07-15-2010, 11:03 AM
|
#325
|
Infamous Member
How Do You Identify?: Woman
Preferred Pronoun?: HER - SHE
Relationship Status: Relating
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: CA & AZ I'm a Snowbird
Posts: 5,408
Thanks: 11,826
Thanked 10,827 Times in 3,200 Posts
Rep Power: 21474857
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by The_Lady_Snow
|
I am disgusted with GOP congressional assbites saying people will not look for work if unemployment insurance is not extended!! Saying they are lazy and extending unemployment benefits will only result in people refusing work?
Some of this is based upon how some people are not taking jobs far from where they live. OK, many people have child care needs (especially in summer months). Child care is expensive and when you add on more hours due to commuting, it gets even more expensive. Plus, travel is not cheap! and wear and tear on cars, etc. So, if one takes a job further away and it is also one that pays less than their prior employment, they have child care and commuting expenses on top of that, they are lazy for not taking that job? Some folks also take care of ill parents and need day care for them, as well. Hell, they could have kids in school and aging, sick parents!! There are a lot of people these days with these kinds of obligations.
Also, do the unemployment/looking for work stats take into account people that have decided to re-train for another kind of work? Many are doing this that have lost jobs in industries that may not come back. Seems like a smart thing to do to me. They are opening up more doors for employment during a very tough time.
This kind of thinking makes me nuts! Congressional members are so out of touch with what the average people are going through!! This, when lack of regulation as well as pure greed (via the top level of people with mega incomes!!) put the economy where it is!!!
Then there is the fact that the US worker supplies the funds within the unemployment insurance system overall!
The deficit is far too high, however, if people don’t have work, it will actually get higher in the long run.
|
|
|