Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 18

Thread: Dems Just dont understand...

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,993
    Likes (Received)
    166
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Dems Just dont understand...

    With countless facts that show when the government subsidises something, you get more of it, why cant dems figure out that having more weeks of unemployment means more people stay on unemployment longer? Yet they want to extend unemployment like we are crashing into a recession or something. They claim that the economy is recovering, after only 5 years of wasteful spending, so why would we need to keep unemployment extended?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...cmp=latestnews

    Every single "idea" from dems these days seem to just be about giving out more free stuff to people that dont earn or deserve it. Even obamacare is miserablely failing.
    The Federal Reserve Bank of New York reports that in the third quarter, student loan delinquencies skyrocketed to 11.8 percent -- while delinquencies trended lower in all other consumer areas. The administration is still struggling to convince that demographic to purchase health care under the Affordable Care Act.
    And that brings up another point of how college is becoming even more expensive, government backed college loans just like the housing loans. 11.8% delinquency, are you mad?
    Liberalism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Columbus, ohio
    Posts
    3,738
    Likes (Received)
    153
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Perhaps if we had less allowances for people to GO delinquent (all those companies that reduce what you owe to the IRS ETC), we might be able to rake back in what is owed..

    As to your initial comments on the Unemployment side, i agree. How long is too long?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dayon, Ohio
    Posts
    1,874
    Likes (Received)
    470
    Thanks (Received)
    31

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDJOKER5 View Post
    With countless facts that show when the government subsidises something, you get more of it, why cant dems figure out that having more weeks of unemployment means more people stay on unemployment longer? Yet they want to extend unemployment like we are crashing into a recession or something. They claim that the economy is recovering, after only 5 years of wasteful spending, so why would we need to keep unemployment extended?

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013...cmp=latestnews

    Every single "idea" from dems these days seem to just be about giving out more free stuff to people that dont earn or deserve it. Even obamacare is miserablely failing.

    And that brings up another point of how college is becoming even more expensive, government backed college loans just like the housing loans. 11.8% delinquency, are you mad?
    The problem with unemployment is quite simply it pays just enough to motivate people not to find a job. When I got out of the AF I was on terminal leave for 45 days so I had time to find a job and didn't file for unemployment. I did check into unemployment though as a worst case scenario. For a single person in my state unemployment would be $350 per week or $700 every 2 weeks (for people with dependants it goes all the way up to $500 per month). They do tax unemployment insurance but the amount is pretty small. In order to bring home that same $700 every 2 weeks I would have needed a job that pays something close to $12 per hour (after figuring taxes and benefits being deducted). I also would need to pay for gas to and from work so realistically I figured I needed something better than $15 an hour to come out ahead. I actually turned down some job offers for $12-$13 knowing I could find something better and that if I couldn't unemployment would be just as good.

    When you factor in the other benefits you can get while on unemployment (food stamps, medcaid, SEC 8, etc) it doesn't really make sense to take any of the jobs that are avaliable until you have to. Once the 6 months runs out employers are afraid to hire the person because they think they are lazy. Would you really want someone who opted for a 6 month "vacation" at taxpayer expense instead of taking a job?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    ny
    Posts
    4
    Likes (Received)
    0
    Thanks (Received)
    0

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    why should any taxpayer feel guilty about utilizing the benefits he or she pays for with their taxes? if i'm ever allowed to opt out of paying taxes then by all means criticize me for staying on unemployment for as long as possible until i find the job i want. im not going to work some crappy retail job for $12 and hour if I dont have to. THIS IS WHY I PAY TAXES.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,993
    Likes (Received)
    166
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by guessthatsit View Post
    why should any taxpayer feel guilty about utilizing the benefits he or she pays for with their taxes? if i'm ever allowed to opt out of paying taxes then by all means criticize me for staying on unemployment for as long as possible until i find the job i want. im not going to work some crappy retail job for $12 and hour if I dont have to. THIS IS WHY I PAY TAXES.
    What about when the extended unemployment kicks in? Who pays for the full 99 weeks they were offering? What is it at now?
    Liberalism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    222
    Likes (Received)
    35
    Thanks (Received)
    3

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    I don't think anyone should feel guilty about receiving unemployment to help them through a rough patch. But the question that never seems to elicit an answer is "How many weeks is too many?" At one point, the time allowed to collect was 99 weeks of state/federal benefits combined. That's almost two years. We as a country cannot sustain these benefits unless we tax more and spend less. And that's the underlying issue. The left is screaming "TAX THE RICH." OK, we tax the rich but how much is enough? Seriously, is it 50%? What about 75%? Is this too much? "Oh they can afford it..." Maybe, but they earned it. And on the Right, you hear "CUT SPENDING NOW!" And the government, through a default did that, with an axe called the Sequester. The first round called for $500B for the DoD over 10-years. The second round, the automatic cuts that took effect because of no budget deal is supposed to cost the DoD another $500B. Ahhh, but with this new budget deal, some of those cuts are being reimbursed because lawmakers have no backbone to their constituents. For example, we are going to lose more manpower in the next five years. This happens after major conflicts come to an end BUT the Congress doesn't want to cut infrastructure. We will have less manpower but the same amount of infrastructure to support. Why? Becasue Congressmen and women don't want to tell their districts and states that Base X is closing. I don't have an answer; it's probably in the middle. Raise taxes a little, cut spending a little. Maybe unemployment was the first step for the public and the1% reduction in COLA for retirees. No one likes it but it's a start.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,993
    Likes (Received)
    166
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcjohn1118 View Post
    I don't think anyone should feel guilty about receiving unemployment to help them through a rough patch. But the question that never seems to elicit an answer is "How many weeks is too many?" At one point, the time allowed to collect was 99 weeks of state/federal benefits combined. That's almost two years. We as a country cannot sustain these benefits unless we tax more and spend less. And that's the underlying issue. The left is screaming "TAX THE RICH." OK, we tax the rich but how much is enough? Seriously, is it 50%? What about 75%? Is this too much? "Oh they can afford it..." Maybe, but they earned it. And on the Right, you hear "CUT SPENDING NOW!" And the government, through a default did that, with an axe called the Sequester. The first round called for $500B for the DoD over 10-years. The second round, the automatic cuts that took effect because of no budget deal is supposed to cost the DoD another $500B. Ahhh, but with this new budget deal, some of those cuts are being reimbursed because lawmakers have no backbone to their constituents. For example, we are going to lose more manpower in the next five years. This happens after major conflicts come to an end BUT the Congress doesn't want to cut infrastructure. We will have less manpower but the same amount of infrastructure to support. Why? Becasue Congressmen and women don't want to tell their districts and states that Base X is closing. I don't have an answer; it's probably in the middle. Raise taxes a little, cut spending a little. Maybe unemployment was the first step for the public and the1% reduction in COLA for retirees. No one likes it but it's a start.
    And whos district in congress is covered in Germany, Italy, GB, Panama, Japan, etc all around the world? Why should be close bases in the states when we are in countries that are more than fiscally capabable of taking care of themselves? Is it because we want service members to have the dream of visiting far off lands on a 2-6 year vacation spots?
    Liberalism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Dayton, OH
    Posts
    222
    Likes (Received)
    35
    Thanks (Received)
    3

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDJOKER5 View Post
    And whos district in congress is covered in Germany, Italy, GB, Panama, Japan, etc all around the world? Why should be close bases in the states when we are in countries that are more than fiscally capabable of taking care of themselves? Is it because we want service members to have the dream of visiting far off lands on a 2-6 year vacation spots?
    WJ - you are absolutely correct. I didn't even think about overseas bases, especially in our "global reach/global power" service. We don't really need pre-staged armed forces anymore.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    4,993
    Likes (Received)
    166
    Thanks (Received)
    23

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by Mcjohn1118 View Post
    WJ - you are absolutely correct. I didn't even think about overseas bases, especially in our "global reach/global power" service. We don't really need pre-staged armed forces anymore.
    Yep. And all that money the service members spend in other country's economies is stagering.
    Liberalism; such great ideas, they need to force you to follow them.

    Socialism is for the people, not the socialist.

    Economic Left/Right: 7.38
    Social Libertarian/Authoritarian: -3.08
    politicalcompass.org

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Dayon, Ohio
    Posts
    1,874
    Likes (Received)
    470
    Thanks (Received)
    31

    Default Re: Dems Just dont understand...

    Quote Originally Posted by WILDJOKER5 View Post
    Yep. And all that money the service members spend in other country's economies is stagering.
    It is also worth mentioning that without troops overseas we would save money in Cost of Living Allowance (COLA) payments. I tried to find the FY 2013 COLA number but it appears to be lumped in with other allowances. Looking at the AF Budget for Personnel costs they show just under $600Mil requested for Enlisted Allowances. It appears they have seperated out Basic Allowance for Housing (BAH) and Basic Allowance for Subsitence (BAS) so the $600 Million would mostly be CONUS COLA, OCONUS COLA, and Family Seperation Allowance.

    That $600 Million number is just Air Force enlisted. Imagine the savings if I added in all Personnel and all of the services. I think even being conservative we could acheive around 2 Billion in COLA savings alone if we simply brought all our troops back to the US.

    Numbers quoted came from here. Hopefully I inetrpreted them right. http://comptroller.defense.gov/defbu.../fy2014_m1.pdf

    EDIT: I can't really tell whether the $600 Million number I was looking at includes Overseas Housing Allowances (OHA). Either way it seems like common knowledge that OHA and COLA are going to be more expensive than just BAH so no matter what we would see savings.
    Last edited by SomeRandomGuy; 12-27-2013 at 02:06 PM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •