunizations. So we now have families out on the street with children who cannot go to school. Life expectancy will drop drastically because now people will be dying from easily treatable ailments simply because they cannot afford treatment. Pray you never find yourself in that situation. And don't be so cocky as to think it couldn't happen to you. It can happen to anybody. People with 20 and 30 years with a company are losing their jobs. Even people in government positions come to work in the morning only to be told, "Your services are no longer required." No one is immune.

Gay Issues (Don't Ask Don't Tell)?: This one was on the Bush/Cheney watch. Obama inherited it. The Obama administration is merely trying to clean up Bush's mess. And, as an addendum - the latest Pentago studies show over 80% of rank and file military don't care about the sexual orientation of others in the military. The common sense argument is that, when you are being shot at, you don't really think about sex! You don't really care about the sexual inclinations of the person next to you, only that they can handle that rocket launcher perched on their shoulder. ANNND as another statistical curiosity, in the matter of sexual perversion ... more sex crimes (the majority, in fact) are committed by heterosexuals.

Climate Change: This, too, has been around LOTS longer than Obama has been a politician - not merely his presidential term or the preceding candidacy but decades. Really ... decades. Almost half a century, in fact. (Did you know the first guy to invent a practical, mass-produceable steam-driven automobile was murdered by the internal combustion, gas powered vehicle power mongers? It's true. Read up.)

They should have focused on how to pay for unemployment benefits a long time ago when they had a super majority and also focused on Tax cuts.

Isn't the tax cuts issue what started all of this in the first place? The Republicans refused to approve unemployment extensions without tax cuts for the wealthy? Fact of the matter is, those tax cuts could cost the government more than unemployment benefits.

It's not a simple problem and there is no easy solution. But one thing is certain... taking unemployment benefits away from people is not the answer.

Its funny everyone that is on hear complaining about no work and trying to pay your mortgage seems to be able to pay internet and most likely their cell phone bill. A job is not going to just come to you and yes sometimes you might have to work at place where you dont really enjoy. The dems keep saying Obama was making everything better and truthfully i have seen more companys hiring so get out there and get the job yourself instead of waiting for uncle sam to do it for you.

That is a very cold hearted thing to say. I am sure that this man is distraught and disillusioned with his life. For you to be so cruel with that comment shows how sadly uninformed you are about the poverty that is swinging the grim reapings of death and doom across the USA.

I agree that unemployment benefits be extended PROVIDED THAT the recipients receive training for a new job.

The reason many American jobs are being shipped overseas is simply due to the extremely high corporate tax rates in this country and over-regulation. If we want to blame an entity for our lost jobs, look no further than our Federal Government and their blatant waste of tax dollars and job killing policies.

David

Why didn't you tell the unemployment office that the nanny had a new job?

I can tell that if you told EDD (our unemployment office) that the nanny had a new job under the table, they would investigate.

We do phone interviews in this state and sometimes recipients have to go to a local unemployment office for a second interview.

I myself received 2 years of unemployment in 2003-2004 when I was receiving additional training that has kept me employed even after being laid off in July.

Since being laid off in July, I have been fortunate to land contract and temporary work that pays my bills, even Cobra.

Since they can not get a job, they need training for a new job.

Define "wealthy" first of all.

Many small business owners fall into the "wealthy" category even though after expenses they are lucky to break even due to all the rising taxes that is now going towards unemployment.

When you give these "wealthy" people tax breaks, it frees up money for them to be able to hire people.

With more people working, that means more money is going into the system instead of being sucked out. When there is more money going in, that means that there is less of a need for taxes to go up.

So you see, by lowering taxes for the "wealthy", it creates more jobs.

Jason...I use to work with the budget of one Fortune 50 company as an input administrator. Don't tell me the corporate tax rates are killing companies. That's what they all say in order to hide the real facts. Corporate America got too greedy. They earned a million a year but that wasn't enough. They earned a billion a year. That wasn't enough either. Sorry but in life, you learn at some point to be satisfied with your accomplishments and stop the constant drive as if the sky is the limit. That's the problem with corporations today. They view the CEO as a god who cannot possibly make an error and so they are willing to pay him as much as he demands no matter how long the fast cash rolls in. In other words, the boards of directors don't care about the US. They only care about their ROIs. See anything wrong with that?

This is so off topic of unemployment but I am not going to leave it unanswered. You can't blame Don't ask Don't tell on Bush/Cheney. Bill Clinton started this policy. Are you saying this was their fault? Where did you get that 80% from?

However, while administrative and "political" military personnel favor repealing the ban on gays, between 40 and 60 percent of combat troops surveyed said gays openly serving in combat would be a bad idea. 58 percent of those in combat responding negatively were Marines.

Former Marine Corps Commandant General James Conway has made clear in multiple interviews with the media that he and most Marines are against it and thought that it would harm combat effectiveness and unit cohesion. At one point, Conway even suggested separate quarters for gay service members.

Responding to the survey results, Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a Marine combat veteran, accused the Pentagon of creating a survey whose "criteria and lines of questioning" were created to "reach a predetermined outcome."

“If anything, the survey results make a compelling case for keeping current policy in place and avoiding any type of distraction for our nation’s military and its combat mission,” Hunter said. “When breaking down the specifics, more respondents answered unfavorably or remain uncertain about a policy change than those who favor repeal."

The defense secretary conceded that there are variances in the overall outcome of the survey when broken down to specific groups.

"Within the combat armed specialties and units, there is a higher level of discontent, of discomfort and resistance, to changing the current policy. Those findings and the potential implications for America's fighting forces remain a source of concern to the service chiefs and to me," Gates said.

"So Gates is admitting that the troops who are first to go into harm's way -- special forces units, Marines, etc. -- are the personnel uncomfortable with having openly gay soldiers, sailors and Marines serving in the U.S. military," said former U.S. Marine and police detective Sid Franes.

"But be certain the news media -- the Amen choir for liberal-left policies -- will not report on the large number of military personnel opposed to ending Don't Ask, Don't Tell. The idea is simple: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Anyone opposed to the gay agenda is subjected to Obama-mentor Saul Alinsky's political tactics," said Franes. Jim Kouri Law enforcement examiner

Some of these comments are incredibly stupid, even for this board. This guy probably HAS tried everything, including McDonald's and Walmart. THERE ARE 5 - 6 APPLICANTS FOR EVERY JOB OPENING IN THIS COUNTRY RIGHT NOW. And there are plenty of trumped up reasons for employers to NOT hire somebody, including the fact that the person is unemployed! That little tidbit has been in the news repeatedly; employers shy away from hiring anyone who has been unemployed for very long. Add to that "you're too old" and "you're overqualified"--the first unspoken, the second a common excuse--and the search can become practically impossible and incredibly demoralizing.

So, maybe all of you holier-than-thou lecturers should track down some facts and quit sniping at someone who is going through a tough time. It could be YOU. Lighten up and get a life!!!

Who is auditing the unemployment benefits? I know 10 people off the top of my head that won't even look for work because they think congress will extend the benefits. They don't even have to prove they are looking for work! What kind of system is that? If people are having a difficult time finding work, which I am sure many are, then we need to start cutting off the benefits for the deadbeats who sit around all day waiting for their checks!!

I have a friend who told me he emailed 10 resumes last week without a call back. When I asked him if he followed up with the companies, he said they should call him back! Is this how we look for work?

It is hard to find a job these days! I work 2 jobs to pay my bills and am happy to do it. I am one of the lucky ones. But, when I see people sucking off the system, it puts a stain on the system and makes me angry about the whole thing. There needs to be "checks" put into the system to ensure people are actually looking for jobs and not just saying they are!

The tax and spend boys should make the playing field a little more even... Raise taxes on the imports not on our labor... Lets send these containers that come in to our commerse with pirated technology (Televisions, toasters, washing machines, etc..) back with USA made goods container for container... Or America should be able to manufacture it's own underwear and washing machines, ATVs, etc... Global economy isn't working for me... Congress should be for the American people 1st and global economy 2nd.... I WANT TO WORK!!!

Whatever. The reality is waking up under stress because you can't find a job. I was laid off mid November from a job that was temporary anyway and already qualified me for public assistance. Maybe I'll get unemployment I don't know yet, and as I check to see if my childs clothes are dry because I washed them in the sink because I can't afford the laundrymat, with the water that I heated on the stove because I can't afford the gas deposit, since I moved from my previous home because I was evicted because I was late on the rent, don't think I will not take the small amount that will not pay for day care, (which I am late on). Do you think I care about a republican or a democrat? They are all politicians and pretty much are far removed from my situation, as a lot of people posting here, and you have no idea what this is like. And as I leave to go apply for a job at a day labor place in my car with expired tags and no insurance wish me luck. A lot of the jobs posted on line are shams, advertisements for school or something else. If you were a person needing a job you already know this. It is just not that easy from where I am sitting. I don't want to be in this situation, I don't like it and I would take any job right now. I wonder if I will ever be able to afford another real home. Think about that the next time you buy something not made in the US. I don't have parents anymore that I can't move in with, the person who posted that must be young. Think about that too when you do have a job to offer and you only want to hire someone young and beautiful. Think about all this when you only want to pay someone just enough to keep them poor. How dare someone say just let me starve? Why should I not have some kind of medical benefits? Why should I just lay down and die? There probably are people who are taking advantage of unemployment but everything is not black and white. This can happen to you too. That is the reality.

People also need to realize that they are NOT going to make the money that they were making. They are going to have to TAKE LESS PAY. It is a bitter pill to swallow.

NO MORE HANDOUTS! There must be a time limit.

Back at the age of 30 I was a dedicated tech employee worked without a vacation, took my first vacation in 4 years and and got laid off back on my first day back in 2002, and lost an ungodly amount of money in stock options. And enormous amount! On my last day I told my coworkers: This stock is going to be 20+ bucks in a year and a half and you guys are going to be rich. I screwed up. They said "We might be if we can hang on long enough and survive all the coming layoffs" Some did, some did not. 18 months later the stock hit 30 dollars.

I am from MA and voted for Scott Brown, and glad he blocked this legislation. I'm not a republication or pro business and got stung as bad as if not worse than a good lot of you, but I can tell you that the government is NOT there to help you.

While I was laid off I met a young professional at a party that said "I worked my whole life and no one ever offered to give me anything. Now the government is paying me and actually calls to see if I am all right. I may even be available for other assistance. This is disgusting, because I could surely get used to this. The system is backwards

I kept enough money, never bought a house, and lived well under my means and prayed to god every day to get another job. The worst was the pain of the stock I lost.

When I finally got a job the unemployment office called and asked me: "You filed? Why didn't you collect?" I was shocked, not because I did move back in with my parents and was an idiot not to collect, but also as a worked the government NEVER called me for anything in my life except to say I owed more taxes!

Yesterday I actually had someone mock me when I was cutting wood for the winter: "Why do you work? I claimed disability and now I can stay home with my kids. I am even getting heating oil assistance this year. He left saying: You're a fool. You're working for me now."

WAKE UP PEOPLE! Handouts will go on forever and we will be socialist, because the jobs are GONE. Gone overseas. Gone are the days of relying on a company. I knew this back in 2000 and even though I screwed up and thought my good work and seniority would save my job, I prepared for it and recovered so far. Handing out money will screw this country into the ground. Obama promised to fix overseas loopholes and has not done anything so far. I voted for him for that reason, since that is why I lost my job in 2002 and again in 2009, and he has not done anything about it except hand out money!

There are jobs maybe not a lot of them out there but there are jobs out there. They may not pay you what you are used to making, they might pay you less then what you are collecting in unemployment. Unemployment doesn't last forever.

I was unemployed for ten months I took a job that pays me less then half of what I use to make. I knew unemployment was going to run out eventually and I better accept this job because it would not be around when my unemployment ran out.

I get paid once a month anywhere from $1300.00 - $1500.00 depending on the month. I can pay all of my bills, food and gasoline with $1500.00 but not $1300.00. I deal with it, less food in the short months.

I get tired of hearing people say they aren't going to accept a job or apply for the job because they make more on unemployment. A lot of people don't even look for a job they just lie when filing out their weekly unemployment claim.

Pretty soon there will be no money in the unemployment fund because it has been sucked dry.

limbaughger

get rid of your house and move in with mom-start paying your own way!!

You must be a fat well off Rep. with no morales for anyone but yourself. Here is a good plan for your Rep. clan, why not euthanize all of these lazy out of work freeloaders, and rid this country of there pathetic ways.
Truth is, it is your Rep. mindset that put things the way they are today; good old JW Bush ran this country into the ground with his agenda and now were in for two more years with the Rep. back. I'm sure it will prove to be a wonderful experience that no one will have wished to go through.
And for moving back in with Mom, she has lost her house and was living with us, what is your next suggestion? On second thought save it, I'm sure it is a good one.
Merry Christmas, As?ho!e

David B333 - must be nice to be able to afford a nanny, when some of your brother and sister citizens are barely scraping by, and you would deny them benefits because, as you say, "they just want to take money from those who are willing to work hard and give it to those who are to lazy to get a job." I'm guessing you and your family are going to have a really nice Christmas again this year, aren't you?

YEAH there are 5-6 applicants for every job but what are they doing to stand out from the crowd. If you can’t get a job in almost two years that sounds like there is something wrong with you not the market. why should we keep paying for people to be on unemployment that long. I got out of the service in 08 i had a job in 1 month, then in 09 my husband got out of the service too he had a job in 4 months. So don’t tell me i don’t know anything or i don’t know how it feels not to have a job. Also we don’t have degrees before anyone ask. People need to start taking responsibility for their own laziness and get to work. If you are on unemployment for more than 99 weeks you are on welfare, plain and simple. someone else is footing your bills while you just sit there. I understand those that have medical issues and that is different. Everyone else need to pick up some pride on isle 9 and start acting like AMERICANS again.

would like to note that when i voted, i voted NO to extending the benefits. yet, i show up as a "yes"? also, the blog changed the questions and responses from earlier. guess not getting enough bleeding heart liberal responses.

y is it that when people working 80 hours a week ( carpenter in picture on article) did not reference all the money put away for a rainy day? and it is pouring out there now folks. AGAIN, people who did not live through 1980 recession do not remember how tough it was then and it is not as bad as now. we are in a RECESSION; don't care how much smoke gov't blow smoke up everybody's a**.

also karen in los angeles; writer DID contact employment div., but not interested because of budget for investigators. most states don't care about unreported work; only the fact that gov't workers get paid to do their 8 not catch a thief.

am sorry for writer who had to be humiliated; eat crow and suffer everyday with lousy job compared to before. welcome to real world................. there are a lot of folks who never had your advantages at all. i worked like a dog for 40+ years and grateful for every dime i got for doing two men's jobs and little or no benefits at some jobs. save your crying for your golf playing buddies.

Obama still has hundreds of $Billions unspent in the 'stimulus' bill. Why does he refuse to use a few $Billion from that to offset the cost?

PS - My son was out of work and collected unemployment for 99 weeks. When it ran out, he found a job within a few weeks. My, what a coincidence.

The carpenter was working up to 80 hours a week at the beginning of the decade, but saw that gradually drop to 15 hours before it dried up completely.

So, when was this guy going to change professions? Hmmmm, 10 years... how long is long enough?

Karen in Los Angeles

You were very fortunate...I lost my job in 2003 as well, but my benefits ended in Nov. 2003...But I did something while out of work that a lot of people have failed to do...I took a credit card to pay for training to gain a certification...It was a living hell during that time, but what I did at that time has paid off...You're extremely fortunate to have continued benefit while out of work.. a lot ofpeople don't have that luxury...

I truly believe that by extending these benefits will not help these people in finding work...2 Years and no work...I find that fact difficult to accept...the individual needs to do whatever necessary to gain employment...People are owed nothing when it comes to their ability to improve their lives...

I think people are missing the point (as is the article)...both parties agree on extending unemployment insurance - the question is how to pay for it. Democrats want to write an IOU and Republicans want to use money that's already been allocated but not spent from TARP. Yes, there are some fringe votes that won't support an extension at all, but not enough to block it if the rest of them can agree on how to pay for it.

Personally, I'm with the Republicans on this issue...I'm tired of passing on debt to future generations. This is our mess and we need to pay for it.

Karen I did tell the unemployment office she was working under the table and they said they no longer have any investigators to look into such matters, they can't afford it. Yes, I do understand how asinine a statement that is but that's the mentality of the people running our government. I even offered to take pictures myself or have a private investigator follow her and send them the information and they said no!

you cant shame a rep--you and you children could be straving on the street if your not one of there rich friends toooo bad

For those saying that tax cuts to the wealthy creates jobs: Where are all these fantastic jobs that all those wealthy people created? They've had several years to create jobs, yet they seem to need the tax cuts extended because they haven't gotten around to creating all these jobs they keep talking about.

On the other hand, I'm torn about extending the unemployment benefits. My brother has been unemployed for two years but he won't take a low paying job or one where he has to drive any distance. And for the record, he's as Republican as you can get. My son lost his job last January due to cutbacks and had a new job by February. He had to take a $10,000 a year paycut but he knew he had to work to keep his home and keep his bills paid. He's Democrat, by the way, which kind of throws a monkey wrench in a lot Republicans comments that Repubs work to support lazy Democrats with their hands out.

Many of these jobs will not be coming back. For those that are overextended you will need to make changes in your life. I have been there a few times in my life and never blamed anybody, nor looked for help from others. Look realistically at your situation and then proceed on the path that will take off the pressure. I would rather live in a cramped apartment and be able to pay for it, rather than try to hold on to something I can't afford. I have been there.

How long should we keep extending the unemployment benefits? Forever? I don't think that's fair to everybody else who doesn't deserve to go into even more massive debt, because some people didn't save their pennies. Most people who are collecting their unemployment will have to change their profession, move, whatever...but i'm tired of paying people to sit at home. Times are tough, adapt or die.

One thing some of you forget - we all pay unemployment insurance out of our paychecks as INSURANCE against times like this.

This person is no freeloader - has been a responsible paying person until the economy went flat and elimnated the jobs. Can't move because he can't sell his house.

Look - jobs are coming back - so there is no reason not to extend one more time. It does not help to have empty houses and foreclosures and people with no money to spend at our stores.

THE APPOACH THAT WOULD REDUCE THE DEFICIT AND EXTEND UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS: The money it takes to extend this is NOTHING compared to what we would net if our politicians had the huevos to extend tax cuts to the middle class and let them lapse for the wealthy. This approach would cut the deficit by billions.

The GOP/TP wants to cut spending for working class Americans, leave spending for the defense industry, and protect tax cuts for the wealthy.

Who voted for that? NOT ME!

I am employed and cheerfully pay more taxes to keep this country on the road to recovery. I have almost no debt and A1 credit, but still support this. I am an economist, and understand that cutting off these folks does not improve the economy or the deficit.

Anyone else get that? Lots of supposed experts with not much background preaching about moving in with Mom & Dad. This economy does not need to drop further - and the USA as a world power is no longer convincing when we can't even take care of our own citizens.

CONGRESS - get a pair and stop the tax cuts to the wealthy. Did you see the Warren Buffet interview? He said he supports higher rates to reduce the deficit. We cannot reduce the deficit on the backs of the poor... That is a bankrupt 3rd world approach.

Karen in Los Angeles

You were very fortunate...I lost my job in 2003 as well, but my benefits ended in Nov. 2003...But I did something while out of work that a lot of people have failed to do...I took a credit card to pay for training to gain a certification...It was a living hell during that time, but what I did at that time has paid off...You're extremely fortunate to have continued benefit while out of work.. a lot ofpeople don't have that luxury...

ctdad - I apparently was not clear. It's only 7am for me.

I RECEIVED UNEMPLOYMENT BENEFITS BECAUSE BECAUSE I WAS BEING "TRAINED" - ie, I did the same thing you did - obtained certification while being unemployed.

At the time (and I still think it is applicable), I applied for training benefits when I first became unemployed.

AND YOU'RE RIGHT - It's the best thing I did too because since being laid off, and because I am certified, I have landed work, which is work even though it is temporary or contract work.

That is why I agree to extend unemployent benefits IF the recipient gets training for a job in demand LIKE WE DID.

David - It's too bad that your state is not like ours. What a waste of tax dollars. Maybe if you tell your Congressman, something will get done.

I see lots of "The Republicans want regular people to starve to give more money to the 'rich'.

Do people really believe that, or are they just repeating 'talking points' from the Democrats.

Isn't it just possible that the Republicans are thinking about the long-term consequences of the unsustainable debt that the Democrats have run up over the last 2 years, and how the interest on that debt will result in a drastically lower standard of living for our children and grandchildren?

Class warfare is not the answer, and using it to score a few cheap political points is counter-productive. The Democrats have spent $Trillions on their pet projects instead of 'focusing like a laser' on creating jobs, and now all of a sudden it's "the Republicans want the poor to starve just before Christmas".

DORFY-

Socialism is what you are talking about. We cannot reduce the deficit on the backs of the rich either. Why should one bracket get tax way more than the other, because they or their families made some good investments that put them in the position they are in today. That is so childish. That is like saying tom has more ice-cream than i do. I am not rich but I understand that the choices I have made set me in the position I am in today. What happen to taking responsibility for your own choices and actions.

you want to B-itch about the rich being rich than lets b-itch about the poor popping out children they can’t afford left and right and creating more tax deficits. Or Lets complain about those that are welfare being on it their whole lives and never trying to step out and do something with themselves (please don’t bore me with the whole product of their environment crap). Lets b-itch about how much money we send overseas to help other countries when our own country is hurting.

You want to penalize a group of people that when out and got the American dream. God do you people listen to yourselves. Do you forget we are a free country and free to make good and bad choices. if your choices have landed you in the poor area that shouldn’t be the fault of your the neighbor with the greener grass. This country use to stand for something now we listen to the media and take everything we hear as Gold instead of using some grown up common sense.

I am pretty certain that people on unemployment can still apply to receive training benefits - which is your unemployment check while you are attending a program to receiving training for a job in demand.

The training must be completed in one year and you have to apply for it within a certain amount of time after being unemployed.

Instead of using a credit card to pay for the education, try a student loan which is what I did. Cheaper interest.

Just an aside note -- I would vote for extending unemployment in certain areas - but this is my problem. I am an avid football fan (pro/college) and there isn't a weekend that goes by that the stadiums across America are not full -- and now add basketball to that. With tickets for the SEC championship this weekend starting at almost $500 and going up from there - there will not be a vacant seat in that stadium, and probably a substantial number just hanging out in the parking lot.
AND -- not a weekend goes by, and even weeknights, that restaurant parking lots are not full around here (area pop around 300,000).
So I'm not sure any in our area need extended benefits -- though I know other parts of the country are not so lucky.

You want jobs? Demand your beloved leader enforce our immigration laws. A lot of jobs could be opened up there. Maybe not the best paying...but you could pay your bills and buy your kids Christmas presents. If you go to the packing houses they pay better than the fields...but you gotta get the illegals out of there first. Its no longer a question of what you want to do for a living...its what you need to do for you and your family. And sitting on your butt in a welfare state wont cut it.

Dorfy

I have a hard time believing you're an economist with a moniker like "dorfy."

That said, what does your training tell you about unsustainable debt? How does THAT affect our economy?

I hear there are lots of jobs that employers can not fill because there are no qualified applicants. Seems that some people should go back to school.

Finally, YES WE DO PAY AN UNEMPLOYMENT TAX when we are employed. The financial models used to determine the amount we pay ALL DEPEND ON 26 weeks of unemployment NOT 99. I'm surprised that an economist is not aware of this fact.

You paid for 26 weeks of unemployment out of your paycheck NOT over 99 weeks!

Tim-1833369

John Smith-2351185,
You must forget the trillions of chinese dollars un-curious george wasted on a fake war. Or the trillions georgie spent on the banks after he de-regulated the market. Oh let us not forget georgies unfunded medicare part D was throwing mone to his pharmacy buddies. Oh thats right cons always LIE!

Tim, you seem to forget that the deregulation actually started with Clinton, not Bush. Also, your commander and chief took a significant amount of lobbying money from Fannie and Freddy when they were in Washington lobbying be less regulated and be allowed to take more risk. Who LIES?

You want jobs? Demand your beloved leader enforce our immigration laws. A lot of jobs could be opened up there. Maybe not the best paying...but you could pay your bills and buy your kids Christmas presents.

I totally agree. Here in So Cal, it is so disgusting that 70% of the available good jobs require BILINGUAL applicants.

Si, hablo espanol pero esta pais es los Estados Unidos. Hablamos INGLES aqui.

Karen in LosAngeles...Thanks for the clarification...I just finished my 1st 16oz coffee and waiting for the caffeine to kick in...

My Republican friends could care less. They own their homes, have pensions and 401ks, have medical care. Yet, go to church each Sunday. No compassion for anyone. USA is going back to have and have nots of the 1930's. Middle class is about gone!

Dorfy -

I am employed and cheerfully pay more taxes to keep this country on the road to recovery. I have almost no debt and A1 credit, but still support this. I am an economist, and understand that cutting off these folks does not improve the economy or the deficit.

Anyone else get that? Lots of supposed experts with not much background preaching about moving in with Mom & Dad. This economy does not need to drop further - and the USA as a world power is no longer convincing when we can't even take care of our own citizens.

CONGRESS - get a pair and stop the tax cuts to the wealthy. Did you see the Warren Buffet interview? He said he supports higher rates to reduce the deficit. We cannot reduce the deficit on the backs of the poor... That is a bankrupt 3rd world approach.

I find it hard to believe you are an economist with views like this. More taxes is not the answer, for anyone at any income level. Lets take more money away from the working to support everyone else, that is a sociallist view that will not get us anywhere. Cutting their benefits doesn't improve the economy, but neither does extending them without a way to pay for it.

Who said it the governments job to take care of our citizens? How about we try something else and let our citizens take care of themselves once and a while. I know thats a hard concept for you dems, but really you can support yourself.

We shouldn't have to reduce the deficit on the back of anyone. How about we cut spending. Or even better get rid of Obama care seeing how he offers no way to pay for it. We need to cut some of these needless programs instead of always defaulting to taxing the rich.

The voters got what they wanted. You did know what you were voting for when you voted Republican, didn't you? No jobs, and now the minimal get-by insurance money is gone - so the base level of suffering in America goes up.

ctdad - I'm still sipping on mine! Have a great day. The sun is finally peaking out even though IT'S COLD!

Ted...I've paid into unemployment for 32 years. Never collected. Got any suggestions on ROI for that?

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the majority discovers it can vote itself largess out of the public treasury. After that, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits with the result the democracy collapses because of the loose fiscal policy ensuing, always to be followed by a dictatorship, then a monarchy."

Democrates are more than happy to oblige the masses with "free" handouts......

I think the Republicans are helping me. I AM TIRED OF THIS SPEND, SPEND, SPEND ADMINISTRATION.

We have an unsustainable debt and soon enough, the retirement age will be raised to 69, etc.

Apparently most Americans are on this page because they did vote for the Republicans.

And contrary to what liberal CA media said, Whitman and Fiorina DID NOT LOSE by wide margins. The races were tight.

walter-2081103

You are not going to get any help from the Richpublicans and I bet your dumbass voted for them. What a waste of a vote and sperm when you were born. Always remember: the poor is coming to take your stuff........... so be scared! Dumbass!!!

The hate is strong with this Liberal.

It's funny that people lay this at the feet of the Reps. The Dems also supported the bailouts, continue to support the military industrial complex and refuse to slash spending.

At least the Reps support cutting the spending that has lead to the crisis.

I say extend the benefits just for the fact that the money will never be paid back and it pushes up the day of reckoning.

When Ronald Reagan cut them, of they went out and got jobs.

To many people not even looking for work, just riding the gravy train!

How about you help yourself! Walk away from a house you can no longer afford and start new. I was out of work for almost 3 yrs, only had 26 wks unemployment benefits, finally found a job, making about 1/3 of what I was making, I knew there was no way I could ever keep up with house, car, c/c debt, and start saving again, I finally decided to just walk away from it all. I now rent a much smaller place, can keep the lights on and a little food on the table, ride the bus to work. Yes, I did feel bad for a while about walking away, but after using all my savings, retirement, and c/c trying to keep up, I was stressed to the limit, tired of trying to keep up and pay debt I knew I owed, although no fault of my own, could not pay. Walking away was the best thing I ever did. I can now sleep at night and even smile every once in a while. Yeah, I know my credit is shot, and some will call me a deadbeat, but I did what was best for me, since no one else was willing to work with me, these days, I live one day at a time, pay cash for everything and hope someday making 'just enough' to live will pass and I once again can have a peice of meat, or an ice cream cone...mmmm, those were the days!

Walter

Your use of personal attacks and threats only shows how ignorant you truly are.

It is sad but true. Not one person has seen the truth about the situation at hand today. The Democrats are not looking at it and the Republicans are denying it. The Bush administration started the recession for a reason. Give the rich their tax break with a message not to hire. That killed the jobs here as they were sent overseas. The Republicans wouls be agreeable to letting people lose everything and starve to death. The survivors would then get the picture and take any job they could get at two or three dollars per hour. Therefore the rich making all the profit. That is the plan of the Republicans.

I would suggest that some of these posters consider several things.

• Ask how many of these people receiving unemployment benefits would prefer having a job and see the response.
• The Repubs want to keep Dubya's tax cuts and cut taxes more.
• If tax cuts are so great, why did we go into an economic recession in the first place?
• Since the cuts did nothing before, why should we expect a different outcome now?
• Add up our current deficits and then multiply $12BN/month times 84 months of the Iraq war and compare the totals. This does not include the Afghanistan war that is also unfunded.
• Why did we cut taxes knowing we were going into two wars? Did we expect the funds to magically appear to pay for them?
• Now, some people begrudge giving the unemployed more funding because the Repubs were not smart enough to indentify how to pay for them initially.
• And now since the Repubs gained control of the House we expect things to change with more tax cuts? Who are the idiots who drank that cool aid?

Wal Mart is always hiring! Thank your Republican friends!

I think ALL pay for ALL elected officials should be $0 until the unemploymnt rate drops by 50%...no ands ifs or buts!!!!! Something tells me they will stop acting like 2 year olds real quick!

What Does The Scoodge, The Grinch, Mr. Potter (It's a Wonderful Life) and the REAPublicans Have in Common?

Answer: EVERYTHING!

Merry Christmas America!

To the post that cried out for the Republicans help. Are you serious? I love Steve's 1019964 post. The Republicans are about power, control and getting Obama out of the White House. The people are on their own. Some just don't get it.

Judy, now there's a good idea.

Fred, let us go with your premise:

The Democrats are for the poor, which party is failing the people it claims to represent?

Arrest anyone who hires an illegal is how you help the poor citizens of this country!

Just two facts in the face of a lot of misinformation being thrown around here:

1. On January 18, 2009 the US debt was somewhere north of 11B (so the Dems did not run the debt up to where it is in the past two years or even the past four years)

2. During Obama's first budget year (2010), the deficit actually went down somewhat in excess of 100B (not a lot but in the right direction) from the previous (and final Bush budget) year.

Think about the facts. Just think them over.

Okay, let's just clear up a few misconceptions:

1) There are no "unspent billions" lying around from TARP. That is a rumor that's been debunked as FALSE by more than one fact-finding organization.

2) The tax cut that the GOP wants to give to the top 2% of earners (those over $250k a year in taxable income) would add $700 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years. In contrast, ALL the unemployment benefits paid out over the last three years have only cost about half that much.

3) The Bush tax cuts have been in effect for 10 years. They did not result in any additional jobs during that period. Why would anyone believe that extending them will miraculously create jobs going forward?

4) There are 5 unemployed Americans for every job opening. That includes the large number of jobs that require very specialized training, such as brain surgeons or nuclear physicists. The ratio of people fighting for jobs that the average college graduate could do is much higher.

5) There are not enough Walmart and McDonalds jobs to hire even a fraction of those who are unemployed right now. And how would anyone with children feed them off those jobs anyway?

Unemployment benefits are the only thing keeping a lot of people from starving in the streets. Is that really what we want America to look like? Are we really going to listen to the Republicans whining about how "unfair" it would be not to give millionaires a tax cut while they're ranting about how we can't afford unemployment benefits? Are we stupid?

R-ich are the 1st Priority

E-veryone else don't Matter

P-oor are lazy good for nothing leeches.

U-nity is for Wimps

B-ig Business rules this country

L-iberals waste their time caring for the Jobless, Homeless and the Sick

I-ntentionally want America to Fail for Political Gain

C-an't have an America with Mexicans, Muslims, Blacks or Gays.

A-lways enjoy Wars, Hatred, Torturer, Racism & taking Medical from the sick.

N-ever will they let Anything Obama or the Dems Seceded

S-ellout their Country and peoples rights for Profit.

There seems to be a Pattern Here!

D-on't ask us where the money comes from. We just spend it.

E-veryone should be on welfare. It makes it easier for us to control the masses.

M-ake excuses when things don't get done. Never take responsibility.

O-bama can do no wrong. He is our Messiah. Fall to his feet.

C-reating jobs is a good idea, but I think we'd rather have you all dependent on us so you can't vote us out.

R-epublicans are at fault! For everything! Always! Even the weather!

A-lways refer to your opponent as racist, bigot, hateful or just your enemy.

T-elling you what to think and believe is what we do best.

S-pend that money before China cuts us off! Trip to India anyone?

I see a pattern too. Weird.

It really urks me that most people on this board are ignoring the fact that most Republican senators said they would vote for extending the benefits. The only question is do we write another IOU or do we cut spending somewhere else?

Please stop with the "Republicans want to let people starve" nonsense. That's just a BS talking point equivalent to a lot of the junk from Beck and Limbaugh.

This is America, how about helping yourself. Open a paper. It took me less than 2 weeks to find a job. If there are no jobs in your area move to another area. (ever seen a clip of africans starving and with no water, and wonder why they dont move to where there is food and water? same thing...) I have not seen one unemployed illegal immigrant. Are they smarter than you? Anyone not working, is not working by their own choice. McDonalds is always hiring. We are in this position by our own making. People need to make better choices, in life, and when they vote.

Reduce military spending by 50% and then extend benefits to those that can prove they're actively seeking employment or in school to be more hireable. There, 2 problems SOLVED!!

It won't happen though, god forbid we reduce military spending before cutting education and other vital services. In the end I won't be happy until it's military officers that have to organize bake sales to raise money for the military.

