Quantcast

Should unemployment benefits be restored/ extended as President Obama wants congress to restore them ASAP.

True~Male 2014/01/04 18:14:54
You!
Add Photos & Videos
Unemployment benefits ran out for millions of American in Dec. Should they be restored or is the economy really that bad ?
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... 2014/01/04 18:36:53
    No, the economy is much better now and we don't to extend them
    Jackie G - Poker Playing Patriot
    +5
    Just no - they should never have been extended to 99 -125 weeks - All the stats say that these kinds of extensions just extend the 'sit on butt' syndrome - Cut them back to original weeks

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • bettyboop 2014/01/06 21:00:54
    Yes , restore them because the economy is still very bad
    bettyboop
    Reality is jobs are just not there.
  • GoDucks5 2014/01/06 02:47:06
    No, the economy is much better now and we don't to extend them
    GoDucks5
    +2
    Get a job. People need to stop voting for entitlements.
  • True~Male GoDucks5 2014/01/11 16:47:37
    True~Male
    I'll agree -
  • ..::localeye::.. 2014/01/05 15:51:16
    No, the economy is much better now and we don't to extend them
    ..::localeye::..
    +1
    There are jobs out there people just need to focus on what they want to do and get motivated to do it. No one is saying take a career in flipping burgers but people need to step out of their comfort zone when looking for employment.

    A motionless brain is a motionless body.
  • sbtbill ..::loc... 2014/01/05 19:05:52
    sbtbill
    +1
    This weeks Business Week Jan 6-12, pp24-25 has an interesting article on this. It points out that North Carolina is a good test of what will happen. The good news is that the official unemployment rate dropped from 8.8% to 7.4%. Business Week doesn't say it but we all know the official rate is about as accurate as the Pacific ocean is small. The bad news is that total labor force in North Carolina dropped by 95,009. That means a lot of people have at least officially given up looking for work. They probably can't afford, too.

    I think this Business Week article proves that the Tea Party idea that it will force people to look for work is wrong. It will just make the economy worse and hurt people.
  • irish 2014/01/05 15:08:50
    Yes , restore them because the economy is still very bad
    irish
    +2
    how bad can the economy be with BO spending how many millions on vacation? or keeping a war going? or funding subversives?
  • chaoskitty123 2014/01/05 14:05:36
    None of the above
    chaoskitty123
    +1
    While I have sympathy for the unemployed, we have a growing number of employers in Alabama fed up with the fact they have jobs and the unemployed refused to even apply for them. True, they are low wage jobs like working at McDonalds but you earn more than unemployment offers and to fill the work rolls, they're actually hiring illegals where they can and it's not excuses they're making about people refusing to work as employment agencies are saying they can't even give these employment forms away because people make excuses... but they have no problem asking for unemployment benefits and food stamps. As you may know, many in Alabama are anti immigration so that employers aren't very eager to hire illegals or immigrants that are here legally because they're finding that people of all races and beliefs stop coming when they do. But before you cry racism, where these immigrants create Hispanic restaurants or businesses where they undercut their American counterparts by cutting the expenses on labor... they're actually doing pretty good because this is what we want, for them to give us authentic Mexicana and to offer us a better deal on services like auto body work since state law mandates we must buy insurance and the cost of auto repair shot through the roof... thanks to the Repu...







    While I have sympathy for the unemployed, we have a growing number of employers in Alabama fed up with the fact they have jobs and the unemployed refused to even apply for them. True, they are low wage jobs like working at McDonalds but you earn more than unemployment offers and to fill the work rolls, they're actually hiring illegals where they can and it's not excuses they're making about people refusing to work as employment agencies are saying they can't even give these employment forms away because people make excuses... but they have no problem asking for unemployment benefits and food stamps. As you may know, many in Alabama are anti immigration so that employers aren't very eager to hire illegals or immigrants that are here legally because they're finding that people of all races and beliefs stop coming when they do. But before you cry racism, where these immigrants create Hispanic restaurants or businesses where they undercut their American counterparts by cutting the expenses on labor... they're actually doing pretty good because this is what we want, for them to give us authentic Mexicana and to offer us a better deal on services like auto body work since state law mandates we must buy insurance and the cost of auto repair shot through the roof... thanks to the Republicans rather than the Democrats ramming that law through.

    So should we restore unemployment benefits... only as a condition they fill out job applications.

    I understand how demoralizing this is for the unemployed and depression has set in for many of them. But something has to snap them out of this and make them get out there and do the jobs that need done until the economy improves and better jobs become available again.

    Create a law where people accepting these low wage jobs at the employment agency instead of unemployment benefits will be the first ones to get access at higher paying jobs when they become available.

    Wow, how difficult was that to figure out?
    (more)
  • wildemanne chaoski... 2014/01/07 16:47:46
    wildemanne
    man did you overdose on acid or something?? mcdonalds pays more than unemployment? dude grow a f**king brain and stop drinking the tea!!! bet you believe the tooth fairy visits your house daily with a bonus under your pillow??? and stop listening to rush already that old fata$$ is so full of $hi+ his eyes are brown probably as yours
  • C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT 2014/01/05 06:31:36
    Yes , restore them because the economy is still very bad
    C-ZAR™, Emperor of the PHÆT
  • MCA~AFCL~PWCM 2014/01/05 04:20:57
    None of the above
    MCA~AFCL~PWCM
    It doesn't have anything to do with the economy. Unemployment is not retirement! So many have just given up and are accepting their checks every week. I'm not saying leave them all to starve. The fact is, if you need unemployment for more than a year, then there's another program to help you. It's called welfare. Cutting unemployment after 18 months was a good move!
  • CuresCancer 2014/01/04 23:29:14 (edited)
    None of the above
    CuresCancer
    +1
    Restore nearly two years of unemployment welfare?? Are you effing kidding me!

    We are going into debt another 2 to 3 billion dollars each and every day.

    People need to create their own jobs if they can't find work. Or depend on family or charity.

    There is NO provision in the US Constitution that allows the government to take money from one taxpayer to give to another because the other person is out of work.

    The longer someone stays on unemployment, the less employable they become. That's just human nature. It is BAD policy to encourage not working.
  • Razorey... CuresCa... 2014/01/06 01:05:06
    Razoreye001
    The preamble of the constitution states that one of the jobs of government is to promote the general welfare.
  • CuresCa... Razorey... 2014/01/10 20:04:21 (edited)
    CuresCancer
    A list of what is meant by "general welfare is added." It's called the enumeration clause.

    Madison, who is known as the father of the Constitution, wrote it was preposterous to think the general welfare entitled the government to have carte blanche power to spend on anything it desired.

    Here's the exact quote:

    "With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison"

    Here is another statement by Madison on the topic.

    "I consider it myself as subverting the fundamental and characteristic principle of the Government; as contrary to the true and fair, as well as the received construction, and as bidding defiance to the sense in which the Constitution is known to have been proposed, advocated, and adopted. If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."

    Writing about the “general welfare” clause in 1791, Thomas Jefferson saw th...
    A list of what is meant by "general welfare is added." It's called the enumeration clause.

    Madison, who is known as the father of the Constitution, wrote it was preposterous to think the general welfare entitled the government to have carte blanche power to spend on anything it desired.

    Here's the exact quote:

    "With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison"
    Madison general welfare clause quote
    Here is another statement by Madison on the topic.

    "I consider it myself as subverting the fundamental and characteristic principle of the Government; as contrary to the true and fair, as well as the received construction, and as bidding defiance to the sense in which the Constitution is known to have been proposed, advocated, and adopted. If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."

    Writing about the “general welfare” clause in 1791, Thomas Jefferson saw the danger of misinterpreting the Constitution. The danger in the hands of Senators and Congressmen was “that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.”
    (more)
  • Sgt Major B 2014/01/04 22:49:21
    None of the above
    Sgt Major B
    +1
    They should never have been extended to begin with.
  • none 2014/01/04 22:18:32
    No, the economy is much better now and we don't to extend them
    none
    +2
    After 100+/- weeks it's time to stop, people have to go out and find jobs even if it's not what they had before, the longer they stay on unemployment the less incentive they have to work. I have been out of work before and I know that if you REALLY want to work you can find something.
  • dubbie 2014/01/04 20:10:27
    None of the above
    dubbie
    +1
    You got em addicted to receiving them , You dig in your pocket and pay them
  • sbtbill 2014/01/04 19:49:06
    Yes , restore them because the economy is still very bad
    sbtbill
    +1
    Many of these people are over 50 with obsolete skills and declining health. Business doesn't want them unless they have specialized skills that younger people don't have. We need to keep helping these people. The money we give these people helps the economy a lot more then tax subsidies to big corporations. it creates a lot more jobs.
  • True~Male sbtbill 2014/01/04 19:53:06
    True~Male
    I say ok --but let's repeal Obama-care first then we'll extend the benefits --We need to use Obama-care as a tool to leverage help for the poor and extend these benefits otherwise NO DEAL !!
  • Razorey... True~Male 2014/01/04 20:26:04
    Razoreye001
    +1
    The president has a way around that deal, The president could call a special assembly of congress and give congress a sort of presidential filibuster keeping congress in session until they agree to extend benefits. John F. Kennedy found a different way to pressure congress. He told the IRS to audit congress and said he'd hold them accountable for anything they'd find. The most indirect way to handle it is run public service announcements exposing congressman responsible for preventing the benefits from being extended and do fund raising to beat those candidates in 2014.
  • sbtbill True~Male 2014/01/04 22:05:24
    sbtbill
    +1
    That would hurt a lot of people.
    Obamacare
    is insuring lots of people who otherwise couldn't get insurnace.
    is insuring lots of people under 26 who can work at jobs without benefits as a result.
    is helping lots of small business provide employees with insurance who couldn't before.
    provided rebates for over charges to lots of people last August.
    had a poor roleout for the individual insurance market last October

    Everyone of those things has already happened.

    You opponents think there will be death panels - none yet seen outside of the private insurance companies who can no longer have them.
    Less doctors. Griping about being under paid seems to be an American norm.
    start up problems with coverage. Well most things have start up problems.
    Long waits Lets see in 2008 I had to wait 3 months to see a specialist. What is new?

    Really, it seems like you Obamacare opponents are getting more and more into a just wait we'll see them next year. Maybe so, but I don't think the Cubs are going to win the World Series next year either.
  • CuresCa... sbtbill 2014/01/04 23:33:00
    CuresCancer
    +1
    Please point to the page in the Constitution that allows the federal government (ie, taxpayers) to provide for unemployed people?

    Federal unemployment is nothing less than taking money from one taxpayer so that another person doesn't have to work for a living. It's a form of slavery for the taxpayer.
  • sbtbill CuresCa... 2014/01/05 00:19:33
    sbtbill
    +1
    First off if you work you pay for unemployment insurance. It is a specific deduction from your check.

    The general welfare clause and the 10th Amendment. Note the 10th Amendment say all powers not specifically delegated are reserved to the people of the US. Thus what ever we want to set up we can.
  • CuresCa... sbtbill 2014/01/10 20:12:08
    CuresCancer
    +1
    Madison, who is known as the father of the Constitution, wrote it was preposterous to think the general welfare entitled the government to have carte blanche power to spend on anything it desired.

    Here's the exact quote:

    "With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison"

    Here is another statement by Madison on the topic.

    "I consider it myself as subverting the fundamental and characteristic principle of the Government; as contrary to the true and fair, as well as the received construction, and as bidding defiance to the sense in which the Constitution is known to have been proposed, advocated, and adopted. If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."

    Writing about the “general welfare” clause in 1791, Thomas Jefferson saw the danger of misinterpreting the Constitution. The danger in the hands of Senators and Cong...





    Madison, who is known as the father of the Constitution, wrote it was preposterous to think the general welfare entitled the government to have carte blanche power to spend on anything it desired.

    Here's the exact quote:

    "With respect to the two words 'general welfare,' I have always regarded them as qualified by the detail of powers connected with them. To take them in a literal and unlimited sense would be a metamorphosis of the Constitution into a character which there is a host of proofs was not contemplated by its creators." --James Madison"

    Here is another statement by Madison on the topic.

