Fate Poll....

[Blackhawk]

You haven't been "made redundant" in this economy, have you?

No, but as I pointed out I've been through the experience with my father who in spite of seeing his company go under (funny, the government gave Chrysler a loan, but not his company), refused to take unemployment. He did not spend 7+ months looking for another VP job. As a matter of fact he never again earned the same pay and benefits. He ended up cleaning buildings for a while to make ends meet. We literally fished so we could have dinner. Except for shoes, socks and underwear I never got new cloths for a long time after that. So don't try to lecture me about the trauma of losing a job.
Even if I was put out of work as an independent contractor I would not be eligible for unemployment benefits unless I set up my business as a corporation and payed unemployment taxes. I would... horror of horrors... probably need to go out and find a different field of work.
Unemployment was not set up so people could take 7+ months finding the ideal job that matches their old job's pay and benefits. It was set up so that people who could find no other work would not lose their home. It's turned into another entitlement program funded by fairy dust. I actually know businesses that would have hired people this year but the increases in their unemployment taxes needed to fund the extended unemployment benefits pushed their businesses to the point where they couldn't.
Again, I'm not saying people are evil for taking unemployment. But to list it as an option when their are other jobs available is indicative of the problem. I've actually known people who take all the unemployment they can get just so they don't have to work.

 

[minitour]

But at least he and our family had the satisfaction of knowing that we never lived on the dole.

Satisfaction doesn't put food on the table.

-mini

 

[Blackhawk]

Nope, for YEARS I paid into the system. I paid my taxes, I paid for others' unemployment so they could get on their feet. For the 6 months post-9/11 that I was on unemployment, I considered it payback for all the money I had already paid into the system. Consider it collecting on the deposits you'd already paid.

Unemployment is there for a reason. There is nothing wrong with using the resources available to you. Don't abuse the system, but use what is available.

I understand that unemployment is there for a reason... but look at what you wrote. It's payback for what you paid into the system. Not that you had to have it to make ends meet- what it was intended to be. But that you paid into it so you deserved something back. That's the definition of an entitlement.

 

[Blackhawk]

Satisfaction doesn't put food on the table.

-mini

No, but his hard work and cutting back did.

 

[Blackhawk]

I think your dad lived in a different era in different times. Today a job scrubbing windows is going to pay half as much as UE. I applaud the nobility but the fact is this is a different world. When you are making a certain amount of money and your mortgage/bills are based off that money, any old minimum wage job isn't going to cut it especially when it requires you working endless hours to make ends meet leaving no time to look for the job that you are qualified for.

We only lived in a different time because we had fewer "necessities". We did not have to worry about a cable bill... we did not have cable. We did not have to worry about a cell phone bill... no cell phone. My father drove cars until the wheels fell off even before he lost his job. Like I wrote earlier I did not get new cloths for years after he lost his job. If I needed a new sports jacket we went to the thrift store. We even had two boats... that my dad got for free somewhere. Maintenance for them was free (7 kids to work on them).
If manual work pays less than UE then UE is paying too much.

 

[MQAAord]

I understand that unemployment is there for a reason... but look at what you wrote. It's payback for what you paid into the system. Not that you had to have it to make ends meet- what it was intended to be. But that you paid into it so you deserved something back. That's the definition of an entitlement.

I hope the view is nice up there.

Your mind is made up, and that's fine. I sincerely hope you or your family never needs the assistance. Or social security either... that's an "entitlement" program too...

 

[Blackhawk]

I hope the view is nice up there.

Your mind is made up, and that's fine. I sincerely hope you or your family never needs the assistance. Or social security either... that's an "entitlement" program too...

I plan on never using social security. I've maxed out my IRAs every year for 30 years. When I had it I maxed out my TSP and my 401k- even when I was a regional airline FO making far worse than what they make today. Between my military retirement and my wife's I should be okay. Personally, I'd rather be given that money so I could invest it myself. Last time I looked I have to live to the age of something like 90 to break even. Pretty piss poor ROI. Besides, if I ran something like social security it would be called a Ponzi scheme.

 

[MQAAord]

I plan on never using social security. I've maxed out my IRAs every year for 30 years. When I had it I maxed out my TSP and my 401k- even when I was a regional airline FO making far worse than what they make today. Between my military retirement and my wife's I should be okay. Personally, I'd rather be given that money so I could invest it myself. Last time I looked I have to live to the age of something like 90 to break even. Pretty piss poor ROI. Besides, if I ran something like social security it would be called a Ponzi scheme.

I sincerely hope your plan works.

 

[bLizZuE]

Wow.

 

[Blackhawk]

I sincerely hope your plan works.

My plan is to not put all my eggs in one basket. Is it guaranteed? Of course not. But I am not relying on one leg for retirement, nor am I relying on the government trough to sustain me. Just to give you an idea of where hard work, simple living and saving will get you. My mom and dad? She went back to school after my dad lost his job (on their own dime) and got a job as a school teacher. My dad spent the rest of his life "underemployed". Yet they put 5 of 7 kids through college (the other two went to service academies), took care of themselves in their old age, and still left an estate worth over $2 million. So it can be done. You just can't go through life feeling entitled.
Look at my criticism of the OP and your response. The question was not "Should I use UE or starve and lose my house?" It was "Should I get a job or use UE?". So far about 30% of those surveyed are in favor of UE rather than getting a job. Your response as well was not that you had to have UE to sustain you after 9/11, it was that you deserved UE, it was your right. That is the problem I have. 1/3 of those surveyed (and probably the country), now view UE as a right, as a means of taking an extended vacation, not as a means of sustaining themselves and their families when there is absolutely nothing else. Again, the money comes from somewhere- from someone else. Eventually we will get to the point where so many are living off the money of others that we will run out of other peoples' money.
Oh, one correction. I've put money in my IRA for 22 years, not 30 years.

 

[MQAAord]

My plan is to not put all my eggs in one basket. Is it guaranteed? Of course not. But I am not relying on one leg for retirement, nor am I relying on the government trough to sustain me. Just to give you an idea of where hard work, simple living and saving will get you. My mom and dad? She went back to school after my dad lost his job (on their own dime) and got a job as a school teacher. My dad spent the rest of his life "underemployed". Yet they put 5 of 7 kids through college (the other two went to service academies), took care of themselves in their old age, and still left an estate worth over $2 million. So it can be done. You just can't go through life feeling entitled.
Look at my criticism of the OP and your response. The question was not "Should I use UE or starve and lose my house?" It was "Should I get a job or use UE?". So far about 30% of those surveyed are in favor of UE rather than getting a job. Your response as well was not that you had to have UE to sustain you after 9/11, it was that you deserved UE, it was your right. That is the problem I have. 1/3 of those surveyed (and probably the country), now view UE as a right, as a means of taking an extended vacation, not as a means of sustaining themselves and their families when there is absolutely nothing else. Again, the money comes from somewhere- from someone else. Eventually we will get to the point where so many are living off the money of others that we will run out of other peoples' money.
Oh, one correction. I've put money in my IRA for 22 years, not 30 years.

Like I said, you've made up your mind, and that's fine.

I don't see it as being "other people's money", as you put it. I viewed it as being MY money, that I had already paid into the system (along with everyone else who pays taxes), and that I paid into the system again when I got recalled less than 6 months later and went back to work. I didn't get something for nothing, and I was most certainly not on "vacation".

 

[Blackhawk]

Like I said, you've made up your mind, and that's fine.

I don't see it as being "other people's money", as you put it. I viewed it as being MY money, that I had already paid into the system (along with everyone else who pays taxes), and that I paid into the system again when I got recalled less than 6 months later and went back to work. I didn't get something for nothing, and I was most certainly not on "vacation".

That's where you are wrong. Unemployment does not come from general tax revenue, nor does it come from some trust fund that you payed into. It is payed by employers not employess. So yes, it was someone elses money... or fairy money if you will as it might as well come from fairyland. Money payed out in unemployment is money that employers can not use for other things... such as employing more workers, paying current workers higher wages, purchasing items for expansion. So when people draw unemployment uncessarily they are hurting the system.
So yeah, you are endemic of the problem.

 

[MQAAord]

That's where you are wrong. Unemployment does not come from general tax revenue, nor does it come from some trust fund that you payed into. It is payed by employers not employess. So yes, it was someone elses money... or fairy money if you will as it might as well come from fairyland. Money payed out in unemployment is money that employers can not use for other things... such as employing more workers, paying current workers higher wages, purchasing items for expansion. So when people draw unemployment uncessarily they are hurting the system.
So yeah, you are endemic of the problem.

:laff:

Okay, so unemployment funds comes from employers. That money comes from their product sales/revenue. I buy things, things that contribute to the income of companies. Therefore, I've still contributed to the money that pays for unemployment!

See, you're not ever going to convince me that I've done something morally wrong or bad by my 6 months on unemployment.

So enjoy your lofty view, and never take social security, unemployment or anything. If that's something that is important to you, go for it. But, others do not hold the same opinion.

 

[Blackhawk]

:laff:

Okay, so unemployment funds comes from employers. That money comes from their product sales/revenue. I buy things, things that contribute to the income of companies. Therefore, I've still contributed to the money that pays for unemployment!

See, you're not ever going to convince me that I've done something morally wrong or bad by my 6 months on unemployment.

So enjoy your lofty view, and never take social security, unemployment or anything. If that's something that is important to you, go for it. But, others do not hold the same opinion.

This is called rationalization. You purchased something from a company in exchange for goods and services- not so the money can be taken by the government and given to a third party. After all, if I purchase your services does that give me the right to insist the government take your money and give it back to me or some other person?
Your rationalization is why the system eventually breaks down. While the intentions are initially lofty and good, people begin to feel entitled. After all, they paid taxes, why shouldn't they get something back. You purchased something from some big evil corporation- they should pay for stuff, not you. Unfortunately the government soon begins to pay out more and more money and needs to take in more and more money. You eventually get to the point where person "x", the poor schmuck paying for person "c's" benefits says to heck with it and the system collapses. Just look at what is happening in Greece and many of the other countries with these systems. Heck, when I was in Spain in the 90's they already had an unemployment rate of 25% partially due to their generous unemployment benefits.
You don't even know it but you are making the argument against the system you support.

 

[MQAAord]

If it bothers you that much, then start an effort with lawmakers to repeal unemployment benefits.

Good luck!


Edit to add: Not trying to sound snippy there, just saying that if you find a government program to be so abhorrent, that your best recourse is to do what you can to change it. Arguing with people on an internet forum won't bring about any change. Like I said earlier, you're not going to convince me that I did something "wrong" by using my 6 months unemployment benefits. So, with that, I sign out of this debate.

 

[kiloalpha]

Play nice boys and girls....

Anyways getting back to the point. Finally got an email from Sherri at Ameriflight so hopefully I can get an interview date set.

 

[wheelsup]

I plan on never using social security. I've maxed out my IRAs every year for 30 years. When I had it I maxed out my TSP and my 401k- even when I was a regional airline FO making far worse than what they make today. Between my military retirement and my wife's I should be okay. Personally, I'd rather be given that money so I could invest it myself. Last time I looked I have to live to the age of something like 90 to break even. Pretty piss poor ROI. Besides, if I ran something like social security it would be called a Ponzi scheme.

The stock market is the ultimate ponzi scheme and don't forget the years in which you were investing were the highest returning years in history. To think that the rest of us will be able to count on 15% returns per year is hogwash. Basically what I'm saying is it was luck that you were able to get the returns and the retirement you have today and have the bulk of your balance invested when the market tripled in 5 years - for folks like me my return is negative or maybe 0% since investing in the last decade.

Glad it worked out for you but as they say "past performance is no guarantee of future results".

 

[minitour]

That's where you are wrong. Unemployment does not come from general tax revenue, nor does it come from some trust fund that you payed into. It is payed by employers not employess. So yes, it was someone elses money... or fairy money if you will as it might as well come from fairyland. Money payed out in unemployment is money that employers can not use for other things... such as employing more workers, paying current workers higher wages, purchasing items for expansion. So when people draw unemployment uncessarily they are hurting the system.
So yeah, you are endemic of the problem.

That's where you are wrong.

Unemployment comes from the state. The employer pays a percentage of payroll to the state and that money, I presume, is probably wasted(hey, it's a government operation)...but it probably shouldbe earning interest so that when someone is laid off or wrongly terminated.......they have money to pay out.

Employers do not write a check to the unemployed when they're collecting UC benefits. What happens is that if they have xyz% of people on UC, the state raises their percentage. IIRC, in Ohio, you start at 7%. If you do bad and have lots of people on unemployment, your number goes up to 8% or 9% or 15% or whatever. If you do good, of course, you are rewarded by keeping your number at 7% or whatever it is you start out at. Maybe it's 5%. It's honestly been a while.

But yeah, UC benefits are not funds that "employers can not use for other things... such as employing more workers, paying current workers higher wages, purchasing items for expansion". That's a common assumption, but it's wrong. Employers, unless they're around for decades with no one on unemployment, will never pay enough into the unemployment fund for the UC Benefits to come "from the employer".

-mini

 

[JustinA]

ALERT.

Thread Hijacked.

:bandit:

 

[Blackhawk]

That's where you are wrong.

Unemployment comes from the state. The employer pays a percentage of payroll to the state and that money, I presume, is probably wasted(hey, it's a government operation)...but it probably shouldbe earning interest so that when someone is laid off or wrongly terminated.......they have money to pay out.

Employers do not write a check to the unemployed when they're collecting UC benefits. What happens is that if they have xyz% of people on UC, the state raises their percentage. IIRC, in Ohio, you start at 7%. If you do bad and have lots of people on unemployment, your number goes up to 8% or 9% or 15% or whatever. If you do good, of course, you are rewarded by keeping your number at 7% or whatever it is you start out at. Maybe it's 5%. It's honestly been a while.

But yeah, UC benefits are not funds that "employers can not use for other things... such as employing more workers, paying current workers higher wages, purchasing items for expansion". That's a common assumption, but it's wrong. Employers, unless they're around for decades with no one on unemployment, will never pay enough into the unemployment fund for the UC Benefits to come "from the employer".

-mini

That's where you are wrong. You write "it comes from the state" but you show your faulty logic- states don't get money by sprinkling some fairy dust. I'm not sure where you get your messed up logic. The employers pay the UE "insurance" (it's a tax called "insurance" to make people feel better), to the state- it's money the employers no longer have. So they can NOT use this money for other things. If the corporations got to keep this money they could most certainly use it for other things. It is not the "governments" money, it is money that comes from corporations. Some money is matched by the federal government- so this does come from the general taxes that the federal government collects.