OT: Unemployment Abuse

[blahblahblah]

I don’t give a flying f*** about a few layabout lifeguards paying into unemployment for a few months and then withdrawing for a while. Hell I should have done that when I was younger, I probably would have had more fun. But criminal finance oligarchs that extort billions in bailouts for themselves and their buddies, that gets me angry.

[briansd1]

That’s exactly right Concho.

You can’t get rich drawing unemployment insurance.

Unemployment is normally limited to 6 months with a look back period of 2 quarters, I believe. So it’s not possible to work for 3 months and draw unemployment for 9 months. There are limits based on how long one has worked prior to filing for unemployment.

The max unemployment is something like $450 and most don’t even get that.

One is much better off being gainfully employed.

[briansd1]

That’s exactly right Concho.

You can’t get rich drawing unemployment insurance.

Unemployment is normally limited to 6 months with a look back period of 2 quarters, I believe. So it’s not possible to work for 3 months and draw unemployment for 9 months. There are limits based on how long one has worked prior to filing for unemployment.

The max unemployment is something like $450 and most don’t even get that.

One is much better off being gainfully employed.

[briansd1]

That’s exactly right Concho.

You can’t get rich drawing unemployment insurance.

Unemployment is normally limited to 6 months with a look back period of 2 quarters, I believe. So it’s not possible to work for 3 months and draw unemployment for 9 months. There are limits based on how long one has worked prior to filing for unemployment.

The max unemployment is something like $450 and most don’t even get that.

One is much better off being gainfully employed.

[briansd1]

That’s exactly right Concho.

You can’t get rich drawing unemployment insurance.

Unemployment is normally limited to 6 months with a look back period of 2 quarters, I believe. So it’s not possible to work for 3 months and draw unemployment for 9 months. There are limits based on how long one has worked prior to filing for unemployment.

The max unemployment is something like $450 and most don’t even get that.

One is much better off being gainfully employed.

[briansd1]

That’s exactly right Concho.

You can’t get rich drawing unemployment insurance.

Unemployment is normally limited to 6 months with a look back period of 2 quarters, I believe. So it’s not possible to work for 3 months and draw unemployment for 9 months. There are limits based on how long one has worked prior to filing for unemployment.

The max unemployment is something like $450 and most don’t even get that.

One is much better off being gainfully employed.

[desmond]

[quote=briansd1]

Unemployment is insurance and not welfare. It’s funded by premiums (taxes) paid by employers. But of course the extensions are government bailouts.[/quote]

bri,

The state is also broke on this fund: From the SacBee:
The state’s unemployment insurance fund, meanwhile, is about $7 billion in the red, and that deficit is expected to more than double in the next year and quadruple by the end of 2011. The state has been borrowing from the federal government, but sooner or later it will have to repay the feds, probably by taxing employers.

[desmond]

[quote=briansd1]

Unemployment is insurance and not welfare. It’s funded by premiums (taxes) paid by employers. But of course the extensions are government bailouts.[/quote]

bri,

The state is also broke on this fund: From the SacBee:
The state’s unemployment insurance fund, meanwhile, is about $7 billion in the red, and that deficit is expected to more than double in the next year and quadruple by the end of 2011. The state has been borrowing from the federal government, but sooner or later it will have to repay the feds, probably by taxing employers.

[desmond]

[quote=briansd1]

Unemployment is insurance and not welfare. It’s funded by premiums (taxes) paid by employers. But of course the extensions are government bailouts.[/quote]

bri,

The state is also broke on this fund: From the SacBee:
The state’s unemployment insurance fund, meanwhile, is about $7 billion in the red, and that deficit is expected to more than double in the next year and quadruple by the end of 2011. The state has been borrowing from the federal government, but sooner or later it will have to repay the feds, probably by taxing employers.

[desmond]

[quote=briansd1]

Unemployment is insurance and not welfare. It’s funded by premiums (taxes) paid by employers. But of course the extensions are government bailouts.[/quote]

bri,

The state is also broke on this fund: From the SacBee:
The state’s unemployment insurance fund, meanwhile, is about $7 billion in the red, and that deficit is expected to more than double in the next year and quadruple by the end of 2011. The state has been borrowing from the federal government, but sooner or later it will have to repay the feds, probably by taxing employers.

[desmond]

[quote=briansd1]

Unemployment is insurance and not welfare. It’s funded by premiums (taxes) paid by employers. But of course the extensions are government bailouts.[/quote]

bri,

The state is also broke on this fund: From the SacBee:
The state’s unemployment insurance fund, meanwhile, is about $7 billion in the red, and that deficit is expected to more than double in the next year and quadruple by the end of 2011. The state has been borrowing from the federal government, but sooner or later it will have to repay the feds, probably by taxing employers.

[briansd1]

desmond, at least it’s paid for as the Republicans would put it. 😉 It doesn’t come out of the general fund.

In that regard, as I said, it’s insurance paid by employers (indirectly by employees and customers).

They should’ve charged more unemployment insurance premiums during the good years.

[briansd1]

desmond, at least it’s paid for as the Republicans would put it. 😉 It doesn’t come out of the general fund.

In that regard, as I said, it’s insurance paid by employers (indirectly by employees and customers).

They should’ve charged more unemployment insurance premiums during the good years.

[briansd1]

desmond, at least it’s paid for as the Republicans would put it. 😉 It doesn’t come out of the general fund.

In that regard, as I said, it’s insurance paid by employers (indirectly by employees and customers).

They should’ve charged more unemployment insurance premiums during the good years.

[briansd1]

desmond, at least it’s paid for as the Republicans would put it. 😉 It doesn’t come out of the general fund.

In that regard, as I said, it’s insurance paid by employers (indirectly by employees and customers).

They should’ve charged more unemployment insurance premiums during the good years.

[Author]

Posts