Please Help..!!!!

What_the - I don't know about 50%, but I'm up for something like 20%. I'm ex-military and know people still there and there is a lot of waste that can be cut without affecting US national security. As an example, I have a friend that's a Captain in the Marines...she's stationed on a ship that docks in Japan...the Marines pay for her 3 bedroom condo on the water even though she only uses it a few days a year...she should be in the barracks or cheap base housing like it was when I was there in the 80's.

99 weeks is enough. I work on the average 70-80 hours a week to get by and semi-support a son in college. I use to financially help other family members until I found out that I was eating chicken while they were going to steakhouses on the money I gave them. They would rather collect unemployment instead of working at a job for less money than they were making. (they actually admitted this to me right before asking me for another handout). If you really want a job, you can find one.

4) There are 5 unemployed Americans for every job opening. That includes the large number of jobs that require very specialized training, such as brain surgeons or nuclear physicists. The ratio of people fighting for jobs that the average college graduate could do is much higher.

The BS about this point is the fact that CERTAIN JOBS ARE GOING UNFILLED BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF QUALIFIED APPLICANTS.

There are about 5 people vying for 1 job that does not require specialized training.

I am certified in my field and I have had zero problem finding contract and temporary work since being laid off at the end of July. I am TURNING DOWN jobs because I have a good temporary gig that should last until I find a comparable position.

What I'd like to know is at what point do the benefits stop being unemployment and start becoming welfare? I was on unemployment during the recession in the 80s, and they only gave me 6 weeks worth of unemployment! My sympathies for the unemployed stops at 99 weeks. Sorry.

The republicans will probably tell you to drop dead, but they'll make sure that the rich and super rich get a tax cut.

Where do you clowns think jobs come from? The unemployment line? The welfare office? The bum on the corner? NO!

They come from businesses! The very people you fools want to tax out of existence!

For your argument that the Republicans are just for big business, what planet are you living on? Obama and the Democrats got more than TWICE the money donated for the 2008 elections than the Republicans did!

I never got a job from a poor man, I got a job from someone who was smarter financially than me and had money to invest in his and my future by hiring me. It has always been that way and always will unless obama and his cronies succeed in turning America into a 3rd world Country.

Almost everyone I know that was collecting unemployment benefits milked it for as long as they could and when the UE ran out, they found a job the next week.

As the Fed said, expect UE to remain high for years to come, especially if we don't make people look for a job. As long as our elected elite continue the spread the wealth economic policies that have failed throughout history, don't expect jobs to return.

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

Benjamin Franklin, On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, November 1766

In God We Trust

I have to laugh at the assumption that tax cuts = job creation. You have to assume that the majority of the wealthy in this country are business owners, first of all. Then you have to assume that if they had more money, they'd use it to hire more employees. Well, I work for a firm with 10 employees. I have no benefits and make 1/2 of what I used to. I can honestly tell you that my boss would be out shoe shopping if she had extra money, not paying me more or hiring another person. My husband works for an independent auto repair facility and his boss is the same way. Gives the employees nothing, but lives in a million-dollar house, owns expensive cars and takes lavish vacations. Maybe we're just unlucky, but you can't convince us that extending the tax cuts is going to help anything.

Corporate profits are back to where they were before the recession. In fact, last quarter was the highest on record.

Don't give me that "they can't afford to hire people" crap. They're paying out record bonuses, increasing CEO pay to obscene levels, hiking dividends and buying out other companies. NONE of that creates jobs. The means are there, what's lacking is the will and any sense of gratitude to the working people of this country for putting them where they are today.

Rachael - if your boss buys shoes that stimulates the economy, which results in more jobs. Also, most wealthy people got that way because they know how to create wealth. For the most part that means they invest money in new companies (which hire people) or they invest in existing companies so they can expand (and hire more people). So, although a wealthy person may not personally give you a paycheck, if they loaned money to the person that started the business it's really the same thing.

RealAmericans - I think what's lacking is confidence in where the country is going and what their long-term costs and restrictions (regulations) will be. Once these uncertainties are cleared up, I suspect you'll see all of that extra money put into the economy fairly quickly.

Right now people that have a job don't realize that when there are 2 million more people that don't have an income this will affect their jobs, Billions less spent back into our economy, yes more layoffs and lost of jobs, once this starts there will be no way to revese it, remember what goes around comes around ...... watch what you wish for and don't cry if it happens to you .....

Sorry, but the Republicans are not going to help you....ever. They will only help themselves and the corporations that own them. Since the supreme court passed their disaster of a law allowing corporations to give unlimited money to elections, that makes it almost impossible for those who want to participate in govemnment for the people to do so. We are toast. We have only ourselves to look at as a country for this mess. We don't teach people how to do their civic duty...i.e. VOTE...that's what makes the difference. It is disgraceful that only 40% of the American public votes. This should be mandatory in a country that claims to be a democracy, although those days seem also to be gone. Civics should be mandatory in school to teach people how to participate in their govenment and therefore lives. Instead, we want to destroy the Department of Education and keep the little people in place by taking everything away from them. I can't believe that not extending benefits for the people in this country who are stuggling in the worst recession/depression since the Great Depression is even an issue. What kind of heartless, self-centered, and immoral country have we become? We're not talking giving people money that lets them stay at the Ritz. We're talking living expenses, and by the way, that goes back into the economy. It's time for us to get our center back in this country...if it's still possible anyway. By the way, I do not collect benefits, just in case someone out there thinks I'm trying to make this case for myself. It's sad that we can't be like this all the time, but in this season that is supposed to represent peace and good will, it would be lovely for those who represent us to act this way. It's disgraceful what we have become.

Ron - like all that money was put back into the US economy while Bush was giving them all the "confidence" and "certainty" they could handle? Yeah, that worked out real well for the other 98% of us, didn't it?

How many weeks is enough? This story, and poll is absolute BS. So some guy that is out of work can't get his kids Christmas presents...welcome to the depression and real life. sob sob sob liberals....

What has Obama done for you? Has he brought jobs back from overseas? Oh and before the blame-bush-for-everything crowd starts it's usual uninformed diatribe....Clinton was the one that signed NAFTA, promoted the admission of China into the WTO and accepted the Free Trade agreements.

How has this joke of a president dealt with the jobless rate? By spending money to sue Arizona, by taxing the living hell out of businesses and working individuals, by campaigning for 4 months without addressing a damn thing, by taking taxpayer expense paid trips all over the world, by protecting the high wages of unions, by not enforcing immigration laws.....

Oh wait....NOT ONE OF THOSE THINGS BROUGHT A JOB BACK!

Oh but feel free to keep blaming republicans. Why don't I hear any solutions coming from the liberals other than "tax the rich!"

• Deport all illegals and do not allow more into the US
• Reinstitute tariffs on imported goods
• Force employers that have employees outside of the USA to pay FICA on that payroll
• Allow for an employee to decide whether or not to join a union...they should be free to work and be allowed to make that decision.

We have a jobs problem in the USA and the democrats are going to waste weeks on don't ask don't tell? They are going to spend all their efforts on taxing the top 2%? Great priorities...no wonder they got their butts kicked in November.

RealAmerican - In my post I was responding to your point about there being a lot of money on the sidelines right now - money that was invested 3 years ago. My opinion is, when some of the uncertainty is removed, that money will flow back into the economy and will further help the recovery. Conversely, as long as the uncertainty remains, the money will largely stay on the sidelines. I'm not attempting to make a statement about whether or not anyone benefits...I'm just stating my opinion on why that money isn't being invested today.

11,908,224 SKILLED JOBS PROVIDED TO ILLEGAL ALIENS

http://immigrationcounters.com/

That would make a real nice dent in the number of unemployed Americans. Too bad those in office are more concerned with supplying aid and comfort at our expense to foreigners! Hey idiots, it's not a democrat, or a republican thing at this point. It's an AMERICAN THING! Regardless of party we should start demanding our party reps start worrying about Americans instead of illegal aliens!

Miller Time #1.61,

We need to repeal the 24th amendment.

Deportation of illegal immigrants increases under Obama administration

By Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, July 26, 2010

In a bid to remake the enforcement of federal immigration laws, the Obama administration is deporting record numbers of illegal immigrants and auditing hundreds of businesses that blithely hire undocumented workers.

The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office.

Now - will ANYone on the right give credit where credit is due????

Now- will you show us the numbers of illegals deported from Mexico......not other nations.......just Mexico.

I guess our governments (local, state, federal) have been asleep for a long time __— at least not doing their jobs, if awake.

A large amount of work, in the not too distant past, required copious amount of manual labor. Well, all of you "Rip Van Winkles", guess what __— with the technology __— primarily computers and their networks, automated assembly lines, and high speed communication networks __— we no longer need a very large workforce!

Now look at these numbers: The US Constitution was ratified in 1788. It wasn't until 1915 that the US population hit 100M, in 127 years. Then in 1968, the US population hit 200M, in just 53 years. Then in 2007, the US population hit 300M, in just 39 years.

And you don't think that our government should have been making policy adjustments, before now? Looks like dereliction of duty to me.

NHLucky-661693 "Just two facts in the face of a lot of misinformation being thrown around here:1. On January 18, 2009 the US debt was somewhere north of 11B (so the Dems did not run the debt up to where it is in the past two years or even the past four years) 2. During Obama's first budget year (2010), the deficit actually went down somewhat in excess of 100B (not a lot but in the right direction) from the previous (and final Bush budget) year."

Let's get our 'facts' right;

1 - The National Debt on January 16, 2009 was $10.629 Trillion. It is now $13.861 Trillion, an increase of $3.232 Trillion in a little over 22 months ($147 Billion per month). It took Bush 80 months to increase the debt by that much ($40 Billion per month).

2 - Obama's first budget year was 2009. Bush proposed a budget for 2009 calling for a Deficit of $407 Billion, which was ignored by the Democratic Congress until Obama took office, at which time the Democrats (now in control of everything) passed the $862 Billion 'stimulus' bill, and only then did Congress pass the 2009 budget in March 2009 (under Obama), with a deficit of over $1 Trillion (actually $1.4 Trillion). Congress sets the actual budget, not the President.

If you're going to quote 'facts', at least get them right.

NHLucky-661693

While we're reporting 'facts', let's consider the Debt Held by the Public, which is the amount of debt we actually owe to foreigners and investors (the rest of the National Debt is money owed by one government agency to another government agency).

Clinton's Public Debt for his last Fiscal Year in office (2000) was $3.405 Trillion, and Bush's Public Debt for his last Fiscal Year in office (2008) was $5.809 Trillion, for an increase of $2.404 Trillion over 8 years ($300 Billion per year) - actually, about $330 Billion of that was for TARP in Bush's last 2 weeks of FY 2008, which has been largely repaid with interest.

As of the last Fiscal Year under Obama (2010), the Public Debt was $9.023 Trillion, for an increase of $3.214 Trillion in only 2 years ($1.6 Trillion per year, or more than 5 times the rate for Bush).

No matter how you slice it, the Democrats are just big spenders, 'which nobody can deny'. lol

Unless you have a degree in a health care related field, there really aren't any jobs out there in my area right now.

The pickings aren't slim, they're non-existent.

Roy,

I stand corrected on your figures, I was just estimating them and should have said so. I am willing to accept yours as true. I do not however, agree that 2009 was Obama's first budget year. He did not propose that budget.

I'm sure you'll correct me if you think I am wrong here, but did either Clinton or Bush (except for his last few months) have to contend with the second deepest economic collapse in the last 100 years? That would, I am sure you will agree, have had a serious impact on revenue collections by the US Government, leading the deficit to expand at a far faster rate than under more normal conditions, say when the economy wasn't hemorrhaging jobs at the extreme rate it was doing in January, 2009.

BTW, I shudder to think where we would be now if it weren't for that stimulus package. Have you seen the economic news lately? Things are turning around.

Boy, those Republicans sure work fast!!

This is what's wrong in our country!

RealAmericansFirst wants to make a big thing out of this administration expecting to deport 400,000 illegal aliens this year "more than the previous administration"!
What's that, one months worth of illegal aliens who cross the Mexican border? Big Deal! It's still not securing the mexican border is it? The politicians have us pointing fingers instead of actually doing what needs to be done, they're playing us like a cheap fiddle! I hope we're really smarter than that! Start fingerprinting (thumbprint will do) everyone who votes, emergency room service, recieves any form of tax based assistance, registers their children for school, etc. so we know they are who they say they are, and secure the border. Address the problem now, then its history so we don't repeat it.

I had a nanny who was stealing from me so I laid her off. She collected unemployment benefits until they ran out.

You should have fired the nanny for stealing - then she would have not qualified for unemployment. You can only qualify if you are terminated through no fault of your own, i.e. layoff. If you are fired for stealing, etc., you cannot qualify for unemployment.

Regarding the post that started this entire string, there's something very elementary that people forget about accepting any job you can find, like I did. It's very hard to crawl back up to where you were when you accept a position well below the prestige of where you once were, not to mention the income level. Once you've done this, like me, you're stuck - you are no longer enhancing your skills from your previous career, you struggle with not being the person you once were, i.e. forced to "dumb" yourself down so as to avoid conflict at work. It's been EXTREMELY difficult to work in a position where there is absolutely no regard to my age, years of experience, or education. I'm treated like someone right out of high school. I'm not supposed to have ideas of my own or question anything. I'm supposed to be a robot, a processing machine; it's sort of like that movie 9:00 to 5:00 with Dolly Parton. I get in trouble a lot because the analyst in me - the person who used to crunch numbers for executive level management - comes out and it doesn't fit in my current position. The skills and attributes that used to make me successful at work are the very things I'm forced to suppress in my new role. It's not easy to accept a lower level position - it's something you do for survivals sake. But I certainly understand the resistance to doing so. For me, the threat of having my unemployment run out was greater than taking any job I could find. I just couldn't wait around - I had to work, regardless of what job I could find.

NHLucky-661693 "Roy, I'm sure you'll correct me if you think I am wrong here, but did either Clinton or Bush (except for his last few months) have to contend with the second deepest economic collapse in the last 100 years?"

Don't get too caught up in the political rhetoric, because here are the actual facts, based on government fiscal year records;

1 - The total decline in Gross Domestic Product (GDP) from 2008 to 2009 was less than 1.3%, and the economy was actually higher in 2009 vs 2007 (when the 'recession' started) by 3.9%. This compares with about a 45% drop in GDP during the Great Depression. By the way, the 'great recession' only lasted about 16 months, which was only slightly longer than the average for a recession, and it ended about 17 months ago, while the Great Depression lasted for about 9 years.

2 - The 'spike' in the unemployment rate was about 2% from when Bush left office to today's rate, which is about the same 'spike' that Bush had to contend with after 9/11.

This is not to diminish the difficulties that people are experiencing today, but the description of the recent recession as "The biggest economic downturn since the Great Depression" is largely political rhetoric.

One other point should be made. Bush responded to the economic downturn after 9/11 by stimulating the economy with tax cuts that resulted in fast economic growth (which actually significantly increased government revenues as well). Obama focused his attention on issues that actually diminished business incentives for growth (HCR, financial regulation, 'wealth redistribution', higher taxes, etc.), and we are paying the price with slow economic growth and high unemployment.

This tends to highlight the difference between the Republicans who focus on economic growth and the Democrats who focus on social change.

There is an old saying that applies "You get what you pay (vote) for".

I wonder if the deportation numbers for Obama are up simply because as soon as he was elected, there was a huge influx of tax eating illegal immigrants running over for the free ride Obama gives them.

Obama is really tough on illegal aliens isn't he? I mean, look how he upheld the law and allowed INS to deport his public housing living illegal aunt.

Oh, wait....

You clowns crack me up with the dem/repub thing, they're all eating from the same trough and if you think they'll let that dry up your only thinking delusionally. It should be about America and not the politicians we've allow to destroy this nation. All the corporate corruption should have been noted in the last decade, think for yourselves and if you still believe that way then it's surely your belief.

I'm not against anyone making money, but, totally against these suckers ripping off America like they did. Not-withstanding our own government helping them right along and telling us the people it's the best thing for us. What about all those mom/pop businesses that got left behind where the heck is their bailouts?

If we're to allow the little guys to fail why can we not allow the big ones to go as well!

Okay, thanks for answering my question. The answer is obviously "NO". But the GOP is very good at that word, are they not?

Just so I have this straight. So credit card companies have people in interest rate servitude, the mortgage lenders put people in predatory loans causing a housing bubble, and wall street has drained the middle class of all available cash. Jobs have been sent over seas, the retirement age is going to be raised, health care reform and financial reform are going to be repealed. The banks that were bailed out refuse to make loans, all while corporate America is showing record profits. Now the government doesn't want to extend unemployment benefits during x-mas, but have no problem extending tax cuts to the wealthiest Americans to stuff in already overstuffed pockets. Does any of this seem just or fair or even moral?

Why else would they be called Grinch Obstructionist Pimps, whose sole objective is to support the elite and themselves while making you their slave workers to fill their pockets even deeper.