    "I consider it myself as subverting the fundamental and characteristic principle of the Government; as contrary to the true and fair, as well as the received construction, and as bidding defiance to the sense in which the Constitution is known to have been proposed, advocated, and adopted. If Congress can do whatever in their discretion can be done by money, and will promote the General Welfare, the Government is no longer a limited one, possessing enumerated powers, but an indefinite one, subject to particular exceptions."

    Writing about the “general welfare” clause in 1791, Thomas Jefferson saw the danger of misinterpreting the Constitution. The danger in the hands of Senators and Congressmen was “that of instituting a Congress with power to do whatever would be for the good of the United States; and, as they would be the sole judges of the good or evil, it would be also a power to do whatever evil they please.”

    The 10th amendment recognizes powers of the State and the people and notifies the federal government they do not have any powers beyond those that are listed.

    Thus a FEDERAL employment check is prohibited by the 10th amendment rather than allowed by it.

    If a state or private individual wants to do these things, they can. That's why there is unemployment INSURANCE required by states. The feds are not allowed to add to or extend those payments, at least according to the Constitution.
    (more)
  • True~Male CuresCa... 2014/01/12 02:15:58
    True~Male
    I'll agree
  • True~Male CuresCa... 2014/01/05 07:48:41
    True~Male
    Make the Unions help pay unemployment benefits
  • sbtbill True~Male 2014/01/05 09:24:33
    sbtbill
    +1
    In some cases they do. So do employers. As I said it is a separate deduction on your pay check. Usually about .8%.
  • True~Male sbtbill 2014/01/12 02:14:46
    True~Male
    I don't pay into unemployment --I'm a school employee and we don't get unemployment benefits
  • Razorey... True~Male 2014/01/06 01:02:23
    Razoreye001
    Why do you hate the unions who's job is to be the protectors of the middle class?
  • True~Male Razorey... 2014/01/12 02:15:14
    True~Male
    I want people to be self sufficient
  • Razorey... True~Male 2014/01/12 02:23:36
    Razoreye001
    There's self sufficient and then there is throwing people to the wolves.
  • True~Male Razorey... 2014/01/12 03:06:31
    True~Male
    Yes and your point is ??
  • Razorey... CuresCa... 2014/01/06 01:01:16
    Razoreye001
    Right in the premble; "We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, *PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE*, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

    Why do you think their called welfare programs, it's because their purpose is to promote general welfare just like the preamble states.
  • CuresCa... Razorey... 2014/01/11 08:05:24
    CuresCancer
    +1
    I answered your question up above. Madison and Jefferson both adamantly disagree with you.
  • Razorey... CuresCa... 2014/01/11 08:17:16
    Razoreye001
    Well neither Jefferson or Madison imagined the world we live in, they might have disagreed but that doesn't matter in a world as drastically different as ours is from theirs.
  • CuresCa... Razorey... 2014/01/11 21:02:43
    CuresCancer
    +1
    Irrelevant. If a change to the constitution needs to be made, there is a process for it. Amend the constitution to include unemployment benefits. Until then, they are illegal.
  • Razorey... CuresCa... 2014/01/12 00:52:33
    Razoreye001
    The supreme court determines what's constitutional, if they haven't spoken out then welfare is constitutional. The constitution has always been a living document, it wasn't until Reagan did people ever see the constitution as so rigid.
  • True~Male CuresCa... 2014/01/12 02:16:53
    True~Male
    So very true -- Great response
  • True~Male CuresCa... 2014/01/12 02:13:47
    True~Male
    yeah I want to read it too
  • ✈SomeOldGuy✈ 2014/01/04 19:47:37
    None of the above
    ✈SomeOldGuy✈
    +1
    "Should they be restored or is the economy really that bad ?"


    The economy is really that bad. People simply don't understand how bad the economy is. Unemployment - the REAL unemployment - stands just under 25%. Visit shadowstats.com to understand.
  • Lady Whitewolf 2014/01/04 19:10:35
    Yes , restore them because the economy is still very bad
    Lady Whitewolf
    +2
    YES.... As long as the jobs aren't showing up!

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/10/31 19:21:29

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals