Lone senator blocks unemployment benefit extensions

**d.mcc** · March-01-10, 12:32 AM

I'm not sure if this has been posted, but it kind of angered me...

From CNN:

Washington [[CNN) -- The Senate adjourned Friday without approving extensions of cash and health insurance benefits for the unemployed after a lone senator blocked swift passage due to his insistence that Congress first pay for the $10 billion package.

**Sstashmoo** · March-01-10, 01:17 AM

It's gotta happen sometime, we can't keep paying people to sit at home. We aren't helping, we're enabling. The economy isn't going to recover any time soon, folks need to figure out how they are going to generate income for themselves. Ya know, like everyone else does?

**Philbo** · March-01-10, 01:35 AM

Senator Bunning is a nut job, even the GOP acknowleges that. Maybee somebody can beat his head against the wall and change his senile mind. Too, too, many people are out of work.

**oldredfordette** · March-01-10, 07:53 AM

Enabling? Have you looked for a job lately?

**johnsmith** · March-01-10, 07:56 AM

a lone senator blocked swift passage due to his insistence that Congress first pay for the $10 billion package.

Makes sense to me, they need to figure out how to pay for stuff before approving it. $10 Billion isn't chump change.

**ct_alum** · March-01-10, 08:50 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

It's gotta happen sometime, we can't keep paying people to sit at home. We aren't helping, we're enabling. The economy isn't going to recover any time soon, folks need to figure out how they are going to generate income for themselves. Ya know, like everyone else does?

Yeah right, you jerk - I suppose that you also believe that people are homeless because they want to be........While it is not usually my nature to wish anyone ill will, I hope that you lose your job and see what it is like to be "paid to sit home". Or perhaps you were born on 3rd base and think that you hit a triple? I repeat - you are an insensitive, ignorant jerk.

**Eastside** · March-01-10, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by ct_alum

Yeah right, you jerk - I suppose that you also believe that people are homeless because they want to be........While it is not usually my nature to wish anyone ill will, I hope that you lose your job and see what it is like to be "paid to sit home". Or perhaps you were born on 3rd base and think that you hit a triple? I repeat - you are an insensitive, ignorant jerk.

Agreed!

"Paid to sit home" what the hell does that mean? It's not easy trying to find a job in this economy. Try it!

I've been looking since May without success and the unemployment benefits are crucial.

**oladub** · March-01-10, 10:07 AM

The United States government is broke. Pigs have emptied the cookie jar. Congress and presidents allowed entire industries to move to China and now are borrowing money from China to unconstitutionally subsidize states to extend resulting unemployment benefits. The allegiance of our representatives to NAFTA and GATT is stronger than their allegiance to American workers. If this had been for the insurance companies or banks, the Senate would have somehow gotten around Sen. Bunning.

That being said, there are scores of other federal government spending initiatives that should have been addressed first. Where was Jim Bunning, or any other Senator, when Bush's Wall Street bailout or Obama's ineffectual Porkulus were being pitched? Where were all the Senator's when these wars were proposed and their funding bills always pass?

**ghettopalmetto** · March-01-10, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

The United States government is broke.

YOU DON'T TRY TO BALANCE THE BUDGET IN DEPRESSION ECONOMICS. Hellooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, 1938!

The United States has far greater credit and borrowing capacity than those who are currently receiving unemployment benefits. Yeah, let's force otherwise-productive members of society into the streets and into starvation because we just don't feel like it's necessary to assist them while they look for work.

Where's the leadership from Jim Bunning? Why isn't he proposing where to find the money for this? Unless, of course, his "principles" are more important than 30 million Americans being able to eat and keep a roof over their heads.

**oladub** · March-01-10, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

YOU DON'T TRY TO BALANCE THE BUDGET IN DEPRESSION ECONOMICS. Hellooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo, 1938!

The United States has far greater credit and borrowing capacity than those who are currently receiving unemployment benefits. Yeah, let's force otherwise-productive members of society into the streets and into starvation because we just don't feel like it's necessary to assist them while they look for work.

Where's the leadership from Jim Bunning? Why isn't he proposing where to find the money for this? Unless, of course, his "principles" are more important than 30 million Americans being able to eat and keep a roof over their heads.

The United States is broke because it already borrowed too much. Your prescription, as always, is to do more of what got us in the trouble in the first place. You don't say, "Let's get rid of NAFTA, OPIC, and GATT, impose some tariffs, and bring our jobs back home." No, you suggest going deeper into debt with China. You should instead be advocating that we vote every politician who voted for Bush's wall Street bailout out of office. You suggest we perpetuate the depression like Hoover and Roosevelt did by not allowing for a correction as in the crash of 1921. Roosevelt had farmers dumping their milk and burning their grain so people could stand in soup lines in the city. Roosevelt devalued the currency by forty percent so the government could pay for its expanding costs. The unemployment remained at 17% after eight years of Roosevelt's meddling. That's what you want?

It doesn't matter. China is trying to relieve itself of dollars as it gradually weans itself from treasuries. China has taken to buying commodities and gold. It's students laugh in Tomothy Geithner's face when he told them the lies which you believe and base your Keynesian fantasies on. The next step of economic ruin, which we have already entered, is to print money a la Weimer Republic and Uganda.

.

**ghettopalmetto** · March-01-10, 11:04 AM

Originally Posted by oladub

The United States is broke because it already borrowed too much. Your prescription, as always, is to do more of what got us in the trouble in the first place.

And what arbitrary criteria consititutes "too much"? The economy didn't go to shit because of deficit spending. The time to begin worrying about deficit spending was 1981, not noon on January 20, 2009. A little consistency with reality, please.

The remainder of your post is simply too rooted in hysterics to even merit consideration. Perhaps you'd like a little Focusin to keep your mind on the topic of discussion.

Do tell what your solution to economic recovery entails. Everyone holds onto their money? No one spends a damn dime? Send the unemployed into the streets and force them to beg and steal for food? Let the banks fail so that there's even less capital available for investment? Let the automobile industry collapse so that we have absolutely zero manufacturing capacity [[unless, of course, you count mobile homes). Balance the federal budget AND tax cuts? Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Even if you could unilaterally nullify every open-trade agreement, is this going to lead to an instantaneous rebound of manufacturing in our industry? Are we going to have unemployed people today who are literally working in a factory tomorrow?

How do you propose that we sell manufactured products abroad once we impose tariffs on foreign-made products?

We'd be living in a fourth world post-apocalyptic paradise in no time at all. Maybe that's what we need, though, before people like you will wise up.

**Detroitej72** · March-01-10, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by johnsmith

Makes sense to me, they need to figure out how to pay for stuff before approving it. $10 Billion isn't chump change.

Let's cut some of the bailout money[[disguised as aid) we send to other countries like Saudi Arabia, Israel, Iraq, etc.

**Detroitej72** · March-01-10, 11:50 AM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

It's gotta happen sometime, we can't keep paying people to sit at home. We aren't helping, we're enabling.

That sounds like a page straight out of the Compassionate Conservatives handbook. Which, by the way, is very un-Christian like.

**oladub** · March-01-10, 12:29 PM

Originally Posted by ghettopalmetto

And what arbitrary criteria consititutes "too much"? The economy didn't go to shit because of deficit spending. The time to begin worrying about deficit spending was 1981, not noon on January 20, 2009. A little consistency with reality, please.

The remainder of your post is simply too rooted in hysterics to even merit consideration. Perhaps you'd like a little Focusin to keep your mind on the topic of discussion.

Do tell what your solution to economic recovery entails. Everyone holds onto their money? No one spends a damn dime? Send the unemployed into the streets and force them to beg and steal for food? Let the banks fail so that there's even less capital available for investment? Let the automobile industry collapse so that we have absolutely zero manufacturing capacity [[unless, of course, you count mobile homes). Balance the federal budget AND tax cuts? Wheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

Even if you could unilaterally nullify every open-trade agreement, is this going to lead to an instantaneous rebound of manufacturing in our industry? Are we going to have unemployed people today who are literally working in a factory tomorrow?

How do you propose that we sell manufactured products abroad once we impose tariffs on foreign-made products?

We'd be living in a fourth world post-apocalyptic paradise in no time at all. Maybe that's what we need, though, before people like you will wise up.

We have been through this many times. You believe that government should borrow to start all sorts of hair brain Keynesian programs like Fannie and Freddie and when that doesn't work, the government should institute more programs to paper over the mess caused by the others. I, on the other hand, think the federal government should strictly follow the Constitution and leave it up to states to develop health care, housing aid, pay unemployment and whatever else they choose. Thats where the federal government bills its excesses anyway.

I would say the time to pay down the debt was anytime after WWII. It is mathematically now impossible to do so. Our softest landing would be to do some of the things I previously listed [[tariffs, a more humble foreign policy, reduce federal programs). In addition, because we are already past the point of paying off the federal debt as Roosevelt did, it will probably be necessary for the government to devalue the dollar - either that or send every American family a bill for $96,000 after President Obama is through with two terms [[CBO estimate). The latter would be to eliminate the annual $5,700 of federal debt interest that the average American family will be paying by that time.

Don't worry about selling our products. The amount of products that we sell to China, for instance, are dwarfed by what they sell us. Another variation would be to offer foreign countries to sell us duty free only as much product as they buy from us. Why do you continually stick up for other countries and TBTF bankers? Had the big banks failed, smaller banks would have purchased their assets at low prices and the gamblers would have been stuck with bad paper. Instead, politicians tranferred the banks' bad debt to our children. The Fed printed or borrowed trillion$ and leant it to the big banks. The big banks, in turn, loaned it to the Treasury for 4% interest. The Treasury bills us to pay the banks the interest. Pretty cool, huh? That is what you defend with your Keynesian nonsense. More went there than went to the unemployed. The banks didn't loan it out to Main Street. They leant it back to the government.

**ghettopalmetto** · March-01-10, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by oladub

We have been through this many times. You believe that government should borrow to start all sorts of hair brain Keynesian programs like Fannie and Freddie and when that doesn't work, the government should institute more programs to paper over the mess caused by the others. I, on the other hand, think the federal government should strictly follow the Constitution and leave it up to states to develop health care, housing aid, pay unemployment and whatever else they choose. Thats where the federal government bills its excesses anyway.

Why should we trust states to enact comprehensive health care when only two states have done so? The only way to both reduce premiums and to insure everyone is to mandate comprehensive coverage. You know that whole "pooled risk" thing.

States already provide housing aid and unemployment. How are they supposed to do that when 1) they face budget deficits of their own due to declining tax revenues and 2) have zero capacity to enact deficit spending? Again--you're literally trying to force people onto the street to beg, grovel, and steal for food--through no fault of their own.

I would say the time to pay down the debt was anytime after WWII. It is mathematically now impossible to do so.

As my high school teachers would say, "Show your work". We did pay down the debt after World War II. But then we had a couple administrations who decided that the wealthiest among us just didn't have enough money in their pockets. Are you willing to re-enact the 70% tax bracket? I am.

Our softest landing would be to do some of the things I previously listed [[tariffs, a more humble foreign policy, reduce federal programs).

Name names. What, specifically, would you cut?

In addition, because we are already past the point of paying off the federal debt as Roosevelt did, it will probably be necessary for the government to devalue the dollar - either that or send every American family a bill for $96,000 after President Obama is through with two terms [[CBO estimate). The latter would be to eliminate the annual $5,700 of federal debt interest that the average American family will be paying by that time.

So President Obama is supposed to fix, in four years or less, a problem that Republicans have created over 30 years? Please explain the necessity of your arbitrary timeline.

Stosh · March-01-10, 12:50 PM

Sounds to me like we need to cancel all of our foreign aid payments until we get our house in order. 26 billion a year.

**Sstashmoo** · March-01-10, 12:56 PM

Quote: "We'd be living in a fourth world post-apocalyptic paradise in no time at all. Maybe that's what we need, though, before people like you will wise up."

That's what it usually takes to effect some sort of change. Simply patching a problem is not fixing it.

Quote: "Enabling? Have you looked for a job lately? "

When I lost my job in the late 70's, there were absolutely no jobs around here, and nobody was giving me a fucking thing. I got off my ass and odd-jobbed, scrapped, went door to door offering to paint for people etc. whatever it took to make ends meet, until I could find a regular job again. I didn't sit on the couch waiting for Government to do something about it, and I didn't say, "Oh but I can make more on unemployment" When offered a job..

**ghettopalmetto** · March-01-10, 01:09 PM

Originally Posted by Sstashmoo

When I lost my job in the late 70's, there were absolutely no jobs around here, and nobody was giving me a fucking thing. I got off my ass and odd-jobbed, scrapped, went door to door offering to paint for people etc. whatever it took to make ends meet, until I could find a regular job again. I didn't sit on the couch waiting for Government to do something about it, and I didn't say, "Oh but I can make more on unemployment" When offered a job..

So, are you superior to people who are currently unemployed, or are you just making assumptions that people now aren't trying as hard as you did in the late 1970s?

**Sstashmoo** · March-01-10, 01:42 PM

Look, Sorry if I came across crass or uncaring. I feel bad for those that can't find work, and I say without hesitation, I do more to help out folks that have lost their jobs than anyone else on this list. I'd lay money on it.

Feeling bad, sympathy and condolences, ring pretty hollow in the cash drawer. People need to stop relying on a Government that denied them of their job in the first place, with idiotic trade policies. Take the initiative, find a way to generate income. The Door-door paint thing works great, I know from experience. Clean houses, wash windows whatever. Until trade is addressed, folks are going to have to change gears and apply themselves in different ways.

And as far as me being "Un Christian" , the word is pretty clear on it in many areas, if you don't work, you don't eat.

**oldredfordette** · March-01-10, 02:00 PM

Why when I was a kid, we worked, dammit! We ate dirt and we loved it! We knocked on doors and offered to lick them clean! None of this namby pamby paint stuff! By God if you wanted food, you boiled the cat and thanked God you had a cat to boil! We used to...GET OFF MY LAWN, YA DAMN KIDS YA! Rotten little droopy pants bastards..Where was I? Oh yeah, we knew how to work there in the 70's! Not like now...

Retroit · March-01-10, 02:03 PM

I think all benefits provided to Senators and Congresspeople should be suspended until they balance the budget and eliminate the debt.

oladub, you win the Gold Medal.

**sumas** · March-01-10, 02:18 PM

As usual, I am not witty, but I do believe it is disgraceful to deny extentions. I am self employed so do not get bennefits. I do know however what lean times look like. If the economy needs to downsize, I think we need to nuture our citizens lost in the wake.

**sumas** · March-01-10, 02:24 PM

Retroit, I am with you buddy. After a few short years our congressmen and women get medical services and pensions. I say, for what. Don't seem to know their constuients [[sp) are suffering.

**Thames** · March-01-10, 02:27 PM

Anyone that has collected unemployment for 99 weeks should have their benefits ended. Hopefully, if they live in MI, they took advantage of the no worker left behind program. Two years free tuition for retraining and 99 weeks pretty much is two years.

Two years of steady income, while receiving a free education is a great deal.

**d.mcc** · March-01-10, 03:19 PM

As the original poster, I should point out that I have been out of work since February of 2009. As a college educated professional with specialized skills, even as a 25 year-old, I have been told numerous times that I am over qualified for even the most minor jobs. I can say that firms in Detroit, Orlando, Washington DC, NYC, Chicago, LA, Seattle, Atlanta, and St. Louis are well aware of my credentials and abilities.

If getting a job was so easy, millions of Americans wouldn't be out of work.