And "NO", we do not; nor have not collected unemployment in our family even though we have been unemployed for a very long time now. Unemployment compensation is not lucrative as the self-serving, self-centered right wing would have you think with their sound bytes. Yet they claim to have heard our messages about jobs and the economy. So where do they start instantly after elections, while dropping the jobs and economy off the top of their list??????? Let's see now, the "First MAJOR thing on their agenda is to make Obama a one term Pres." Then, it is to cut, if can't eliminate, all the social programs that can't be paid for. And let's not forget that they all signed a note/petition yesterday (after talking to Obama the night before saying that they could work together on the critical issues) saying they would not vote for anything critical that the Pres. or Dems bring up UNTIL after they vote to give the TOP 2% wealthy their permanent tax exemption at the expense of $700 BILLION dollars added to the deficit that DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PAID FOR. And at the same time they have voted not to extend unemployment compensation (at $18 Billion), which WOULD HAVE TO BE PAID FOR. Let's not forget that they also want to cut SS and Medicare (even though we are the only ones contributing to SS without any matching from the Govt.). So what did the Republicans do with it? Bush borrowed all the surplus money in SS to pay for Bank Bailouts, Big Bonuses, and two very expensive and extremely long wars (one proven very questionable, unethical, and illegal interrogation tactics in Iraq for WMDs that never existed. So tell me with a straight face who or what group of people have sacrificed the most? Certainly not the GRINCH OBSTRUCTIONIST PIMPS. They just want more money and the HECK (putting it nicely) with what the Constituents desperately want or need to survive. And they call themselves the Party of Change, which is simply a rhetoric twist of "Confuse to Diffuse" just to provide for themselves.

We have a several very serious problems today that need immediate attention. Although few inside the Beltway appear to actually realize this.

The problems all have a connection to the economy and are too often lumped together in a way that makes resolution appear overly complex. As such, the real solutions are missed in favor of “sound byte” commentary about tax cuts and the deficit without actually addressing effective long term corrections. Clearly, the deficit must be controlled and reduced. Clearly, government spending must be managed in a way that doesn't continue to increase the deficit. Clearly, entitlement programs such as Social Security and Medicare are not safe political choices for the type of reductions that would actually affect deficit reduction.

Individually, the issues that need to be managed and managed effectively and immediately are:

1. Deficit

2. Unemployment

3. Economic growth

These three can be managed and corrected very easily from the purely physical stand point. The simple steps are as follows:

1. Raise taxes. This can and should be done by first allowing all current tax cuts to expire and then by adding a consumption tax of some small percentage on non-essential goods and services. It is critical that daily living expenses such as food, medical, and living expenses such as rent and utilities not be included here. Additional small increases in other existing consumption taxes could also be included.

2. Extend the Unemployment Benefits for at least another two years to provide a long term cushion for the folks currently out of work.

3. Initiate an infrastructure program paid for by an increase in the gasoline tax in which the work force is actually Federal employees. These programs must be funded directly to the employees and not funneled through the large contracting companies typically used for this type of activity. The government needs to perform the entire process, as this will insure the wages will actually get to the people and not be siphoned off into the coffers of wealthy executives.

4. This may be the most difficult. Regulate health care costs by establishing profit limits on the health insurers, pharmaceuticals, medical equipment manufacturers, and specialty care providers. In other words, establish the "Public Option" as was originally promised.

A message of hope for those that are unemployed:

I was unemployed or underployed for 1.5 years in a state with the highest unemploymetn rate. I couldn't collect unemployment benefits because I left my job in Sept. 2008 because of intense stress levels (was it the smartest move--probably not but I would do it over again). I never gave up even on days when I had nothing to get out of bed for. However, I made myself get up and walk 4-8 miles in the fresh air. I found hope in the small things in life because I didn't have any money. I met friends for coffee, walked and went to church. I never lost hope. Finally, in May 2010 I accepted the "best" job of my life. I feel very blessed. Before I accepted this position, I worked for a company and did whatever job they asked me to do (I have a college degree and wasn't above cleaning apts. (toilets) to put food on the table). Please, please don't ever give up. My motto was "even though the world was standing still, I had to keep on moving." Look up the prayer for job seekers on the internet. Within 2 months of saying this, I accepted my position. Don't lose sight because down the road things will be better.

Time to start looking at a smaller house and a lesser paid job. How much longer does the government need to pay?

It's a tough question to ask at this time of year. Those with jobs are happy (maybe), while those without are suffering (or not). Too many stories of folks opting to reject job offers to continue benefits, thus because unemployment pays more. Understood, but still....starting out on the lower rung of the ladder, well, it's a start. Even volunteering time can lead to a job offer.

The question was ill-worded, and intended as a trap. Why mention the GOP, or any political party? Just ask the question.

Boom!

99 weeks on unemployment! Well, if I was getting money for doing nothing I'd certainly want that unemployment to keep on rolling in. I have noticed that when the unemployment quit several folks I know drawing on it went out and found work. As to those folks who sit around waiting for the 'perfect' job commensurate with their skills, gosh, maybe no unemployment might loosen up your creativity and cause some opportunity to happen.

I know folks who are selling stuff they have or found at the flea markets and making $100 to $300 a day. I know folks going around cutting firewood and doing odd jobs for money. Then there were the two college educated guys who couldn't find work in their fields so they started popping and selling kettle corn. What is needed is willingness and the ability to create work and make money by thinking outside the box.

KSte - clearly you don't know what it's like to look for a job...it's absolutely essential to have an internet connection and a phone to get a job. What a cold-hearted and ignorant person!!

Tim, get your facts straight. Agree with you on the war funding, but Bush had NOTHING to do with the bank deregulation. That was passed by your boy Clinton in 1999. Darn, some of you libs will believe anything spoon-fed to you by Obama, Pelosi, and Company. You missed a chance to slam they republican controlled congress and senate that submitted and passed the bill to Clinton to sign! Bush, as Governor of Texas at that time, had nothing to do with the deregulation. Fool.

I don't know where you live or how well your husband has taken care of his health. Here in central Indiana, not far from Obama's poster child "Elkhart", people are refusing to take jobs because the unemployment benefits are so high. There are ads in the paper and at the DWD office.

I have been trying to fill 3 positions for almost a year, I have reviewed about 250 applications and resumes, I have interveiwed about 45 people and made just over 30 job offers. I have 1 new employee and he told me that he wouldn't have taken the job, but his unemployment extension had run out(I pay him $16.50 an hour). I am still trying to hire 3 people, Tuesday, I interviewed a person and offered him a job and was immediately turned down. He was recently layed off due to his employer closing, he turned down $19.25 an hour because his unemployment and union sub pay gives him almost the same money without working, and because he was a union employee making $28 an hour, he won't even consider anything under $22 an hour.

On top of that, starting January 1st both my state unemployment tax and my federal unemployment tax rates double. Both programs are beyond bankrupt, so they want to take more from me to pay people to stay home instead of coming to work. Another year of this stupid government and I will have closed my doors too. That will be another 22 families on welfare and facing forclosure, my self included.

The sad part is that this country could have a balanced budget in 6 months and begin paying down the debt in 12 months if the politicians would just do what they were elected to do. Every politician from every party.

You are so righ, Glen!!! This is what is happening all over America. I am a small busines owner and feel your plight. IF this economy ever recovers, ever so slightly) I will be hiring. BUT, I WILL not hire anyone who has been taking advantage of the UE taxpayer vacation and will not hire any previous Union worker. I am right there with you, Glen!!!!

I too am a small business owner and even here in Florida the lazies wont get off their butts. There are so many places hiring for the holiday season yet the UE people wont take a temp job because it will kill the UE benifits. I blame all of AMERICA we bred these lazy people. If the welfare program was more structured we would be better. but some people have been on that program their entire adult life. I find that sickning.

Reading through the list of (mostly republican) uninformed and completely false facts I think we're screwed. The country truly does deserve the government they voted for, enjoy the republicans holding the rest of us hostage for another 2 years to help the already wealthy. They sold your jobs off to begin with and there was what, 2-3 dozen posts suggest we all bend over and get used to minimum wage jobs forever, we accept 3rd world wages as the new normal and thank our lucky stars they aren't lower (which they will be once everyone settles for those low wages).

Republicans, you have put the country in reverse for the last 30 years, another 10 and we probably won't even exist anymore. Of course with your heads in the sand you are completely oblivious to it all anyway and will just end up fleeing to mexico or canada once you've bankrupted us at home.

Believe me there are no jobs in the healthcare field either unless you have 2-5 yrs. of experience. I graduated from Nursing school in May 2010 with honors and passed my state boards in July, now I am an RN with no work in sight. I have applied all over the state of MI and am constantly told that I need experience before they will hire me. Well if no-one will hire me how can I get experience and it is not because I am too young or old as I am in my mid-forties. I know all about people who abuse the system my mother was one of them and recieved welfare her whole life (my whole life with her). Now she collects disability and is proud of it. When I lost my job my mother's brilliant idea was that I should fake a disability for money but I said "no, I would rather work". So she has a house and I am losing mine. Doesn't seem fair. I have even applied at Wal-Mart and McDonalds and neither place will hire me because I am over-qualified.

"Move in with your mom..."
I wish to God I could. My Mom has been dead for nearly two years.

Glen-1921803 - Yours is the first valid argument that I've read in support of allowing unemployment to expire. But I have to tell you - I don't think the situation in your area is the norm. I truly believe there are more folks that need unemployment help than not. No one system is full proof. I collected unemployment for about 10 months, maybe a little less, and never stopped looking for a job. Furthermore, after 6 months I threw pride and humility out the window and started applying for anything that I thought I could do. I gave up any thought of matching my previous income or finding a job that utilized my skills, experience, and education. I got a job earning less than half than what I previously earned and only requires a GED.

But I got to tell ya, it came at a heavy price. I've now pigeon holed myself at the bottom of the income ladder, essentially starting over at 45 years old. I've been out of my field for 2 years, hence the "years of experience" become less and less important in my field. Today's employers look at employees as pieces of equipment - they want the newest, fanciest model with all the bells and whistles. They don't care about whether the employee would be a good, long term investment in their company, worthy of training - hence the problem of the newly minted RN not being able to get a job without years of work experience. How the hell is she supposed to get years of experience if no one will hire her? There is a cost to taking any job you can find. So yes, it gets you off unemployment, but it can and often does forever change the course of your life, and not necessarily for the better.

$390. per wk is highest unemployment rate paid in Indiana

unemployment in Elkhart is 13% and Glen can't find 3 people wanting to make twice that, what a worthless community Elkhart must be

HMM, the problem is that "supposedly" no one is looking for a job, they're all at home living it up on the UE, so the only reason they need a phone or inter-net is to play games and call their mommy, because they are all living it up in grand style, odd how many college educated people that worked for 30 years are now satisfied to live so meagerly, or even those w/o the college but worked hard for 10-20-30 years are now such leeches

damn lazy asses, hey how'd the vote go for the American millionaires and their continued tax breaks

I know what is meant by some when they speak of "wealth re-distribution" but what exactely has been implemented for this wealth distribution to take place?

who is losing what monies and how and who is distributing it and to whom?

what bill was passed that re-distributes someone elses wealth to another individual here in America

I think you have got it wrong. We don't have the good Republican congress in session yet. Instead we have the Democrats who you voted in that wasted time in Congress on climate change, obama care, don't ask don't tell and nothing for the american people. They could have fixed the tax situation and unemployment benefits problem a long time ago.

Some people don't learn - problably some people don't like the truth that the Democrats have ruined this country. What can we show to the unemployed for the millions in TARP that was spent? NOTHING. Also the tax hikes that Obama wants will kill more jobs.

DMAC...Sorry, it was the Ahole conservatives who for 8 years conserved their money, made stupid decisions we ended up paying for with 3 bailouts in 9 years. That your idea of conservatism? Save your money and screw up the economy and make the rest of us pay for your mistakes? You had 8 years to clean up this mess with job loss. Bush knew in 2001 what was coming or he wouldn't have handed billions to corporations to hire and create jobs...or...was that just more of the neoconservative gifts to the already too damn rich.

You don't cut programs people need. You cut programs we don't need...like all of those outsourced vendors who are double billing and costing us cost overruns up the gazork. That's where you start. Not with programs that will further destroy the economy.

What were the cost overruns for Iraq that Halliburton, Enron and Blackwater charged us? Conservatives are hideously stupid people. They outsourced the government where salaries for work is far more controllable to people who were double billing and running over bid costs ten times the original amounts. That's pure BS. Get rid of tens of thousands of these vendors first. I'd love to know how many are cronies of Republicans who remain on bidder's lists for eternity.

Whoa ,wait a minute ,the bush administration and paulson handed out the big bailouts ,tarp. So get your facts straight you idiot. and as far as tax cuts to the super rich . Let me know if you benifit directly by all the jobs they'll create . You must have your application in to be a shoe shine person or butler or something.

DesperatelySeekingtheTruth

Your post is a desperate attempt at pointing the finger of blame for this situation....

Carl D....Your party had 8 years and focused solely on increasing US debt with war.

this guy does not want to pay any debt -thats the so called moral majority the would rather let people live in the street and not eat after there buuies in the stock markets created this mess

fiscal responsibility is gratitude, actually. How long should we keep paying people to sit at home? forever? No way....change your job, move, whatever you have to do, but i shouldn't have to pay for other people to do nothing

superbig -

You don't, so you can relax. The taxes you pay don't even cover what you cost the system......

With unemployment assistance, we pay people to look for jobs until they can find one, then return to productive work. The unemployed are not those who just sit - they are prior working folks who truly want a job - but there are none in many fields.

It is so obnoxious that people sit back and act like these folks want to draw $690/month which covers almost nothing instead of having a nice job that pays $2,000/month or $4,000/month or $6,000/month like they used to have.

Like Scrooge, be careful of what you deny others - when it comes to your tme, you may find less empathy based on your own mean spirited past....

the liberals who have bankrupted this country

the Democrats have ruined this country.

What can we show to the unemployed for the millions in TARP that was spent?

Actually, it was years of unchecked Republican rule that bankrupted the country. We had federal budget surpluses and a booming economy back in the 1990s. Next decade gave us two wars, a massive government program to pay ridiculously high prices for pharmaceuticals, expanded government programs and new government departments and beauracracies, and an idiotic tax cut that provided no new jobs.

By the way, of the $700 billion TARP program, all but $25 billion has been paid back. Who was it that insisted the bailouts be made in the form of LOANS? Oh, yeah. That was Obama. The Republicans wanted to just give the money away to their rich pals. Obama said they'd have to pay it back, and so they have (almost).

Saving the American automobile industry was genious. It not only kept the American automobile manufacturing industry alive, but all of their suppliers as well, and the people who provide goods and services to all those millions of workers.

Dorfy...You can see how easily right wing conservative love to reverse the truth. Why was unemployment insitituted in the first place? It was a penalty for employers who would lay hundreds of people off when there was no financial reason to other than sticking more money in a CEOs bank account.

Then, the right wing loves to blame the unemployed. Who unemploys them? Who makes that decision? That's the one who has to pay for his decisions. Because his decisions could conceivably cause masses of Americans to live on welfare. Another thing the right wing won't admit. People who live on welfare don't cost this country nearly as much as the 2 million Americans living in prisons. But get a right winger to address that one and all you hear is..."well what do you want to do? let them out on the streets?".

You did know what you were voting for when you voted Republican, didn't you? I wonder. No jobs, and now the minimal get-by insurance money is gone - so the base level of suffering in America goes up.

You seem to be missing the point, we don't have a way to pay for it. Many republicans will support the extension if there is a way to pay for it other than increasing the already astronomical deficit. Then you blame Bush for the entire deficit because he went to war, a decision that most Americans supported. How about blaming Obama for pursuing health care reform, which we also have no way to pay for, instead of focusing at the immediate crisis and trying to create jobs. No instead he implements programs that put more restrictions and cost on employers thus stagnating growth in the private sector. But yeah, lets all go and blame the republicans.

LOVE how everyone blames Republicans for unemployment. Small Business (myself included) will not hire more employees until ObamaCare is cut and I know my taxes won't be increased.

Also, we need to break the unions like SEIU. They are just breaking America.

How you guys managed to vote in someone worse than Bush is amazing.

stoneemall; Tell the Truth would you. I know that is hard for you left wingers.

Your party had the House, the Senate and the White House. You spents Trillions and told the American people if we spent it, unemployment would NOT go above 8 %!! LOOK at it now!!!

Your party is destroying America!!

To David regarding his Nanny:

I live in VA and the only way you can draw unemployment benefits when you are fired/laid off is if it is of NO FAULT OF YOUR OWN! Seems to me that stealing from your employer and getting fired for it should mean that the Nanny never should have received benefits to begin with. Did the unemployment office contact you when they were making their determination of benefits for your Nanny to confirm her claim? If so, then you should have explained that she stole from you thus no unemployment benefits....period!!

Seems to me unless your state unemployment office has a whole different way of handling this type of situation, you may have enabled her to draw unemployment in the first place!

DMAC, you seem to be spreading your own version of horse @!$%#. If Dubya's tax cuts are soooo great, why are we in recession now when we should have been rolling in the dough while the Repubs were in control?

KSte:

It's funny everyone that is on hear complaining about no work and trying to pay your mortgage seems to be able to pay internet and most likely their cell phone bill.

It is cheaper to pay the internet bill than it is to buy gas to drive every day to the library or the unemployment office to use their computers for job searching. Almost all jobs I've applied for require applications, resumes and cover letters to be submitted on-line. You can't buy Craigslist job listings at your local grocery store.

