Jobless benefits do more spurs more recovery than tax breaks for the rich

[Torvald Von Mansee]

http://www.slate.com/id/2276473/

Oops...

It should be "does more to spur recovery"

[The Third Man]

All fine and good if Americans are willing to accept the European model of perpetual greater than +10% unemployment. Because that is the model on which this article is based.

When the economy comes back we won't need some Obama agency to tell us.

[August]

What a load of BS. From where I sit, extending unemployment benefits doesn't spur recovery, if anything it spurs laziness.

I see way too many of our students who, although they can easily get a job with the skills they have learned in our trade school, don't bother looking because they are still sucking from the government teat.

"Why work when you can get a paycheck for free?", seems to be their reasoning. Now that the government is talking about ending the free ride they are coming out of the woodwork demanding placement assistance. :nope:

[XabbaRus]

Really UK unemployment has been perpetually under 10% and yet you in teh past have criticised the UK for its system of benefits.

[mookiemookie]

Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's, has found that $1 in unemployment benefits generates $1.61 in economic activity. (That's the second most-stimulative form of government spending, behind food stamps.) A dollar in tax cuts—not just to the rich, but to everyone—generates about 32 cents.

I predict that every post railing against extending unemployment benefits will ignore this data and offer up nothing but rhetoric and ideology.

But facts are facts, and there it is in black and white. Extending unemployment benefits is indeed more stimulative than tax cuts. Discussion over.

[Ducimus]

I predict that every post railing against extending unemployment benefits will ignore this data and offer up nothing but rhetoric and ideology.

But facts are facts, and there it is in black and white. Extending unemployment benefits is indeed more stimulative than tax cuts. Discussion over.

Can you cite some reputable, non partisan sources?

On a personal rant regarding tax breaks for the rich vs the poor.... I wish "trickle down" worked. I really do. But i don't think it does. I'm starting to think money only trickles up, not the other way around. Just my opinion, based on no sources but my own observation of daily life.

[yubba]

Stimulus didn't work, printing money out of thin air to help the jobless isn't going to help, only when the government decides it is going too quite these anti business policies, then we should see some improvement, lefty Dems still don't get it. Rush, said that the fed sent 3 trillion dollars too bailout UK banks, so why are we bailing Europe out?

[mookiemookie]

Can you cite some reputable, non partisan sources?


I just did. Moody's is a reputable non-partisan source.

Moody's Corporation (NYSE: MCO) is the holding company for Moody's Investors Service, a Credit rating agency which performs international financial research and analysis on commercial and government entities. The company also ranks the credit-worthiness of borrowers using a standardized ratings scale. The company has a 40% share in the world credit rating market, as does its main rival, Standard & Poor's.

[Torvald Von Mansee]

Stimulus didn't work, printing money out of thin air to help the jobless isn't going to help, only when the government decides it is going too quite these anti business policies, then we should see some improvement, lefty Dems still don't get it. Rush, said that the fed sent 3 trillion dollars too bailout UK banks, so why are we bailing Europe out?

...

You take something Rush Limbaugh says at face value? Really???

[Catfish]

Hello,
the only point the article makes clear is that the republicans have no easy recipe of what to do against the jobless situation either.

In Germany the govenment belies the population with statistics of how much people suddenly get a job, and that less than 10 percent would be jobless, to make the government look better and justify its decisions. Reality lies by roughly 22 to 28 percent jobless changing in the course of the year, and every 3rd being poor in comparison to international (western) standards.

They just do not count people over 40 years of age as "jobless", because those will not get a job at all anymore (so, out of the statistics). They sort out female workers and people younger than 25 (assuming all being in any kind of education, apprenticeship or young mothers being pregnant), and especially people who are in (government-controlled) training measures, which they are forced to perform (also out of the jobless statistics). Not that they will get a job after this measure, but sure there is another training measure waiting for them.

It is as well not so that people do not want to work and earn money to buy them nice things like cars, houses or iPhones. Or does anyone think people can afford such brands by getting social help ? They need a perspective, and given one they will work like everybody else, except the usual 2 percent of lazy idiots.

Not to denigrate republicans or the current government, but the problems lie elsewhere:

- We have computers which do a lot of automatic work and led to masses of people having to leave their job never to get something similar again, from banks to railroads to oil industry and whatnot.

- We have computer-controlled CNC machines for machinery and automotive production, only a prgrammer with some metal-working background is needed with those automatized "transfer belts" doing the job of at least 50 workers each. Electronics are not manufactured here, indeed just this word describes the situation.
(Besides there are meanwhile few who would be willing here to work in a factory with the standards of 1960, like in the good old Detroit days, or Wolfsburg (VW) or Stuttgart (Mercedes-Benz) in Gemany - not that there would still be any jobs like that.)

- "We" (western countries) have transferred all "minor" jobs (for less skilled work) to abroad; e.g. iPhone, Computers, cars and machinery is assembled in China for 16 (Dollar) cents an hour (but wait they got a doubled loan raise to 32 Dollar cents recently !)
Regarding the US just of all lots of Computers are being built close to the US border, in northern Mexico, and then imported. But they are US companies who do just that to produce cheaper than they would be able to in the US, to survice. Similar things happen all around the world in all countries, it is called globalization.
(If you ever wondered how an electric water boiler can be produced, assembled and shipped to Europe or the US for less than 3 dollars final sale ..)

Problem is the national market and their companies cannot internally compete against each other anymore, as long as there are price-dumping (for us) countries like India and China, so companies have to go there themselves. As soon as the international loan or productions standards have been ballanced or equalled worldwide, like they finally had in the national "micro-economic" systems, there will be no more country to go to produce cheaper (well maybe there is Mars, then), but only then will they think about the general mess and change something.

Companies and governments are far too much involved in getting out instant profits, few look farther ahead - to be honest smaller companies just cannot compete and choose to go to China or wherever.


Fact is society is changing, but western govenments and industry still behave like in the 19th and 20ieth century. As soon as politicians with a broader view appear they are either bashed or just killed, for their unconvenient views.
If governments do just that why don't we vote for our industrial leaders directly, and skip superfluous politicians ? :O:

Greetings,
Catfish

[Tribesman]

All fine and good if Americans are willing to accept the European model of perpetual greater than +10% unemployment
Do you have to go out of your way to demonstrate your ignorance quite so often?

Really UK unemployment has been perpetually under 10% and yet you in teh past have criticised the UK for its system of benefits.
Wasn't it Thatcher who abandoned the principle of aiming for full emloyment in the UK?
Surely Third Man should be supporting that idealism even though it flies in the face of his claims...then again the claims he made were clearly nonsense anyway:yawn:

[Armistead]

What a load of BS. From where I sit, extending unemployment benefits doesn't spur recovery, if anything it spurs laziness.

I see way too many of our students who, although they can easily get a job with the skills they have learned in our trade school, don't bother looking because they are still sucking from the government teat.

"Why work when you can get a paycheck for free?", seems to be their reasoning. Now that the government is talking about ending the free ride they are coming out of the woodwork demanding placement assistance. :nope:


Full time students aren't allowed to draw, part time may get some if they've had previous unemployment. You have to have a recent pay quarter to draw.

Actually unemployment is cheaper to pay than all the social programs people out of work go to.

Course as an employer I'm amazed at how easily they give these benefits. I've fired people for failing drug test, not showing up to work for weeks, ect...and even if I fight their claim, they always win benefits...Then you see them working on the side while drawing.

I had one guy drive a van through a garage door, hit a benz, did about 20K in total damage, failed a drug test, fired and still got benefits.

[August]

Full time students aren't allowed to draw, part time may get some if they've had previous unemployment. You have to have a recent pay quarter to draw.

Maybe the laws are different in your area but here well over 3/4ths of my present class are drawing unemployment benefits.

Actually unemployment is cheaper to pay than all the social programs people out of work go to.

In addition to regular benefits the government is paying for their tuition as well. In out little school alone i'd bet at least 200 students get this deal.

Course as an employer I'm amazed at how easily they give these benefits. I've fired people for failing drug test, not showing up to work for weeks, ect...and even if I fight their claim, they always win benefits...Then you see them working on the side while drawing.

I had one guy drive a van through a garage door, hit a benz, did about 20K in total damage, failed a drug test, fired and still got benefits.

Here's where we can agree. Employers tell me it takes a literal mountain of paperwork to deny someone benefits. It's so difficult they often just bite the bullet and pay benefits to people who they should have been able to fire outright.

[SteamWake]

This is proof beyond doubt that the left desires the euro style socalisim and that Pelosi is loosing her sanity.

[AVGWarhawk]

SO TELL ME. WHERE DO WE DRAW THE LINE?

Do we continuously hand out cash? There will be no incentive to stop watching Oprah and get off the coach applying for jobs.

[Capt Sinbad]

Stimulus didn't work, printing money out of thin air to help the jobless isn't going to help, only when the government decides it is going too quite these anti business policies, then we should see some improvement, lefty Dems still don't get it. Rush, said that the fed sent 3 trillion dollars too bailout UK banks, so why are we bailing Europe out?


I'm pretty sure us UK tax payers bailed out our own greedy banks. Don't remember hearing that the US sent one single $...didn't this crisis develop in the US under the watch of Bush?

[SteamWake]

I'm pretty sure us UK tax payers bailed out our own greedy banks. Don't remember hearing that the US sent one single $...didn't this crisis develop in the US under the watch of Bush?

Thats probably because the media dident cover where the money went...
Untill now...

http://foreclosureblues.wordpress.com/2010/12/02/trillions-in-secret-fed-bailouts-for-global-corporations-and-foreign-banks-%E2%80%93-has-the-federal-reserve-become-a-completely-unaccountable-global-bailout-machine/

Oh and this snowball started rolling before Bush helped it along.

[Tribesman]

Thats probably because the media dident cover where the money went...
Untill now...


So instead of the 3 trillion that wingnut junkie on the radio claimed went to Britian its actually 3 trillion to US companies and banks, multi nationals which are either American owned or conducting big business in America and foriegn banks and companies doing business in America.
So this 3 trillion payout to Britains banks is really a 3 trillion payout to American business interests which is why the media isn't covering the story as its just a wingnut myth:doh:

BTW why doesn't the blog which is taken from another blog give proper quotes.
They may have repaid their loans, but that's not good enough
It does kinda put a damp squib on his rant about money being thrown away when it was coming back the very next day
No mention either of the double triple or even quadruple counting. whodathunk that if you counted the same loans 4 times you could come up with a really big number eh

[Capt Sinbad]

So instead of the 3 trillion that wingnut junkie on the radio claimed went to Britian its actually 3 trillion to US companies and banks, multi nationals which are either American owned or conducting big business in America and foriegn banks and companies doing business in America.
So this 3 trillion payout to Britains banks is really a 3 trillion payout to American business interests which is why the media isn't covering the story as its just a wingnut myth:doh:

Saved me a bit of typing :yeah:

[Bubblehead1980]

I predict that every post railing against extending unemployment benefits will ignore this data and offer up nothing but rhetoric and ideology.

But facts are facts, and there it is in black and white. Extending unemployment benefits is indeed more stimulative than tax cuts. Discussion over.



Really? Two years of unemployment benefits being extended over and over and well hows that worked out for us? lol Some people are just blinded by their ideology, even Stevie Wonder can see that it is is just idiotic to think unemployment benefits is more of a stimulus.About all that extending unemployment over and over has done is add to our debt. Having said that, I am actually in favor of extending the benefits this time IF they find a way to pay for them, no more adding to the debt.I am in favor of this because for those who can not find a job, it will hurt them and they need help.

[Bubblehead1980]

I believe "trickle down" works, just not as many people think.I've noticed a lot of people think trickle down means well the boss is rich so I am going to be rich.Trickle down more describes how those at the top are doing well and therefore can do things such as hire more people, expand operations, perhaps afford higher salaries, bonuses etc Worked well in the past and would prob work better.The problem is it needs to be sold in a realistic fashion, clarify how it actually works.The problem with that is many American's today believe it is the government's job to "level the playing field" instead of taking on the fight themselves.The playing field is basically level, sure some start with more advantages but that is life.Plenty of people have came from really horrible circumstances and "made it" without the government "helping them"


Say what you want about , but it certainly works better than Obama's "trickle down poverty" of the last two years.:yeah:

[Ducimus]

.Trickle down more describes how those at the top are doing well and therefore can do things such as hire more people, expand operations, perhaps afford higher salaries, bonuses etc

Why i say trickle down doesn't work, is because, quite simply, they are not doing that. In fact, they do they exact opposite, and the only ones who see higher salaries or bonuses are upper management.

We, the cubicle plebes, are regarded as nothing more then cogs. Expendable, replaceable, with no long term value, therego no investment is made. Meaning, no 401K matching of any sort, no bonuses, no raises, no nothing. All of that was revoked, and replaced with a happy tap dance, and (metaphorically speaking) a large cumbersome object rammed up our hindquarters, all the while getting that great big upper management smile while they pretend to be our best buddy.

Trickle down.. yeah.. tell me another one. From what i've seen, anyone who believes in that is living in a freaking dream world. Maybe i can sell them oceanfront property in arizona - they might just buy it.

[Bubblehead1980]

Why i say trickle down doesn't work, is because, quite simply, they are not doing that. In fact, they do they exact opposite, and the only ones who see higher salaries or bonuses are upper management.

We, the cubicle plebes, are regarded as nothing more then cogs. Expendable, replaceable, with no long term value, therego no investment is made. Meaning, no 401K matching of any sort, no bonuses, no raises, no nothing. All of that was revoked, and replaced with a happy tap dance, and (metaphorically speaking) a large cumbersome object rammed up our hindquarters, all the while getting that great big upper management smile while they pretend to be our best buddy.

Trickle down.. yeah.. tell me another one. From what i've seen, anyone who believes in that is living in a freaking dream world. Maybe i can sell them oceanfront property in arizona - they might just buy it.

No we're not currently on a trickle down thing, I agree.There were times in the past it worked.The only thing trickling down these days is poverty and the tingle in Chris Matthew's leg.

[Ducimus]

Yeah i'm bitter. I fully expect to be laid off either on the 20th of this month, or the 3rd of january. I'll be amazed if im still employed by febuary.

Then again, i've been here for a little over a decade. I'ts been great. Great hours, great coworkers, and up until the last year or so, great managers. Working here didn't seem like a job, but a way of life. So, its been a great run, i don't think i'll be angry when i get that call to see HR, all good things come to an end eventually.

edit:
ANd yeah, i'll be filing for unemployment too. If i've been paying into it for the last 10+ years, your damn right i am.

[Takeda Shingen]

Yeah i'm bitter. I fully expect to be laid off either on the 20th of this month, or the 3rd of january. I'll be amazed if im still employed by febuary.

Then again, i've been here for a little over a decade. I'ts been great. Great hours, great coworkers, and up until the last year or so, great managers. Working here didn't seem like a job, but a way of life. So, its been a great run, i don't think i'll be angry when i get that call to see HR, all good things come to an end eventually.

edit:
ANd yeah, i'll be filing for unemployment too. If i've been paying into it for the last 10+ years, your damn right i am.

I know it does nothing to help, and sounds quaint, but I am really sorry to hear all of that. :cry:

[Madox58]

Does anyone really know what trickle means?
A small, slow, or irregular quantity of anything coming, going, or proceeding.
Note the irregular part.

Around 1995 i got tired of working in a Factory and quit.
I started an ISP and ran that for awhile.
Sold it and went into Construction cause I love doing that type work.
I have NEVER collected so called 'benefits' or asked for help with my business.
When stuff hit the fan?
I had to layoff the Guys that worked for and with me.
That was probably the lowest point in my working life.
Sure it was only 7 Guys Max.
But I was the one that wrote them Good checks every week.
I took care of them on road and made sure the Rooms were nice and never far from needed services.
They worked hard, long hours.

You know what trickle down did for me and them?
Not a DAMNED thing!

I'd post about the last 'Trickle down' I actually had.
But that's X-rated and would get me in trouble.

[Ducimus]

The overall point of my last two posts, was that the rich just get richer and the poor just get poorer. The whole "trickle down" thing to me, seems like just some BS excuse to justify the "tax breaks for the rich" or whatever other perks they're getting.

If they were genuinly creating jobs i can see the logic, but they aren't. All i've seen lately, is a guilded elite that work/milk/sell out a company for all the money they can make for few years, and then they move on to their next abomination.

[Madox58]

I agree with you.
My last Factory job?
I got a Tie pin for 5 years Service.
They gave it to me while I was on the job.
I put it in one of my ear ring holes cause I had no where else to put it at the time.

I got wrote up for "Disrespecting the Company".
I quite shortly after.

[mookiemookie]

No we're not currently on a trickle down thing, I agree.There were times in the past it worked.

No there wasn't. If you believe that, then prove it. Hard numbers and data, please.

[Madox58]

Hard numbers for me means this.......
I employed up to 7 Guys and the lowest paid made $10.00 per hour.
(That's what I started a Guy out at)
The highest paid made $13.00 per hour
(After 1 year!)
Top pay would have been $20.00 per hour at 5 years.
At which point a New Crew would have been built and the pay scale would
have been based on running that crew.
The more you earn me?
The more you earn!
That's the American way.

As we all know Wall Street Wizards shot us all in the arse.
:nope:
So my Guys took the hit.
I took the hit.
There is no hard data, no proof, no evidence whatsoever that
"Trickle down" did anything but fool the masses.

If you believe anything other?
Your the type fool they were looking for.

[August]

There is no hard data, no proof, no evidence whatsoever that "Trickle down" did anything but fool the masses.

So your construction company never had a wealthy customer?

[the_tyrant]

Hard numbers for me means this.......
I employed up to 7 Guys and the lowest paid made $10.00 per hour.
(That's what I started a Guy out at)
The highest paid made $13.00 per hour
(After 1 year!)
Top pay would have been $20.00 per hour at 5 years.
At which point a New Crew would have been built and the pay scale would
have been based on running that crew.
The more you earn me?
The more you earn!
That's the American way.

As we all know Wall Street Wizards shot us all in the arse.
:nope:
So my Guys took the hit.
I took the hit.
There is no hard data, no proof, no evidence whatsoever that
"Trickle down" did anything but fool the masses.

If you believe anything other?
Your the type fool they were looking for.

Economics isn't just about the stuff that directly effects you, things effect you indirectly too

[Madox58]

So your construction company never had a wealthy customer?
Many.
Includeing the U.S. Gov
Seems trickle down missed them also from what my books show.

[CaptainHaplo]

Here is the problem with trickle down economics.....
Its designed to trickle...
The dam is held back by ludicrous regulation.

Here is the reality:

People want to make money. Doesn't matter if they are rich owners, or the "cogs in the machine". If success wasn't so penalized, there would be more incentive to reinvest. After all - its true that "you need money to make money".

The problem is that there is no balance. Some owners will maximize profits at the expense of workers. Liberals howl over this - and like it or not they have a point - it happens. On the other hand, Republicans yell about how government regulation keeps people from having a drive to succeed - and they are right too.

I say give if we can't get rid of the IRS, lets make it useful. Give tax incentives to any company that has a profit sharing plan. The percentage of profits that are distributed to the workers, the company gets an equal break on its taxes. Who will an owner decide to pay? His workers who make him money, or Uncle Sam? Easy choice for anyone who has to make payroll.

This does 2 things. It incentives the owner to "share the wealth" without it being an undue burden (since he is going to pay it one way or the other), as well as gives a direct incentive to the workers to perform. In the end the owner makes more because his people have an interest in doing a good job, the workers make more, and government has to get the heck outta the way. Win/Win/Win!!!

However, this has nothing to do with the OP. So, to that topic, I have no problem with extending unemployment benefits. What I have an issue with is how unemployment benefits are administered. Anyone claiming unemployment should have to pass a drug test regularly. They should have a closer check on whether or not they are actually and seriously putting forth effort in looking for a job.

Does unemployment benefits spur the economy? No. Such benefits are not spent on luxuries - they are spent paying thie rent and light bill. Anyone hear of a recovery because people paid their phone and cable bills? Of course not. However, those funds ARE critical to maintaining stability in an economy. Cut them off, and the economy WILL tank. However, there is no question that our legislators of both parties are pretty much all willing to extend benefits. The question is how are they going to be paid for. Democrats want to increase the debt, Republicans want to use unspent TARP monies.

Considering that TARP has to date been used as a corporate slush fund, I see no reason why the "for the working class" Dems are wanting to protect that corporate slush fund and instead put more debt on the backs of those they say they are looking out for......

Increasing the debt hurts the working class..... using TARP doesn't. So while I agree that this needs to be done, I would love to hear one of our more liberal members (except for tribesman - he is on my iggy list) explain how using corporate slush fund money is a bad thing and burdening the workers with more debt is a good thing.....

[Madox58]

Economics isn't just about the stuff that directly effects you, things effect you indirectly too
Yes, and your the one that posted your 15 years old?
What would you know about running a business?

[the_tyrant]

Yes, and your the one that posted your 15 years old?
What would you know about running a business?

OK, basic economic theory
Marx once said:"in a capitalist society, the upper class always seek to reinvest to increase profit"

I'm not an economist but i know history and political theory

[krashkart]

OK, basic economic theory
Marx once said:"in a capitalist society, the upper class always seek to reinvest to increase profit"

I'm not an economist but i know history and political theory

Theory is that we'd all be employed or employable. Reality is the stronger suit. :yep:

[Ducimus]

Theory is that we'd all be employed or employable. Reality is the stronger suit. :yep:

Yup. One thing i learned really quick when i started working in the real world:

There's what a book says, or how a book says something should be done - and then theirs, how it's really done. The two are often, quite different.

[Tribesman]

So your construction company never had a wealthy customer?
A more relevant question might be ....has he noticed any difference in getting due payments from customers of different wealth levels?

[Platapus]

The problem with Trickle Down Economics is that the middle class soon gets tired of being trickled on.

<rimshot> :D

[Blood_splat]

http://www.ourfuture.org/files/trickledownimg1033.jpg

[Bubblehead1980]

OK, basic economic theory
Marx once said:"in a capitalist society, the upper class always seek to reinvest to increase profit"

I'm not an economist but i know history and political theory


Please tell me you did not just quote Marx, ehhhh.

[Bubblehead1980]

No there wasn't. If you believe that, then prove it. Hard numbers and data, please.

The economy turned around under Reagan in the 80's who was a big proponent of supply side aka trickle down, it worked, pretty well.The Dem controlled Congress did not mind too much then, but that was when the Dem party was still somewhat of a decent party and not the party of Barry O.

[krashkart]

The problem with Trickle Down Economics is that the middle class soon gets tired of being trickled on.

<rimshot> :D

http://th157.photobucket.com/albums/t69/FreedomOne_1/th_applause1.jpg

[kiwi_2005]

What a load of BS. From where I sit, extending unemployment benefits doesn't spur recovery, if anything it spurs laziness.

I see way too many of our students who, although they can easily get a job with the skills they have learned in our trade school, don't bother looking because they are still sucking from the government teat.

"Why work when you can get a paycheck for free?", seems to be their reasoning. Now that the government is talking about ending the free ride they are coming out of the woodwork demanding placement assistance. :nope:

:up: Well said. Our Prime Minister John Key would employ you as Minster of Welfare in an instant!

Whenever I'm out of work I become this negative, lazy, sloth. Work is good for the well being and keeps me sane!

[mookiemookie]

The economy turned around under Reagan in the 80's who was a big proponent of supply side aka trickle down, it worked, pretty well.

How did it work pretty well when the poverty rate increased and middle income wages were only marginally higher at the end of the 80's than they were in the start of the decade? Where did the trickle go? Why did productivity stagnate in the 1980s? Does Volcker's handling of inflation not get any credit? Why is there very little correlation (0.03 correlation coefficient) between tax rate cuts and GDP growth when you examine the data points from 1982 to 2001?

Correlation is not causation. Until you can answer those questions, then claiming Reagan's tax cuts caused the economic recovery in the 1980s without examining other factors at work makes you nothing more than a partisan political hack. But then again, we already knew that.

[The Third Man]

Can you see the compromise comming? I'll give an extension on the all needed tax breaks for the all needed extension of unemployment benefits?

If not...you heard it here first.

[Sailor Steve]

OMG, a compromise! EVERYBODY RUN!

[The Third Man]

OMG, a compromise! EVERYBODY RUN!

Compromises are always bad for someone.

[krashkart]

OMG, a compromise! EVERYBODY RUN!

No worries. August is mobilized and on the scene.

http://www.brickarms.com/Images2/Products/M1_Helmet_Gallery_5.jpg

I hope he's a good sport about this sort of thing. :salute:

[gimpy117]

The economy turned around under Reagan in the 80's who was a big proponent of supply side aka trickle down, it worked, pretty well.The Dem controlled Congress did not mind too much then, but that was when the Dem party was still somewhat of a decent party and not the party of Barry O.

It worked pretty well for the rich in this country...just not everybody else

[Sailor Steve]

Compromises are always bad for someone.
You're absolutely right. It's the price to be paid for freedom and democracy.

I apologize if there was a misunderstanding on my part. I thought your comment was in part joking, and I tried to reply in kind.

[Stealth Hunter]

The economy turned around under Reagan in the 80's who was a big proponent of supply side aka trickle down, it worked, pretty well.The Dem controlled Congress did not mind too much then, but that was when the Dem party was still somewhat of a decent party and not the party of Barry O.

The numbers say otherwise. In fact, under Reagan, our national debt increased- moreso than under any other president in history since 1945-- by 20.6% ($1.7T). The economy didn't "turn around". It got worse. It got worse under Bush, Sr. as well. Under President Clinton, it turned around, however, and our debt actually decreased.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_debt_by_U.S._presidential_terms

Trickle-Down economics does not work for anybody below the upper class line, ultimately causing it to fail to accomplish anything remotely beneficial for the people of the nation. It did not work when Herbert Hoover tried it, it did not work when Reagan tried it (though funnily enough when Hoover tried it, things actually got worse for a good portion of the upper class).

[Madox58]

A more relevant question might be ....has he noticed any difference in getting due payments from customers of different wealth levels?

Yes I did see the difference.
The smaller Companies paid much slower then the bigger Companies.
But even the Big Companies got slower to pay.
And the Companies that paid them were slower to pay.
And I'm not talking about some unknown, smaller Companies.
Walk in to any Mall near you and pick out one of the Businesses.
Chances are I did work in one of thier Stores somewhere in the U.S.

[August]

Yes I did see the difference.
The smaller Companies paid much slower then the bigger Companies.
But even the Big Companies got slower to pay.
And the Companies that paid them were slower to pay.
And I'm not talking about some unknown, smaller Companies.
Walk in to any Mall near you and pick out one of the Businesses.
Chances are I did work in one of thier Stores somewhere in the U.S.

Companies aren't individuals though.

[Madox58]

Companies aren't individuals though.
I'm not catching your point on that.
:hmmm:
I am a Company.
Small yes, but I employed others.
Paid all types of insurance and taxes.
But I'm still an individual.
As were all of my Guys.
Or is there a size of Company that is the factor?

[August]

I'm not catching your point on that.

I only asked if you had done work for wealthy individuals. I guess your company is more oriented to commercial customers than residential.

[Madox58]

I only asked if you had done work for wealthy individuals. I guess your company is more oriented to commercial customers than residential.
It was Yes.
The scale back I had to do resulted in going back to local residential work.
So it's just me doing Sub Contracts for Local Builders right now.
And Yes they are suffering now also.
I've work for them on and off for over 10 years and I see the problems they have also.
In the Constuction Game I see a pattern.
When GM shut down it's factory near here?
Quit a few people started doing Construction to make ends meet.
That causes the 'trickle down' effect I'm seeing.
They work at cut throat prices, we lose bids.
And most of the time?
They are collecting benefits while doing so.
We do have a dedicated clientele that has some pretty well off people.
But even they have cut back on what and when they do any major work.

[August]

We do have a dedicated clientele that has some pretty well off people. But even they have cut back on what and when they do any major work.

Do you think that increasing their taxes like the Democrats advocate will make them cut back more or less?

[Madox58]

Do you think that increasing their taxes like the Democrats advocate will make them cut back more or less?
They have stated to us that future work may well depend on the out come.
The contracts we have now are pretty much a 'let's get it done before'
thing.
The Construction business is tough enuff in Good Times.
It's been a nightmare for many the last few years.
:nope:
One of the things they always point to to show how the times are going is the Construction business.
If we ain't building stuff?
It's not a good sign.

[onelifecrisis]

The benefits of benefits change with the times like everything else. The article linked in the OP even says this. Reading the comments in this thread I'm struck by a thought: it'd be nice if people didn't stick quite so rigidly to their ideals and tried to move with the times a bit more. "All benefits are always bad" is just as poor a stance to take as "all benefits are always good".

[The Third Man]

Has anyone been hired by someone on government assistance?

[CaptainHaplo]

I see none of our liberal posters decided to take on my challenge.

Why am I not suprised?

[Armistead]

Maybe the laws are different in your area but here well over 3/4ths of my present class are drawing unemployment benefits.



In addition to regular benefits the government is paying for their tuition as well. In out little school alone i'd bet at least 200 students get this deal.



Here's where we can agree. Employers tell me it takes a literal mountain of paperwork to deny someone benefits. It's so difficult they often just bite the bullet and pay benefits to people who they should have been able to fire outright.

They do almost always get them. It's not a lot of paperwork, they file, you get it and can protest causing a hearing. I'm been to hundreds of them and lose 90% of the time. They just know they have no income and it's sitting there to get.

I had one guy leave the job without telling me, leaving the crew with no van, no way home, ect. I was even on the job. Called him and he said I told him we could get off at lunch, so he left. I told him hopefully we could get done by lunch, but we weren't and come back. He said he had to go home. I had to have the van back, so I told him to bring it to my house and he did. He couldn't find a way home and was gonna walk 20 miles home. He had a heart condition, so I offered him a car I had, refused. We argued and I even threw the keys at his feet...wouldn't take them. I told him we needed to part ways and let him go.

His claim stated I fired him for being sick and forced him to walk home in the summer heat with a heart condition. He stated he had to get an ambulance to come get him. I was so mad I protested his claim....still lost.