As for cell-phones, most people I know have ditched the landline for a cell phone. I use a Tracfone, which is a pay-as-you go phone, buying time in increments of 120 minutes for $20, and no extra for long distance. I save more than $30 a month. I can also have the phone with me at all times, for if when someone calls back regarding my job application.

I've gone through the listings for indeed.com, state employments offices, hospital job board, school careers board, craigslist, the newspaper classified, Safeways, Albertsons, and other on-line postings already this morning before I came to this site today. I do it every day in a town where there's 13% unemployment, retail jobs go to the young, and I am 54 years old. Oregon is a "work at will" state, where before your application is even considered, you sign an agreement that you can be fired at any time, for no given reason.

Now if you will excuse me, my self-imposed 15 minute break is over-- back to looking for work.

stoneemall

For your uninformed imagination, Bush did start the bailouts. But he only spent 1/2 of what was there in tarp funds. He left the other half for Obama to do as he saw fit. Most of that is still there having never been spent. It is just a slush fund for the Democrats. It was obama and Congress who did the stimulus. By the way, you should learn to spell, you may get a job or be able to improve your position in life.

People, you all can argue as much as you want that will not change the fact that this will create more job losses when companies are going to be forced to start layoffs because there will less money spent back into our economy, if you people can't see that take off those blinders and start to think for yourselves and stop preaching the party lines, it does not matter if you are an employee or an owner of a company this will affect you ............

From the NY Times:

Our Banana Republic

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

C.E.O.'s of the largest American companies earned an average of 42 times as much as the average worker in 1980, but 531 times as much in 2001. Perhaps the most astounding statistic is this: From 1980 to 2005, more than four-fifths of the total increase in American incomes went to the richest 1 percent.

For those of you who think it should be extended....Do you think it is okay for a 20 yr old kid who has worked two summers for the State spraying weeds and did not get rehired this past summer due to his drug use and jail time he served for getting busted. He has been getting $275.00 a week in unemployment benefits and qualified for an extension on his benefits. I know this kid, he went to school with my son. Every week he comes into my place of employment and withdraws his $275.00. He is high when he comes in and he looks at it as free money and the joke is on us. I keep telling him he needs to figure out life, unemployment does not last forever. It pisses me off every week. I can't wait until his benefits run out...no more drug money for him!

Rush is OK

That explains a lot....you're a small business owner....so you steal from the government on a regular basis.

rock n roller - I think you should try and start your own small business and see what it's like before just assuming all business owners are evil. I work for a small business and the owners haven't gotten a paycheck for a year. In the other small business I worked at before this one, when times got tough, instead of layoffs or staff pay cuts, the executives took 20% pay cuts and got 2nd/3rd mortgages on their houses when times were bad. (and we appreciated it and busted our butts to make that company succeed)

I've also worked for some greedy bastards before, but they weren't the small business owners....they were the greedy execs that took over when the original owners left.

You've got to be kidding me, is this the only person that you've read? I don't have enough fingers and toes to count how many people have violated that one!

Haven't you ever noticed that Tyler suspensions are one sided.

There was a lady calling people idiots and other names post after post after post and she never got suspended or deleted. I went and read other post by this woman and anyone that disagrees with her she calls all sorts of names and not one suspension.

I will probably get suspened now!

Ron-1861300

Great Post!!!

This is 100% a DEMOCRAT problem. They still control both houses, and if they simply agreed to use money that is available rather than adding to the debt, the Republicans will vote in favor of extending benefits.

Make no mistake - the game players here are Democrats. They want to advertise in the next election that Republicans ended extended unemployment at Christmas plain and simple.

Anyone dim enough to fall for the Democrat shlt sandwich deserves the bad taste.

To Desperately Seeking the Truth:

It's nice to know that there are seeing beyond the bought sound bytes with this past election. Will the Voters ever learn ?????

John Smith:

You have definitely got it wrong!! While this remaining Congress is Dem, there are more than enough for the Grinch Obstructionist Pimps to filibuster and block the legislation, which is exactly what the Republicans did done last night with the unemployment compensation. So before spouting from the mouth, get your facts straight and up to date!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is it that this site doesn't allow you to make corrections within their allotted time, esp. when the screen correction is showing along with the count down?? Very slow and not able to provide properly for the heavy flow of traffic!!

Small businesses are not the problem. BIG Business is the problem.

I feel so sorry for people in positions of having to have a job. what many are not seeing is they are being forced to take jobs paying half of what they use to make with higher cost of living. something is not right.

because even when every single dem votes for it, its still not enough votes ha ha!! obama and the dems are finished!!

Gman1...According to what I've seen of the Senate and House on cable TV, Republicans are not willing to budge on extending unemployment that will put another 2 million people in soup kitchens. Who put these people out of work? Bush's tax credits that allowed businesses to offshore American jobs.

If it was up to me? Every Ahole CEO who took that money in 2001 to hire and create jobs and didn't should be forced to pay American taxpayers back. All that money did was help them afford to offshore our jobs.

Now, the Biggie Piggies at the top have no where else to get money for their next year's bonuses and salary increases except to continue to layoff more workers. Is that good business? No. It's self-serving greed.

ok mr limbaughger... your tax cut party got us here over 8 years.... now get our loafing butts out of the house with all the jobs we can go to that were lost and are going to be ready with the profits you pocketed and will invest in the country... oh you saved your tax money and bought some more bank stocks

Limbaughger you must be in the entertainment industry or some other type of work that doesn't produce meaningful goods and services. Anyone who owns or runs a business (big or small) knows that it takes consumers to stay alive. For every $1 spent on unemployment checks $2 or more goes directly back into the economy (gas, groceries and yes, even car insurance for those driving to interviews). Your comments are not very useful.

gman 1 , the dems are still in power in the senate, but it doesn't matter because the republicans blocked the extension ,the dems wanted to pass the extension.

Jan...Don't you know? Conservatives like to earn their living the old fashioned way...price gouging at the pumps, grocery stores, the hospitals and doctors offices. That's how they stay rich. Find me a single billionaire who got that way without employees or customers. There is no such animal unless Mommy and Daddy passed down the wealth.

What you are seeing right now in this country is greed gone nuts. The insatiable greed is killing the economy. Salaries for the top 1% are higher than anywhere in the world. But, typical for conservatives, the Trickle Down they never talk about is the ripple effect of taking from the bottom and middle and then trickling down more and more of the tax burdens to those who earn less and less.

Yes... also I seem to remember that part of the current recession began when gas prices topped out at about $4 per gallon. Now at almost $3 per gallon I think everyone is forgetting how this is still affecting consumer spending. The media is strangely silent on this....

Due to the rules of how the Senate operates, the Democrats HAVE to have some Republicans agree to any legislation. They do NOT have a super majority.

Jan...One NJ billionaire has always touted "flat tax". Now, think about what would really happen. The guy earning $100,000 gets 10% tax rate just like the guy who earns $10,000. No difference? Not until the guy earning $100,000 wants a salary increase and starts increasing the costs of necessities for the guy earning $10,000. Whose salary will erode faster then?

Yet, you have the rich constantly flim-flamming the working poor and middle class out of money that erodes their paychecks. A rich man can afford $200 a week to fill up his SUV. A poor man buys a $15,000 vehicle he'll keep for 5 or more years that costs $30 a week to fill up. But, the rich man is Big Oil and not satisifed with his salary. So up go gas prices he can afford but the rest of us can't.

These same rich asses don't mind Americans working for 3rd world salaries. But just don't dare try to stagnate their salaries back to 1971 levels like ours or suggest they get paid like 3rd world CEOs.

Or they both purchase a Chevy Volt and the $4k tax on the purchase is 40% of the $10k earner's salary and 4% of the $100k earner's salary.

ewent, 10% of $100,000 is $10,000 and 10% of $10,000 is only $1,000. Not the same at all! $10,000 is 900% more than $1,000. Quite hating the "rich" you don't know and learn to progress on your own. You liberals love the Class Warfare. It's not doing any good and it's getting so old. The poor do not write Pay Checks! If you extend unemployment, you cost businesses more in unemployment insurance, so they loose more and can't afford to hire. The unemployed don't want jobs to go away, they want them to grow and give them a job, not a hand out!

ZipZag...I stand by my point. When the man who earns $10,000 gets an increase in his property taxes, his healthcare insurance, the cost of groceries, gasoline and education for his kids, assuming your Ahole conservatism doesn't assume denial of education for all that is, who benefits if not the biggest feeders at the trough. One thing no conservative is good at is math. You have sooooo much money that you cannot possibly fathom what a measly $25 increase in rent can do to a salary far lower than yours. Don't talk about liberals and class warfare when you conservative elitist overprivileged created it.

One thing you leave out is that guy making $10,000 pays no income tax and is probably on food stamps

again ewent, when property taxes go up on a $100,000 home by 2% it costs them an additional $200, it goes up on a $400,000 home as well and they pay an additional $800, 400% more. You can stand by your feelings that the rich aren't punished as much as you like, but we're all in the same boat here. No one gets better with increase costs!

ZipZag,

The point regarding taxation is not actual dollars - it is the amount taken out of the total needed to spend for BASICS.

If the guy making $10k pays $1k of taxes - that is money he needed to buy food for his family. The guy making $100k pays $10k - which is more - but still has $90k to cover food, wine, private schools, house payments, property tax on his larger home, his BMW and trips to Cozumel.

With a flat tax, the rich pay more, but are not punished as much, because they do not have to forego the basics to pay their taxes as the poor would under such a plan.

It is also better for the economy if the poor are taxed less. Every dollar they get goes right back into the economy and results in the multiplier effect. The wealthy save more or invest, so their income is not recirculated as quickly - thus does not have as strong a multiplier effect. The wealthy can live well and prosper :o) at a tax rate that will injur a poor wage earner.

TRUTH.

Dorfy...Thank you. You said it better than I could.

FormerDem...Not true. Property tax rates in my state are based on a per dollar amount per square foot of land owned. So, my tax rate is the same as the guy who owns the McMansion. The difference is that I have not had children in the school system in 2 decades and 85% of my property taxes pay for that kid who lives in a McMansion McMommy and McDaddy can afford. Too bad they don't have their priorities straight. Education first. McMansion second.

I paid school taxes for 3 years before either of my two kids were born and for 2 decades after. The difference is today's school tax rate is ten times what it was when my kids were in school. Tell me again who is getting it stuck to them.
In my view? If you can afford a $600,000 McMansion, 2 SUVS, cheerleading school and karate classes, you can pay for your own kid's education and stop forcing seniors to pay for something they can't afford.

The truth(does any P.C. remember what the truth is)is that millions of these guys are not going back to work until the "unamerican"federal gov't cuts off the money! I've talked to plenty of folks who've been on unemployment for two years, no getting up in the morning, no putting up with supervision, still eating good, why would they screw that up? Some of my friends are even using this free time to try to get on disability! It's a fact, the entitlement brainwashing of the last 40 years has killed American will to work!

LegalTexanGal...Sorry but if you ever left the state of Texas, you'd see millions of out of work Americans who no longer have a company to work for. What does offshoring mean to you? To most of those unemployed, they know it means that American companies are in foreign countries. How about you go and tell China to stop buying rights to Texas oil fields so you don't lose your job? I understand CNOCC has purchased a couple of hundred thousand acres of oil fields to develop with rights to drill.

ewent... America needs to break the unions. Teachers unions are killing education. Superintendents of school systems who make $175,000 retire receive benefits then are rehired at $165,000 double dipping. Teachers do it too, then when Tax Levy's are passed, it doesn't go to kids, it goes to teachers raises. I claim BS!

AND - Obama is in bed with big unions, so all of you blaming Republicans, point the finger back at your party. Obama is doing nothing to stop them. OBAMA voted to not tax unions. I'm taxed and so should they! Oh, they paid him off so that's OK to dems.

Doofy, it is about the dollars! You are defining what YOU think is fair. The guy making $40,000 shouldn't have to pay ANY taxes, because it costs him the rest for food, etc. but the guy making $250,000 has still enough to pay his taxes and have servants. It's NOT for You or the Government to decide! You want those that make more than you to suffer. Let me share that 40 years ago, $40,000 per year was "Rich", most of us were making $15,000, but punishing them wouldn't bring us up, it only knocked them down and it hurt us all. Remember Jimmy Carter? Geeze, you people are thick headed when it comes to this "social fairness" stuff.

ewent-

I really don't understand your logic. You are all for taxing the big guy to save the little guy, but to me it seems you are missing a major point. You claim that a higher earner, the 100K fellow getting a raise will hurt the lower earner, the 10K fellow because of inflation and such. What do you think happens when minimum wage is increased? When all the 10K earners get more money it hurts them the most. It puts small businesses out of business, and it forces an increase in prices across the board. If however one person who has earned a raise gets it it is usually granted based on the fact that they have done something to increase profits, so in fact the raise is already paid for.

As far as your description of property taxes, that is not how it is done everywhere. I think you are actually in a minority. Here you pay taxes based on the value of your home, so the people in the 300k home pay far more than someone in a 50k home, acreage has no impact.

As far as your comments on outsourcing, why do you think companies outsource? A large part of it is the demands of labor unions for more money and more benefits whether they are earned or not. The other reason is we live in an age where companies like Walmart have trained the consumer to demand more for less. At some point a company cannot produce here and deliver for the prices that consumers are willing to pay.

"At some point a company cannot produce here and deliver for the prices that consumers are willing to pay."

That might just have something to do with the fact that American CEO's salaries are hundreds of times higher than those of other countries, don't you think? CEO salaries in this country have increased from 432 times the average workers' pay to 531 times in just 20 years.

According to Business Week, the average CEO of a major corporation made 42 times the average hourly worker's pay in 1980. By 1990 that had almost doubled to 85 times. In 2000, the average CEO salary reached an unbelievable 531 times that of the average hourly worker.

D Net's Total Compensation Vs. Total Return To Shareholders chart shows that total return to shareholders was higher for many companies whose CEO compensation was under $500,000 than for companies who paid their CEOs multi-million dollar compensation.

If the poor companies are having such a hard time that they can't hire anyone, please explain how the continue to support such exorbitant CEO pay and how they just turned in the most profitable quarter ever in the history of this country (over $1 trillion in profits!)?

No matter how big the top pigs get, you keep buying their argument that they're really just little runts. Good luck with what they trickle down on you!

Typo - CEO pay increased from 42 times the average workers' salary in 1980 to 531 times in 2009.

And now the want a tax cut, too.

Ever heard the saying you get what you pay for? In a competitive environment you have to have the best employees to have the best chance of survival. That comes with a price, and if your company can't pay it some one else is right there waiting to. What would you like them to do slash everyone's salary and start hiring whoever is willing to do the job for what meager wages they are willing to pay? Do you have any understanding the level of commitment and dedication most CEO's have to put in, not to mention that a 40 hour work week is unheard of for them. Why shouldn't they get compensated for that?

You people make it sound like you should be ashamed to make money, like earning a good or even exceptional living is something you should feel bad for. If you have the potential to be a high earner good for you, you should be proud of that. At the same time you've made it perfectly acceptable to take assistance. I don't understand you should be ashamed of being a high earner, and have no shame if you can't support your family? Seems a bit backwards to me.

LeahMarie - you need to slow down and read:

D Net's Total Compensation Vs. Total Return To Shareholders chart shows that total return to shareholders was higher for many companies whose CEO compensation was under $500,000 than for companies who paid their CEOs multi-million dollar compensation.

Paying multimillion $ salaries to CEO's doesn't get you the best people. It gets you the greediest SOB on the market.

I love facts like that. Total return to shareholders was higher for many companies... what is many. I find it hysterical that people are so easily fooled by "facts" like this. What is many, it is obviously not a majority because if it was they would have said that, so what is many? How about this... many adults believe in the tooth fairy. Of course I'm only talking about the 20 schizophrenic people in the local psych ward, but I get to define what many is.

I'm sure there are cases with lower paid CEO's who get a great return for the shareholders. Just like in some cases not institutional investors can beat the market, doesn't mean it happens often. It also doesn't mean that the ones who make more than 500k are greedy or doing anything wrong. What do you care anyway your not writing the paycheck.

Leah Marie says,

Why shouldn't they get compensated for that?

You people make it sound like you should be ashamed to make money, like earning a good or even exceptional living is something you should feel bad for.

Then why does the companies not want to pay that wage earner his /her wages at a desired amount in order to live. Your example of the high earners is delusional at best. You talk about the hours they need to put in order to make these types of incomes, while I'll enrich you with a little insight of that momentum. The average household will have both parents working their azzez off for a POS, while they struggle by and he lives like a king.

Most of the CEO's at Enron did what the later have, wreck a corporation, cost a lot of people their entire retirement savings and yet still walked away with millions in bonuses. Hmmm is this all the hard work they are putting forth.

Is the wallstreet rip off to America again the guist you are calling hard work I mean after all they did take a long time and effort to figure up this scheme to rip off America with all of their politician buddies to help bail them out and yet walked away with millions of dollars. Yet how many of these individuals have even been charged much less prosecuted, if this was a poor man doing this he'd already been tried and convicted of embezzlement.

The rich for way too long have had the revelance of a double standard in this country just like a third world country, where money buys the very laws they create to put the majority in prison. It's time now for all the real citizens of this country too exaborate the truth to these idiots. This is not Great Britan so tell the kings and queens to go home, or, better yet send them home. Oh I almost forgot most of them don't even live in the states and yet control our very government.

Listen it's really not a d/r issue, it's what is normally known as greed and it goes from the top to the bottom of the food chain. Everyone keeps saying what about physical responsibility, hey I'm all for it so when do we take those responsible for allowing this to happen to the country out for their hanging?

Least you have millions of dollars you too will secumb to those whom have only used you for their agenda. When they are done with you, you'll be put to the curb as well.

Why does what a private company pay their CEO have to do with anything? If the stockholders (you know, the OWNERS) think the CEO pay is a good investment, and if paying him/her causes the company to grow, to add jobs, to generate stock gains, pay dividends (ALL TAXABLE) seems to me they are smart business owners. Now if the CEO doesn't perform, they get fired - granted, I agree many seem overpaid, and their parachutes are ridiculous to my way of thinking, but I do not want to live in a country where the mob decides how much I get paid, or how much I pay someone, or how I spend my money.

It's funny all the people who think 35%federal income tax + 10% or sometimes even more in state taxes, plus city taxes in some of the really cool cities equates to not taxing some rich guy enough. Add sales tax, and a variety of other taxes, and if you don't think this is excessive, you are either really selfish, extremely lazy, or quite light in the loafers.

If you want to criticize tax loopholes, your democrats could have fixed that in the past 2 years and didn't, so the party of the rich seems to be the democrats.

Do a little homework on taxation and revenue - increase taxes, revenues will fall to the government, this is not a zero sum game. So you little whiny children need to re-think your strategy, because most folks understand that the only way we grow the economy is to leave taxes alone, and get out of the way of private enterprise.

And in the states where this happens, unemployment is far lower than the much more enlightened states like where I live in CA - where are actual unemployment in the central valley is approx 17%. Real enlightened.

Dividends are taxable as capital gains, which only get a 15% tax rate. That's a lot less than middle income people pay on their EARNED income. AND they're not subject to SSI or Medicare taxes (another 7.65% that working people pay.)

Those multimillion $ CEO salaries could (and should) pay a whole lot of actual WORKERS' salaries. If one pig eats the whole trough, there's none left for the rest of us, capiche? That's money that comes out of the pockets of American workers, just as surely as those taxes you whine about.

Actually, an increase in the top rate would lower the incentinve to put all that compensation at the top, resulting in slightly improved pay equity. That would also increse economic activity, as those in the lower tax brackets would be more likely to spend the money, and would spend it sooner.

I always amazes me how seemingly intelligent people can focus like a laser on taxes, and completely ignore revenue / income. I would gladly pay the tax rates from 2000 if that meant we could have the economy of 2000.

CEO's salaries have been beyond comprehension for years now. Also, something that has been going on are individuals who raid companies, selling off the profitable areas and letting the rest go to hell while they laugh all the way to the bank.

Pensions are another untenable situation, ditto unions demanding more money and benefits from corporations without regard for whether market or consumer demands are enough to make a company profit.

Overseas jobs outsourced and now Caterpillar corporation is importing employees from India, giving them a place to live, a small amount of money until they're trained and then putting them to work for the same money that they pay american workers. Why is this?

Additionally, a lot of jobs now are mechanized and require very little labor and that labor is generally to run the equipment for the assembly line. Machines can do in a few hours what it took a person several days to accomplish.

Also, the cost of living has gone up with inflation and salaries rose to compensate for that. Now the inflationary costs are still high but the salaries have dropped. The government can't do everything or be everything to everyone. Looking to the government for help is alright in the short run but what happens when the government goes broke? Like trying to get water out of a well that's quickly running dry and no rain in sight.

those people need more tax cuts to create jobs, don't you know anything about jobs?

Tax cuts help nothing. Unemployment benefits create and support more jobs per dollar than a tax cut. Why is alright to cut benefits for the unemployed but its okay to cut taxes for businesses. Isn't cutting taxes also spending?

Did you know that tax receipts from the Rich increased when there were tax cuts during the Kennedy and Regan presidencies? The Rich will find shelters to avoid the taxes. Money into the government goes no where. When the rich have more money they invest it. Guess where that investment goes? It creates more jobs. Look at the TARP? It didn't create anything.

It's funny, they had these tax cuts for years and they still haven't created the jobs. I don't buy this.

limbaugher...Get an education before you post. Bush gave corporations billions in 2001 to hire and create jobs. According to all government records, only 1% of it was used to hire and create jobs.

It's time for people like you to stop repeating contorted truths. CEOs know that if they lay off 10,000 workers earning $50,000 annually, that money provides them with a fat bonus they can't get because they've already overpriced their products and services.

So...CEOs who earn 500 times what they paid their lowest paid employees got those salary increases the only way that remained....layoffs and using cheap foreign labor to replace American salaries. Deny it...go ahead. But the GAO records prove otherwise.

finobody...what makes you think that stopping these tax cuts for the rich will help....There is a ridiculous disdain for the rich, but they are the ones who have businesses and employ people...Screwing them out of these tax cuts will only affect their willingness to create new jobs...Your suggestion is very short-sighted...

Limbaughger,

Your argument is a bad one, much like the greedy Republicans.

Tax cuts don't create jobs. If they did, there would be lots of jobs out there because the Bush tax cuts are still in place until the end of the year. But there aren't! And if this argument were true, then NO taxes would create millions and millions of more jobs. But then millionaires and billionaire wouldn't pay taxes and everyone else in the country would. Is that your argument? Don't tax millionaires and billionaires because they create jobs? That's your argument's absurd conclusion.

Just ask Warren Buffett and he'll tell you that he pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Limbaugher, you have bought into the Republican balderdash. They have duped you in thinking that millionaires and billionaires need the money.

ctdad...Reality time. If the rich were going to create jobs, where were they when 10,000 people lost theirs in 2004? Where were the jobs they created in 2008 when 8 million people were out of work. The rich create jobs alright. Jobs in foreign countries where they don't have to pay American salaries, healthcare benefits or pensions. Ask any employee from India, Mexico or China how much better off their economies are now that American CEOs sold our jobs to their countries.

ewent....Here's reality...Jobs are out there...They may be contract and not perm...but you need to go where the work is to gain employment....Jobs are out there, but they pay less....Bottom line, when you lose your job, you get a new job, and that's to find work...that's it...you do whatever it takes get work....

Outsourcing is a ugly reality and am well aware of its impact, but that does nothing in addressing any individuals willingness to do whateveris necessary to find work...

Your argument does nothing but to distract...

"let the tax cuts for the rich expire". This is more of the old class warefare you liberals love. The "rich" you envy are not your problem. Your problem is your own. If you are not where you wish to be, punishing others will not get you there. Try to let your neighbor keep what he makes and you keep yours. Quit trying to take from him what you did not earn and spend it the way you want. IT'S NOT YOUR MONEY. Go get your own and you'll be free to give it away to those you like.

ctdad...Okay...So if you are sooooo knowledgeable about where the jobs are...let's hear it. Where are they? At McDonald's? Walmart? You sit pretty in your cushy job and look down your nose at those who aren't in your position. Until YOU lose your job.

Let me clue you in. If you're an engineer with a secondary degree, you won't find a job unless you leave the country. Is that what you are suggesting? All Americans give up their citizenship and live in a foreign country? If you are a degreed chemist, your chances of finding a job in the US is zip. Same with accountants. Most accountants go the entrepreneural route rather than wait two or three years for anything to open up in the financial industry.

Unemployment benefits help create and support more jobs??? Are you for real? Unemployment benefits are for people who are "UNEMPLOYED"! That means they don't have a job, therefore there is no job created!

You need to get off the Pelosi and Obama Kool Aid wagon and come back to reality.

I have no problem assisting those they are truly looking for work, but there needs to be some oversight into those that are sitting on their brains collecting from the taxpayer!

ewent...actually I am knowledgeable....Here's what you do...1st...you create a resume, secondly...you go out and contact headhunters that deal with your respective industry...3rd, you post your resume and contact information on jobsites that deal with your industry...Avoid sites like Monster or Careerbuilder, they are a waste of time....4th, you follow up DAILY..5th, if possible, try to find training seminars, hopefully inexpensive, that will help you become more marketable...

Jobs are not going to fall in your lap...Now, more than ever, people need to step and really work to find a job...The position that crosses your path may not be a permanent position, but its a job nonetheless. You may even need to commute out of state for work.

This is what YOU need to do to get out of this unemployment rut...It's reality...gov't doesn't give a sh$t about you or I, they are simply trying to gain political strength...

ctdad...You are preaching to the pulpit. I was a personnel recruiter for 4 years in a technical recruiting firm from 1978 to 1982. I wrote resumes for a woman who became a liaison to a governor. Several of my friends from that technical recruiting firm are still in recruiting. They tell me it has never been as bad as it is now not even during the Reagan Recession in the early '80's.

By the way, I'm what Bush called "uniquely American", I have a full-time and 2 part-time jobs. I'm an accounting and office manager (on vaca this week) and freelance published writer and SEO copywriter. I earn enough money to keep the bills paid but I'm sick of having it wiped away by the greediest among us. I live simply so others can simply live. You couldn't do what I do on my salary. That's why I despise what these greedheads are doing. Any man who can't learn to live on $800 a day is a jackass. Throw it my way. I'll show him how to do it on a fraction of that.

ewent....It's Q4....If you were a recruiter, you know full well this is a slow time for jobs...they are limited, but they are out there....come Feb, you will probably seen an influx of jobs...not fulltime, but jobs nonetheless...I've been in IT for over 20 years and have been down this road many times, during this time, I've come to understand the job climate and what is necessary to be one step ahead of someone who his vieing for the same job as I...I go to work everyday wondering if my badge still works...It sucks...no one is immune...

It appears to me, based on what you indicate, that you may be incorporated, which if you are, makes you eligible for significant tax breaks...I don't think you are in as bad of a situation as you illude to...

ctdad....Yes. Jobs are out there. But you also know that the only jobs out there are jobs that have unusual requirements for education or for experience mostly because they are hi-tech jobs people are not qualified for.

So, the choice becomes pay your rent or spend for additional schooling. No, I'm not incorporated. You can't imagine what a writer pays in taxes. It's not a business but it's considered self-employment nonetheless. I'll give you an example of the kind of taxation: Last year, I earned $3,000 for 12 months of SEO copywriting. I paid over $700 in taxes even though I work through a regular company that provides the writing jobs.

people who believe in extorting money to give to anyone , working or not working are thieves and criminals! What gives you the right to take money rich people have worked for?

LegalTexanGal...You should know about frauds....The biggest frauds are in your state. Tom DeLay? Ken Lay? Jeff Skilling? Exxon? Halliburton? KBR? How many of them take money from the poor and zap us at the gasoline pumps? Don't talk about fraud when you live in THE most fraud ridden state in history. Did you think those oil rigs are worked by Americans at American salaries? Or those illegals you Texans love to complain about who'll work for dirt wages?

I'm guessing your Big Daddah is "Big Oil" and daughtie dearest doesn't need a job? By the way, educate yourself on how much money was stolen from people by Madoff...$63 billion. Kozlowski of Tyco...a couple of hundred million. Ebbers...another couple hundred million.

Or, is it Texas law that rich men can steal as much as they like and get away with it? Oh...that's right. I forgot. That's why Mrs. Ken Lay got all of her husband's stolen money. Money he stole from 33,000 Enron employees retirement funds. But, Texas is neat as a pin about making sure wifie most Texan got what remained.

". . . rich people have worked for?. . ."? Many are on inheritances which they have never worked for.

I've never seen a person making over $250k a year who works harder than a hotel maid making $20k. If we're evaluating merit by hard work, the system of compensation is upside down.

Are we still on this kick of hatin those who make more than you? Regardless of your job or your income. Worry about you and your family. If you don't like what you're doing or not making enough, go find a greener pasture, but quit trying to tear your neighbor down, thinking it will benefit you somehow. it won't. To the guy who's cleaning hotel rooms, doing a lot of physical work, it's nothing compared to the Auto Mechanic or Roofer, or Contractor, who have no heated or air conditioned rooms to work in, but they do it all day every day. Learn to love what you do and do not envy others. You get what you make and they get what they make and neither tells the other that they are wrong or bad for doing it.

No one should hate any one, including the rich. And in a good economy, the rich are also creating jobs. But do not lie. Not every single one earned it.

A lot of the media and all of the Democrats seem to forget one simple fact about the Bush tax cuts: they were passed in response to a recession occurring as George W. Bush and Dick Cheney entered office.

Moe Lane wrote an excellent post about the impact of the Democrats not extending the Bush tax cuts, but what about what they actually did.

We should not forget that.

The 2001 Economic Growth and Recovery Tax Act was George Bush's version of Barack Obama's stimulus plan. However, instead of creating a bunch of temporary government jobs and subsidizing the expansion of government, it cut tax rates, increased the child tax credit, increased the standard deduction for married couples, and increasing contribution caps for a variety of savings programs. The result? The recession ended in November of 2001.

But, September 11, 2001, happened as the economy was recovering and throughout 2002, the economy grew at an anemic rate. The Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 revved up the 2001 tax cut package and cut taxes again on dividends and capital gains.

The result?

Under George W. Bush's "tax cuts for the rich" the rich paid more in taxes in 2005 than any time in the prior 20 years. In fact, as the Wall Street Journal noted, thanks to George W. Bush's tax cuts for the rich, the richest one percent went from paying 25% of all income taxes in 1990 to 39% in 2005. The richest 5% went from paying 44% of all income taxes in 1990 to paying 60% of all income taxes in 2005.

Read more: http://www.americansforprosperity.org/072710-facts-about-bush-tax-cuts#ixzz16toWIoPq

But corporate taxes as a percentage of GDP are at their lowest levels since the 1930's:

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=263

Guess who's making up the difference?

RAF,

that's just it! those numbers are obviously left over from the great leadership and benefits GW provided the middle class.

IF, obama has his way those numbers WILL be flip-flopped and we ALL will be getting creamed!

the great leadership and benefits GW provided the middle class.

Harhahrhar - did that kool-aid taste funny?

The top tax rates in this country are at their lowest levels since the 1940's. I don't see any problem with turning that around. Don't you realize the bottom 98% of us have been making up the difference? I personally am tired of subsidizing their tax cuts.

If the Bush tax cuts work so well, why are we in this mess? After all, those rates have been in effect for almost 10 years. The Republicans are NOT proposing any tax cuts, just continuing the same rates we have now. It's not working worth beans, but they don't care.

BTW, another Republican idea - ending the Recovery Act programs - will result in a tax INCREASE for most everyone. So remind me again who is trying to raise taxes.

No not lazy. It's human nature. Why would anyone take a job that pays less than unemployment?

You are so amusing! There isn't a job that pays less than unemployment. Have you seen the other posts? (average check is less than $200 per week).

Not only human nature, but if you live in rural areas and have to drive with gas at 3.00 it makes no sense at all to work for much less. Not everyone's situation is the same.

Mattyj2733...I dont' think people believe these people are lazy, but I do believe they have unrealistic expectations, with some unwilling to look beyond their own industry and geographic location to find work...

Despite what people may think...there is work out there...the question is, are some of these people willing to do what is necessary to attain it...

ctdad...As unrealistic as a rich man whose salary is over a million a year thinking he's entitled to more even though it jeopardizes the economy of this country? Put blame where it belongs. How many CEOs ever break a sweat during the course of a day? Yet, they are flush with money. No man gets rich without employees who do the work that makes him rich or customers who buy what he offers. Unless Mommy and Daddy passed it down.

Time for greed support to end. Why should we bail out people who already have more than they need to survive? Why should we be saddled with unfunded tax credits that made 1% of the to earners 11% richer in less than 5 years?

It's time to stop all tax cuts for wealth. If you're wealthy, God Bless. Just don't you dare expect us to fill in the gaps for taxes you don't pay.

ewent....Follow me with this simple proposal....

- The gov't should offer HUGE tax incentives for companies hiring AMERICAN and not offshoring...

- The gov't should institute a national sales tax for items other than clothing or food...when you think about it...those with money are spending for these types of items.

- Increase taxes for H1 Visas working for domestic companies

- Provide tax deductions for interest paid against credit cards...

I guarantee that if these are instituted, you will see an increase in domestic job creation and a boost in revenue...It will also provide tax relief for people deep in credit card debt.

Regarging the Wealthy - What is it about the rich that cause people have such disdain towards....I'm not a rich man, but have friends, normal Joes, who've work their butts off and have become successful...It was not given to them...but they attained it thru hard work...Now that they've become successful, they are now being vilified for it...

You are talking the same BS as those who are unwilling to whatever is necessary to better their lives...

ctdad...Pay attention now...Bush gave tax credits to corporations who were offshoring jobs. To undo that, you'd have to get Republicans to agree to it. Since they are the ones who voted for it, it's highly unlikely that can be repealed. So, it will stand for the life of the legislation.

Why provide tax deductions for interest paid on credit cards when it's easier to reduce that 21% interest rate credit card companies charge in the first place?

As for those visas, unfortunately, you are either not in tune with the number of American companies operated by foreign owners who bring many of their own on those visas to work in this country. We lose twice. Once to offshoring by American corporations and again when foreigners buy up American companies here and only hire their own.

I don't disrespect a man who earns his money the old fashioned way...working his butt off. I don't respect what I've seen for more than 3 decades of the rich men who cheated their way to the top of that food chain. Sorry, but Corporate America is full of thieves, miscreants, corrupt frauds and all manner of sicko behaviors. Sound cynical? It is. But, it's born of personal observation. And from that I take a view that too much money is too corruptive.

ewent....Please stop the Bush argument...you compromise your credibility when you go that route...We're approaching 2011 and dealing with issues that need to be resolved....Getting lost in retrospection does nothing for fixing the problem, it only serves to distract and incite emotion....

Let me tell you about outsourcing and businesses...Contractors, mostly foreign-, are paid out of a CAPEX bucket and not considered as an operating expense...Companies thrive on capitalizing on costs....The fact they work offshore reduces that opex spend...If companies see incentives, that if accepted offset that save and provide a cost save, jobs will come back to the US.

As far as interest rates...your expectation is unrealistic...unless gov't steps in to regulate, Americans will have to deal with this BS..

We live in a capitalist society and yes, there is corruption and there are people out there who make obscene salaries, but that's the nature of the beast and nothing you are I can say will ever change that..

SH%T rises, we all know that...What Americans need to do is understand these facts and do whatever they need to in order to make a good life for themselves and family.

Sorry but anyone who would rather not work than take whatever job they can get, even if it's flipping burgers or scrubbing toilets, IS LAZY. Now if someone has applied for those jobs and is STILL unemployed then they may not be lazy. But anyone who refuses to apply for a job over "status" or "pay" is lazy.

And in response to the person who said "there isn't a job that pays less than unemployment" you are wrong. Hiring companies of independent contractors are not bound by minimum wage laws and many of us make less than minimum wage - and less than your unemployment check. There are also waiters and other people that receive tips that may also make less because they are "assumed" to be getting enough tips to make up the difference.

ctdad...Sorry, I find nothing reasonable about glib acceptance of status quo. I voted for President Obama because I was tired of being led around by the nose by those who have more money and make their money do all the influencing of our government. That's where you and I disagree.

Jobs may not come back. But guess what? Americans will have learned the lesson we older ones always knew....NEVER EVER rely on a corporation for a lifetime of job security.

But, you are quite correct about some outsourced jobs returning home. From what I'm hearing from some of my friends from India, Mexico and China, the employees there are fed up working for salaries Americans won't work for. Guess all that capital will go down the tubes when these foreign workers begin to demand higher and higher salaries that suddenly are equal to what CEOs wouldn't pay Americans. And, American CEOs won't have the kind of power to control like they do in the US. That's how stupid it was to offshore. The only result will be that anything imported to the US will see costs rising even higher.

Mattiej2733, you have the 'bottom line' in this whole discussion.

In cognito, servers actually do make more than minimum wage. They need to take what they make from wages plus tips and average it. If they don't make more than minimun wage, then their employer is suppossed to make up the difference. And most people who earn tips make way over minimum wage. I used to be a server and over the course of a year, my employer found I averaged around $14 so she took me off peak hours (Friday and Saturday nights) and I still brought home around $11-$13 an hour on average. If you aren't making enough tips to make up the difference, then you aren't doing a good enough job or the place is overstaffed.

And ewent, I do have one problem with you stating Bush gave tax cuts to cooporations that sent jobs over seas. Those tax cuts were that they weren't taxed on things produced out of the US and were subject to import taxes if they were brought to the US. This is in fact how most European nations work also. I believe you libs are just angry at the fact that they don't have so they want everyone to be even. And before you say that I'm looking down my nose at people, I have infact been laid off from two different jobs. The first time was in the winter of 2008, just after everyone did their Christmas hiring so there were no jobs around to find but once things picked up, I found a job paying half as much around March and worked up to my previous wage around September only to be told the company was going out of business in the Spring. They gave us a 2 week notice and I had 5 interviews lined up by the end of the day they told us and two other job offers within a week. There are jobs out there but no one wants them because they are below them.

i'm on unemployment since last aug. when the company i worked for decided they were not making enough money and closed up shop.

I had worked there for 8 years at a pay rate of 12 hr. That is not much. Some of you people think that we only want or are looking for this high paying jobs. hate to break it to you but some of us never had a high paying job so your theory is crap.

There are no jobs in the paper or online. I'm lucky to apply at a few places a week. there are times that i have to apply over and over due ot no new postings.

I live in indiana and i tell you no lie that the listings are so few and far between. 80% of the job postings online are fake work at home jobs and pay to hire temp staffing fake jobs. I don't understand why they let them falsely post up those type listings.

the other 20 % are for educated workforce in a specific field, not all of us can get those. There are no mc donalds jobs or walmart jobs or target jobs or anything.....When those type jobs do come up they are going to end up hiring kids, at least thats what i see.

I have only gotten one interview and one email response. all others just do not respond, i have been turned down by temp placement due to not any qualifying jobs...however i applied for jobs that i was just doing for the last 8 years.

At times i think that these places need to post up a limited times as a requirement, its the only thing i can think of as to why they never hire

also this whole 5 people to ever job opening is not true here, there were more than that applying for a position with myself and that was within a 1/2 hr and they were taking apps all week...

i am worried about the future. I have a mortgage and 3 kids and time is running out. I' be all over jobs paying 8-12 hr....only thing is there are not any out there or are so few that there are hundreds of people applying also.

All those people that say there are all these jobs...WHERE? I sure in hell can't find any by me and i also went to Illinois in may and found nothing there either.

I wish i had to only worry about how much more money i could save by tax cuts..

Hey GOP, where's the focus on jobs you promised?!?

@!$%# the tax cut sh1t and help us displaced workers and start up the economy

Wow, 8 years at a pay of $12 an hour? That is pretty good. The only time I made that was when I was a server at a restaurant. Then they promoted me to shift manager and it was actually a pay cut. The trick is you should've saved up some or noticed that your place was going to close and start to tighten your belt a little. Any place that closes shows signs before hand but people are either to dense or ignorant to notice.

About your job search. Are you checking up on your applications or are you just sending them in and waiting to hear back. Call them up and ask for the hiring manager and his/her name. If s/he isn't there, then give them your information to have them call back. If they haven't called back, call again and ask the next time they are in so you can call them at that time. If you aren't proactive in your jobsearch, you won't find a job.

And the 5 people for 1 opening is probably a lot less. Just because every job you see has more than 5 people applying for it doesn't mean there are more. Think of how many jobs you appy for. Most likely people will apply for many jobs so most of the time you are going against the same people for each job. I know I applied for 15-20 jobs within the first week. I knew my place was going to close or thought it was so I started bailing on things I didn't need to create a nice safety blanket so I got rid of internet, texting, going out to eat and other extra costs. By the time the place actually closed, I had quite a nice safety blanket so I took the first job I could find because I already knew I could live on less pay and by the time I worked up a little higher on the ladder, I used the money I had saved up to pay for a new to me car in cash that was around $2000.

Oh and by the way, all retail stores just hired a bunch of people as temps for the holidays. Most of the time, half of these temps become long term jobs.

@ jackal - one month notice is all we got. I didn't make 12 hr right away it took many years to make that. I started out at $9.50. It is not a lot of money at all.

We have a Unemployment rate of around 13% still so i know there are more than 5 people for every job. I look in the paper and online and there was no holiday hiring going on by me, trust me i looked.

Not sure if there was holiday hiring by you but nothing was added by me.

99% of the jobs want it done via online and there are no contact numbers.

The sunday paper by me are less than one page...on that half a page you have Fake work at home jobs, Fake pay to hire placement ads and then maybe 10 jobs that are for specialized experienced workers.

this economy and situation we are in is not normal. the lack of jobs and amount of applicant pool is worse than the media states.

can't get a job when there are no postings. I will continue to apply for what i can and hope that my resume is not in some dark hole.

I have tightened my belt, got ride of basic cable local channel plan i had, got ride of land line, we eat cheap food, grew my own vegetables and canned them, used my 401k i had, sold everything not nailed down.

We own two POS cars but i don't care, they get me to where we need to go. Don't have any luuxury goods or expensive cars. I have the internet for job searches and phone line/communication.

Sounds great to save money but when you take home enough to just get by you can't save anything.

To try and use " you should have saved some money" doesn't work, Did and tried but was all used up to survive in this terrible economy.

got rid, not ride...my bad.

its fine. Because I see it in the eyes of people all the time, what they're thinking, what's next, how it's coming down.

And I'll tell you this: It's not in 3 years, or 5 not even in 15 or maybe 20 years.

But when the time comes; they're gonna terrorize. And even if I'm old as hell; I will be on feet shouting on the blood bathe revolution that's coming.

You people think Middle Eastern guys are the problem...they are the terrorists?

When the @!$%# comes down, you'll see people terrorize like it's nobody's business. I really hope I live to see it, even though in the process, I'll probably be killed jsut because the situation will be so harsh. What will happen is that the military (which is by in large) composed of working people---white working people's sons and daughters, will see what the system is doing to their parents or their grandparents or friends/family and they will turn against the government and we will have a coup.
it's in the tea leaves, friends.

Anthony, I used to laugh at that, but I think history does have a tendency to repeat itself. You can only keep people down for so long, and then, what do they have to lose?

Funny how people want to talk about how "greedy" people who are against extending benefits are, instead of calling people "greedy" who refuse to settle for a lesser job because they'd rather take money out of the pockets of hard working people so they can sit at home and not work. And I'm not saying everyone on unemployment is greedy - if you applied to flip burgers and scrub toilets and you're still unemployed then you get sympathy. But if you refuse those jobs because of your "pride"? You're greedy.

Incognito...How about greedy people who won't accept a lesser salary than a few hundred million a year? That what you had in mind?

Some people just don't get it. A salary of $200 million a year is enough to pay a few thousand employees. What right does anyone who earns that kind of obscene salary have to think we'll bail them out when they screw up? And just what kind of entitlement is there to obscene wealth when you don't earn it without employees or customers?

ewent, you just don't get it. Stop blaming others and looking to control others. You can't, you can only control yourself. So what if someone is making $200 million a year. Who says that they can't? Oh yeah you and your liberal friends. No one should be able to earn more than others because that isn't fair to the lazy people who want their benifits to extend so they can go blow it on Christmas presents instead of the necessities.

American CEO's salaries are hundreds of times higher than those of other countries. CEO salaries in this country have increased from 42 times the average workers' pay to 531 times in just 30 years.

According to Business Week, the average CEO of a major corporation made 42 times the average hourly worker's pay in 1980. By 1990 that had almost doubled to 85 times. In 2000, the average CEO salary reached an unbelievable 531 times that of the average hourly worker.

D Net's Total Compensation Vs. Total Return To Shareholders chart shows that total return to shareholders was higher for many companies whose CEO compensation was under $500,000 than for companies who paid their CEOs multi-million dollar compensation.

And then there's this:

From the NY Times:

Our Banana Republic

The richest 1 percent of Americans now take home almost 24 percent of income, up from almost 9 percent in 1976. As Timothy Noah of Slate noted in an excellent series on inequality, the United States now arguably has a more unequal distribution of wealth than traditional banana republics like Nicaragua, Venezuela and Guyana.

C.E.O.'s of the largest American companies earned an average of 42 times as much as the average worker in 1980, but 531 times as much in 2001. Perhaps the most astounding statistic is this: From 1980 to 2005, more than four-fifths of the total increase in American incomes went to the richest 1 percent.

The poor have paid their dues. It's time for the rich to pay theirs.

Based on the development of wages and salaries over the years, $200,000 per year had been becoming rather common for some professions, something that comes to my mind after reading this last thread.

A point to keep in mind about these professionals; not all of them really have that much knowledge, just the 'papers' or the 'connections'. One case in specific point, is the management of the Los Angeles transportation system.

Until they can guarantee every person who wants a job that there's one available for them, they shouldn't be able to cut off unemployment benefits. Period.

Real, the problem is if they gave every American a job that wants one, the American person won't want the job because it will be beneath them. For some reason, I have found that the unemployed feel entitled to a high paying job instead of working their way up like everyone else.

The jobs have to pay enough for the worker to pay the average rent, utilities and transportation costs for the area they live in. That's only realistic. A minimum wage job would pay $15k a year working fulltime - not a wage most people could live on even if they didn't have kids. But even jobs that don't pay enough to make ends meet are not available right now.

Our local Costco got over 600 applications for a single cashier job they posted (paying $10 an hour, or just over $20k a year). That's desperation - a state many on this post seem to believe doesn't really exist in this country. Maybe because it hasn't happened in their family yet? Or just a lack of imagination and empathy?

And consider the situation of anyone with children - posters here seem to look at only what it takes for one person to live, but unless we go back to child labor some of us have to cover their costs, too.

I can't get even a menial job because there are others with more experience every time an opening is posted. Changing fields or taking a lower paying job only works when you aren't competing with thousands of others who have more experience in that field, or who employers prefer because they are likely to stay longer.

Ok Real, So I'll look at my situation. I pay around $500 for rent, $100 for gas for my car and my apartment pays for heating so I only have to pay for electric which was $50 when I ran my AC all month in the summer. So that is $650 per month for Rent, Travel, and Utilities. Aroun $7800 a year for that. Lets take that and divide by 52 weeks and then that by say 20 hours a week equals $7.50/hr they need for those three things in my area and mine are higher because I travel farther than most for work and have extra things in my apartment that raised the rate such as two-bedroom instead of one and first floor apartment. So I'm sure they could easily make it on minimum wage where I am. And if it is only part time, then get two jobs. And if you are a married couple, then both get that and then the second person's income could cover extra things.

Jackal50––I just want to say, $500 a month for a two-bedroom apartment with most utilities included is insanely cheap! I pay $425 for a crappy efficiency second-floor walk-up with only water and trash service included, and everybody I know is jealous because they think I got such a great deal. And I live in a city that is known for its low cost of living, at least proportionate to most other American cities. And you left a lot of things out of your list of "necessities." What about car insurance? I pass multiple cars on the side of the road everyday with the orange "no insurance" tag on them. Here if you don't have insurance, you have to leave the car where you are pulled over. It gets impounded, and you can only get it back if you show proof of insurance and pay the impound fee, and I think there may be a fine as well. I know a lot of people forgo car insurance, but if I had to commute, I wouldn't risk it. And it's great that your car is paid off and apparently requires no maintenance or repairs. You also left out food. A healthy, balanced diet is going to eat up a couple of hundred dollars a month. No health insurance (which you definitely will not get with a part-time minimum wage job), so preventative measures, such as a good diet, are essential. Then again, you may be one of those people who have that weird idea that when poor people with no insurance go to the emergency room it doesn't cost anybody anything. (I really hate it when people say health insurance isn't necessary because anyone can be treated at an emergency room and not have to pay) And I guess you have magic clothes and shoes that never wear out or get torn and need replacing. I could probably think of some more things, but I am starting to bore myself. My point is, you need more in life than just rent, gas, and electricity.

Robbie try reading all of her post and see if you don't get a different opinion on some of those issues. I'm thinking she has a very good life and just tries to comfort everyone into believing, living like a dog is good. Just like most of the poiticians on the hill.

Robbie- You obviously missed my point. If you have a part time job then you can pay for that stuff. Then get another part time job for the extra things. And I know that is a real cheap apartment. It is an old converted motel that no one would live in unless it was that cheap. Jobs that pay on commission/tips are great for someone starting out. If you excel, it is easy to show evidence of you doing better than your coworkers and can move up quite quickly. And food for one person is not that much. If you have two people, then you both get part-time jobs. And that was for just the essentials, car/health insurance is not essential. But thanks for putting the food in there for me. Still, everyone thinks they need some $10/hr full time job to make it and I was just showing you that no you don't, you just need to be more careful with your spending.

darrell-I hope that post isn't directed towards me. Because I have no where near a good life. Like I said earlier, I'm tired of everyone complaining that they can't find a job or no job pays enough or is part time, they never think that they could get two part time jobs to make it. They would rather wait for me to give them a handout instead of taking care of themself.

Jackal50, in your response is exactly what I'm talking about, is it fair to you, that you have to work like that when companies are recording major profits. This is the reason Americans are getting left behind and to what should be the prevalence of all of this? Is it not ok to demand a profitable enough wage to support your families needs? I mean after all aren't they making these profits off of Americans.

Outsourcing of work is not due to the people in charge not making enough monies, it's in fact not making enough profits. It's not about doing the right thing, it's about doing the greedy thing! To throw people aside for your own monetary gain is in fact greedy. This is what is really going on, welcome to slavery and your current policies in place to allow it. Just wondering who makes these laws? {sarc} for those whom don't catch the wave.

I'm only saying that yes we need to be responsible for our own selves, because it's evident you can not trust the people whom are supposed to protect you rights. Once again Taxation w/o representation. thx.

Yes they do have a majority........but......... there's this little thing called a fillibuster. Without a 'Super Majority' the other party can fillibuster the bill and it goes nowhere.

Why do people not understand this. It's NOT 99 weeks. It's extended benefits period. if your basic 26 weeks ends this week or next, then that's it unless there is an extension. Not everyone gets 99 weeks. And by the way for others that say take ANY job. Companies don't hire middle aged people that were making good salaries for minimum wage jobs. Given the choice, they would take a kid since they know the person would be out of place.

Oce...Let me give you a bigger clue as to why anyone over the age of 45 won't get hired if there are job applicants younger than that....healthcare insurance costs. This is undeniably the biggest headache for all business owners but hurts small businesses most of all. I've watched our small business healthcare costs soar into the stratosphere until now more than 35% of our salaries are paying for the HMO costs. This is a totally unnecessary situation caused by the greed of HMOs. Oh sure, they use the excuse that the number of people in an HMO pool and their use of their healthcare insurance is the main cause of the increases in premiums. But that's so much BS. It's also the reason no HMO wants transparency into what they are spending on high risk investments using slush money premium payments provide.

Again, behind every scam is Wall Street investing. That's why no one trusts Wall Street anymore. It's also the reason Republicans want Social Security, Healthcare, Medicare and anything else they can hand over to Wall Street to manage. It provides tons of slush money for their high risk investments. And, there's no real loss to the Wall Street gamblers because SS and these programs are usually payroll deductions.

Oh Geeze, here we are again on the Repubs want to put all the Social Security Money into the Stock Market. First, the Government has LOST money from day one of the Social Security program. The first recipient ever, put in a nickle, retired and got eleven cents. The Government didn't earn a penny of interest, it simply took the money from others to give him, like a ponsy scheme! Second, I am one of those who believes the Social Security Money I pay with each paycheck should be MINE to invest as I wish, instead of hoping the Government will get some other poor SOB to pay in enough to give me a profit. I will never get all I paid in back, because some other SOB claimed Alcoholism is an illness and he's getting SS Disablitly for life with MY MONEY. Third. If I can invest it and get a better return, why not let me??? Those who wish to continue to let the Government steal a return from others, can stay that way. That is the program Replublicans promoted. Nothing more!

And others are just plain full of democratic stupidity and always will be.

The republicans block everything that comes to the floor of the house and senate ,get your facts straight, it really is quite incredible how ignorant some people are. Hey , my neighbors house just got broken into ,it's your fault.

Yep, they work hard to stop any program offered by the democrats, regardless of the effect on the people in this country. I will never, ever vote republican again.

This simply a crock.
The Democrats knew that if this bill came to the Senate without being funded (simply added to the debt) that it would not pass. They could have committed some of the "Stimulus" (I use the term loosely) that has not been used and it would have sailed through.

Democrats are good at blaming, great at campaigning but lousy at governing.

Here's hoping that real compromise (from both sides) finds its way into the process in January, but keeping Nancy in charge makes me wonder if that is her goal or if she will try to keep Obama from working witht he Republicans.

We will see

In past recessions, unemployment extensions continued until the unemployment rate dropped below 7.5%. What's so different about this one?

Most people who collect unemployment are not lazy. They just supplement their unemployment by working jobs under the table.

that's not true so much anymore. Employers are required by law to issue a 1099 to anyone contracted for work. Anyone that does risks getting a call from the IRS.

Then maybe it's time for some of these folks to take a minimum wage job or two. I'm not saying it's fun to have to take a lower paying job, just that sometimes it's necessary. I have worked two jobs for the better part of the last 9 years (one full time, one part time). I'm not in my 20s, I'm in my 50s. I was raised by people who worked however much it took to eat and live indoors. I have lost several jobs but have only received 9 weeks of unemployment during all of my 35 working years (those were in the end weeks of a pregnancy, when no one would hire me). It's called a work ethic. I think some of these people need to get one.

How often does the IRS ever check on all these unemployed people who are working for cash jobs on the side?! Give me a breaK! I know too many people that love the idea of sitting home and getting a free paycheck. They stay in sweats all day, play on the computer, watch tv and even go to the bars on their unemployment checks. I am very proud of the people that go out and work more than one job and make a living! I am a divorced mother of 5 and have been working at more than one job for most of my life! Made a good living for my kids and now my 2 older children are each working 2 jobs each and making good lives for themselves along with one going to college. Yes it is hard to work more than one job but if you need to make a living you will do whatever it takes to get their. Waitressing, cashiers, stockperson whatever. If someone knows you are working 2 jobs and doing a good job someone will notice and hire you for a better job! I know I have done this and now I have a great job! Don't give up but give it all you got! It's called SURVIVAL!

I'm working hard full time and living on less than minimum wage and less than the average unemployment check. And if I get laid off, I will not be eligible for unemployment because I am an independent contractor. I will swallow my pride and take whatever job I can get. If I can get by and support my kids with less money and no unemployment safety net so can anyone.

You can get unemployment benefits even as a private contractor..you just have to pay UI taxes for it like all others do instead of saving/spending it...employers pay UI taxes for employees and a few states make the employer & employee pay UI taxes.

Its called an insurance..so if no pay no get!

@arealchristian - before 2008, I may have agreed with you. Since then, no way. I live in Michigan where unemployment is the highest in the nation, and i'm here to tell you there aren't even the lowest of low paying jobs available. If there are, they're probably part-time. Sorry, but this is not enough to sustain a household and family. You guys act like jobs are falling from the sky and people are turning them down because they've got it made. Do you really believe some of the stuff you're saying? Sorry, but I know some very good people that have lost nearly everything they worked very hard for and are definitely not looking for a handout. IF you're a real Christian, as you state, you would perhaps be a bit more caring. The little amount of money that the gov't would have to spend to pay these people is a mere pittance of foreign aid we give to every Tom, Dick and Harry nation that asks for it.

tony, then you aren't looking. I have been laid off twice in 3 years. The first time took about 3 months to find a job mostly because it was winter and just after they did the holiday hiring. The second time, I didn't even have my unemployment go through by the time I got a new job. Five interviews and 2 job offers by the end of the first week and by the time I started my new job, I had calls to set up another 8 interviews. And I live in Michigan. Also, I don't have any special training or anything.

And if you find two part-time jobs, that usually makes up what you were making. Most jobs start off part-time and become full time also. And about a Christian being more caring, it has been said God helps those who help themselves. So if you aren't helping yourself, then if by us helping you, you get no better. The whole give a man a fish and he eats for a day but teach a man to fish and he eats for a lifetime comes to mind here.

About people turning them down because they've got it made is pretty accurate. Why work when I can just sit around and be lazy and still recieve a check. About 90% of the people I've seen on unemployment (which is around 100 or so that I have seen coming in and asking for applications so we would sign their slip and never return the application) somehow find jobs within a week of their benifits expiring. Strange isn't it?

I am employed, thank you. And if you really live in Michigan, then you know how it was and how it is now. Sorry, but it ain't good and don't think the new guvner is going to do anything to improve it.

I'm sure he can't do much worse than the Canadian did. And it really isn't bad, see my post, most people that I see on unemployment choose to not be employed. Sure they turn in applications and send in resumes but they don't follow up on any of them. I know we have near the top unemployment but I see plenty of "Now Hiring" signs over here on the west side. Yeah money is tight, but nothing that can't be handled with smart spending.

Jackal (nice symbol for your ideology) - there were over 600 applications for a single cashier position at our local Costco paying $10 an hour. Get your head out of your gated community and look around.

I live in Metro Detroit. I'm telling you, it ain't good. Drive over here sometime and check it out, or pick up a Freep and read.

Detroit is a bad place, you mine as well get out of there. I'm not in much of a better place though, Grand Rapids is extremely corrupt at the moment. I have been to Detroit though for events and such but not for job searching and you are right, last time I was there, which was March or so, I didn't see as much "now hiring" signs as I see other places.

And real, so how many jobs do you think those 600 applied for? If any of them do a slightly aggressive job search, around 15-20 apps a week, then they would have done more than that in 30 weeks or so. And I don't live in a gated community.

Also, how many of those 600 know how to job search? I bet most of them just turn in their application and don't do any thing else. Like I said, when these benifits run out, they will be forced into the work force to find a job. Then most will find a job within a couple of weeks. Trust me on this one, when faced with no income, they will find a job. Just so you know, Americans are lazy.

But it would be great for all kids to get Christmas presents. Maybe Bill and Melinda Gates will see to that via another one of their publicity driven charity drives. You know, give away your money just not here in the country that you made it.

Those who are working under the table, and going to bars, with their unemployment checks, are living at home or are associated to a supportive relative.

Yup. It's all the Republicans fault for not wanting to add to a colossal deficit. God forbid the Democrats spend some of that earmark money they have set back for pet projects like START or DREAM to help out. But you're right. It's ALL on the Republicans. I can almost hear you bleating like a blind sheep over the internet.

Yup. It's all the Republicans fault for not wanting to add to a colossal deficit.

Republicans don't give a crap about the deficit if it helps their wealthy contributors. They want to grow the deficit with their tax cut to the wealthiest - the elite. Anybody who continues to believe trickle down economics works for anybody but the top is just stupid.

Yeah. We should totally tax the rich. Because it's not like they're the ones who provide jobs. I know I work for a bum out of a cardboard box. I'm sorry you think you're entitled to pay less in taxes then people who actually worked their butts off to be where they are.

If you tax the rich, they stop investing. If they stop investing to save that money, they stop hiring. If they stop hiring, unemployment gets worse. The economy completely collapses, and they take their wealth and move to a different country that isn't going to tax them into the ground.

Furthermore, you act as if these taxes are the ONLY taxes the rich pay. Most people get rich by owning businesses. They pay taxes there as well. So basically, you're saying they should not only provide you with a job, but they should get double dipped on taxes, because you think it's morally right to do so. Good plan. That won't make them leave at all.

You are wrong. My family works works their butts off and and have always been solid middle class. Plenty of the rich know they should pay more in taxes. When the rates were higher we had economic boom times. Back before Bush was president WE were in that top tax bracket. That top 2% will not help the economy, and there were plenty of business oriented tax cuts and incentives the democrats want. That top cut will add too much to the deficit but we will not get a big enough benefit from it.

http://factcheck.org/askfactcheck/have_tax_cuts_always_resulted_in_higher.html

http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2010/07/16/128564378/alan-greenspan-let-bush-tax-cuts-die

Even Greenspan disagrees with you.

So do other republican economists:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/06/opinion/06bartlett.html

The fact is the old economic trickle down DOES NOT WORK. We can sit down and find a new model for these new times, but lets not go on erroneous information. If tax cuts to the top worked why did Bush have such a terrible record on jobs? This link is up to 2004, but you won't find better job figures after that. Stop believing the fallacy.

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2004/04/b43958.html

But they have no problem whatsoever tacking $700 billion onto the deficit to give the top 2% a tax cut. Hypocrisy? - you betcha!

As opposed to the 890+ billion that was used to make sure unemployment didn't go over 8%. Yeah, that worked well. And that's 700 billion over 10 years, as opposed to the failed lump sum payout we gave for the "stimulus".

Or maybe they'll just die under the bridges. As long as we drive fast, we won't notice.

A little compromise on funding these extensions and they would have gone right through the process. As to killing Christmas perhaps, but continuing to add more and more unfunded spending to the debt will kill America in the long term.

Robert - When was the last time in the countries' history that unemployment extensions were funded in the middle of a recession?

Being unemployed at Christmas is no fun. For those who received benefits during the last 2 Christmases and expect it for a third Christmas, I hate to say it, but we can not afford to have Christmas if we extend benefits for another year.

bmilleroh, it's not funded, but don't forget, it costs businesses more in unemployment insurance with each and every extension. These businesses can't hire if their costs keep going up, but they are forced to keep their costs low to compete. It's killing the remaining jobs, causing MORE unemployment!

Yet we gave Exxon/Mobil a $1.1 billion tax REFUND last year, despite their record profits of $45 billion. We ship pallets of cash to Afghanistan and Iraq to buy the "hearts and minds" of warlords. And the GOP wants to give a $700 billion tax cut to the richest 2% in this country.

There's lots of things we can't afford, but unemployment benefits are way down the list. Get your priorities straight.

This article was written by some liberal. There were Dems who blocked this too. But what's forgotten here is that the Dems had super majorities sometime ago - but wasted it on Climate change, obama care, dont ask don't tell...

The fault is with the Democrats

Senator Brown and other Republicans want the benefit paid for rahter then simply adding it to the debt. The Democrats want to simply add more to the debt and move on. This is lunacy. The reason that these benefits were not extended lie right with the Democrats who knew that paying for the benefit extension was a requirement for Republican support.

Yes we can't add to the deficit as this is how our tax money is being spent right now: ($175 billion bailout of AIG update)

NEW YORK (Dow Jones)--American International Group Inc. (AIG) and the U.S. Treasury Department this week announced moves they are making as the insurer prepares to woo investors for the first time since its near-collapse in 2008.

Treasury on Monday said it hired investment banking firm Greenhill & Co. (GHL) to help manage its investment in AIG, which will amount to a stake of more than 90% after the government converts its preferred shares to common as part of its exit.

Greenhill's contract, released on a Treasury website, states that Greenhill will give advice on how best to dispose of the stake for at least the next year, and represent Treasury in discussions of AIG's plans to tap the capital markets in coming months.

For its services, Greenhill could receive more than $6 million in fees: $500,000 a month for the first year of the contract and $175,000 a month for any time after the first year. The contract runs from Nov. 18 to May 2012.

Hiheels

What does this even mean?

uh Robert on #17.2 -- that argument doesn't fly when you look at extending the Bush tax cuts to the wealthy--those cuts aren't paid for either, yet the Republicans want to continue them for the rich. Loved Buffet's comment on Sunday talk show: 'the rising tide just lifted all yachts but left the rowboats behind.'

alabama bush tax cuts aren't paid for? It's not your money! Lower taxes means you keep more of your money. Taking tax cuts away, is RAISING taxes, taking more of your money. If the Governement doesn't have the money, they should CUT somewhere like we have to. Stop the Government from taking more of your money to give to someone else! We have Churches, non-profit organizations and volunteers that we all contribute to that can do a much better job of caring for the unemployed, than asking businesses that are already close to the brink, to have to pay more and more in unemployment insurance.

ZipZag, that will not be true about the Churches, it their exempt tax status is eliminated.

As far as #17.4, and some others, see the movie "Inside Job".

The thing about the top tax bracket is that these businesses are NOT struggling to make payroll, or putting off investment because of their taxes. We are talking about individuals with NET TAXABLE income over 250k. That is not a struggling person or business.

The government is like a scale - expenses on one side, revenues on the other.

You can't say that we can't afford to keep unemployment benefits on the expense side of the scale while at the same time taking $700 billion off the revenue side by giving tax cuts to the rich.

Especially when the unemployment benefits cost half what the tax cut does. The GOP is just playing with words when they argue the rich's tax cut doesn't affect the deficit - it has EXACTLY the same effect as continuing unemployment benefits, except twice as heavy.

I am sick of hearing that we should tax people making over $250K more (and no, I do not make anywhere near that) and that we should extend unemployment benefits again. People do not pay in as much as they collect from unemployment. In fact in my state (Florida), we don't even contribute to our unemployment fund. It's paid 100% by our employers.

Small business owners would usually fall in the category of making over $250K. The so-called RICH people everyone is so eager to tax will pass that tax increase onto others either by raising prices on their products and services, cutting any employee bonuses, cutting benefits, not giving raises, etc.

Not exactly true. Even if the benefits should be permanently cut, the leaders send a nasty message by doing it at Christmas.

So sorry about your 1.5 year free ride stopping yesterday but buck up. it is the holiday and EVERYONE is hiring temps, or is that beneath you, and you would rather complain than act?

Who ARE you? Do you know that age discrimination is rampant? Many older workers are just not being hired at all. I am talking about people who have worked hard their entire lives and done everything right. I know someone who lost their pension benefits (that they paid into for YEARS) disappear with the company they worked for. Poof, it was gone. Do you corporate apologists even know what millions of Americans are going through in this economy? You throw these quips about lazy people and seem to live in some alternate reality where everything can just be fixed by wanting it bad enough. I don't think you understand anything about this economy or what everyday Americans are going through.

It is appalling to see how greedy and vicious some Americans have become. Concern for your fellow man seems to be in very short supply, at least for some of those who are still the "HAVES". When enough of the 'HAVE NOTS" recognize these people for the jackals they are, things will change. That's what happened after the Great Depression. Robber barons, beware!

Real, its the concern of others for their fellow man also. The "Have Nots" seem to only want a hand-out with no concern for anyone else. It is this strange sense of entitlement that they have that makes me dislike them. I do realize that some "have nots" are not like this but in reality, most that I have found are. And people that want to complain about how we should give them hand-outs are just like the homeless beggars, I'll give you a little food for you but I won't payyou for your luxuries. A lady in a small town that I live near just bought a bunch of cans of pop with her government money and then she walked with full cans to the return machines and proceeded to put full cans of pop into the machines. When she got enough money in there for a pack of cigarettes, she took the slip to the service desk and got a pack of cigarettes. I don't think I should be paying for this lady to waste a bunch of money on pop just for the cans so she can have her cigarettes. By the way, it made a huge mess all over the place and created internal damage to the machine. So when the "Have Nots" stop robbing the American people and actually do work for their fellow Americans, then we can all enjoy this place.

Just look at the people who are collecting unemployment that you know. Most are also working jobs under the table. When you don't have to pay taxes you can work for a lot less.

Seriously? What are they doing under the table? What exactly are these types of jobs? Please name a few ... please be specific. Let's see-- babysitting? Any others?