I know it's not politically correct or even compassionate, but the so-called 99ers irk the hell out of me. Our transparent government refuses to release any hard numbers when it comes to unemployment, but it's probably safe to say there are a million or two folks in this protected class.
They've become their own lobby. They've become a bargaining chip for the tax debate. They've become the ultimate squeaky wheel. I call "bullshit".
The truth is that a vast majority of Americans don't qualify for unemployment at all. Who cares about them or their Christmas? No one, that's who. Of those who have been eligible for unemployment "benefits" during this infernal big R Recession, most have long ago exhausted their pile of federal dough. No one is screaming bloody murder about their Christmas, either.
The non-99ers have lost their homes, they've cleaned out their retirement savings to buy food and shelter for their kids, they've moved to other states to find whatever work they can, and they've survived with dignity. We all owe them our respect.
Out of the few who are "lucky" enough to be 99ers, it seems that many have made a career out of oinking at the federal trough and wringing their idle hands on the front page of our newspapers. Enough is enough. Get a fucking job, already. If you can't find one, MAKE one. Sell your toys. Load up the truck and move to Montana. DO SOMETHING.
The tomato-throwing can now commence. No need to point out specific cases of 99er calamity; for every case you can point to with a sniffle and a tear, I can point to ten or twelve cases of families who have coped with little or no federal money, and with worse circumstances. Don't tell me that there are no jobs; go pick lettuce or flip burgers. Wal-Mart is hiring. Nursing homes are always looking for CNAs. Sell Avon, fer chrissakes. I know several people who have started selling Avon, and they're making enough scratch to buy a few groceries and half-fill the gas tank.
Just call me a cranky curmudgeon. I'm good with that. Just do it as you're taking your hand out of my pocket, m'kay?
I read something this morning about a woman who stated she wants to collect unemployment until the job market is "robust", or some such nonsense. Gahhh....
ReplyDeleteA lot of people in my area have really tightened their belts, and will have a VERY lean Christmas. When I hear a 99er make comments like this woman, my blood boils. x(
Lady Red, I do wish you would get worked up about something once in a while.
ReplyDeleteI agree. Progress is not made if people are not willing to take gambles and go for it. That is the problem with the "tax the rich" mentality: let's penalize those who are going out, taking the risks, and making them pay. Rich families often do not stay rich from generation to generation, as the younger generations never had to work for the money, don't know how to work for the money, and do not work for the money.
Donald Trump knows how to work. Sure, he started with a silver (plated) spoon in his mouth, but he worked hard and is much richer than his father ever was.
The Kennedy familiy, on the other hand, has managed to place itself into government, where they can 1) exploit their name to keep the dollars flowing in, and 2) protect the money they have.
Too many people want to take the safe route. And society suffers as a consequence. People should not be reckless, but they do need to try.
Good points Matt.
ReplyDeleteI guess I'm a product of my generation. To hear people BRAGGING about being on the dole astounds me. And when I see how hard young families are scrambling to meet basic needs, and to provide some kind of Christmas for their children (without UE), I definitely get a bit worked up.
Really? I did not notice.
ReplyDeleteI hope you don't feel that I am having fun at your expense, but what you say is so true. I always resent it when people are punished for doing the right thing.
The sad part is that people will brag about getting handouts and vote for those who will stick it to those who actually foot the bill. That has to change.
For us furriners, please explain what a 99 er is...
ReplyDeleteYes, yes, yes and yes.
ReplyDeleteI was listening to some talk radio show a couple of weeks ago and a called was complaining that since Republicans don't want to extend unemployment it proved that they care about children. After all, many of those 99ers have children, and those children will needlessly suffer if the benefits expire. The host (I don't remember who it was- could have been one of the Marks who fill in for Rush from time to time) asked who is responsible for taking care of the needs of a child? Isn't it the parents? Shouldn't the parents do whatever the need to do to make sure their children well cared for? Do we really want they government to be responsible for taking care of the needs of our children?
Er, it's not just furriners, I don't know what a 99er is either.
ReplyDeleteFay, 99ers are those who are reaching the end of their super-duper extended unemployment benefits after 99 weeks.
ReplyDeleteEnough is enough. Get a fucking job, already. If you can't find one, MAKE one. Sell your toys. Load up the truck and move to Montana. DO SOMETHING.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Alphie and I are among the dopes who went out and found jobs outside of our respective fields, just to have something. We both pretty much hate our jobs, but... they're jobs. They pay the bills, put food on the table and will put presents under the tree.
We're a couple of dopes, since the government could have done all that for us.
Lady Red, I found myself agreeing with all of your points in this post. I have people working for me who would rather be drawing un-employment than working with shorter hours because they can make more. Sad.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work.
That is the problem with the "tax the rich" mentality: let's penalize those who are going out, taking the risks, and making them pay.
ReplyDeleteMatt, I love the arguement that we should tax the rich more since they're not going to put their money into the local economy anyway. (Uhhh... but aren't the rich the ones who- you know- hire people?)
lady red, I get what you're saying, but I will confess - the issue doesn't get me as vexed.
ReplyDeleteIt's worth remembering that with respect to unemployment, this time really is different:
imgw:"http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d170/lewy14/03economix-recession-blog480.jpg"
Different from all the other post WWII recessions, anyway - different from the "hard times" of living memory (of those still in the workforce, anyway).
I'm sure there are scammers. I'm also pretty open to the idea that there are decent people who are at the end of their rope through no real lack of virtue.
Personally I'm seeing a new kind of homeless person around Portland - younger, but not kids - not obviously messed up. They are well equipped - decent outerwear and gear - but worn, and dirty...
...like they consciously put their last dollars into gear that would carry them through the winter, spending a good chunk of time outdoors.
I'm not certain that extending unemployment benefits is a great idea. However...
I owe my current comfortable circumstances to a mix of prudence and good fortune - each essential. I'm also pretty sure I don't have all the facts on the current cohort of people - quite substantial in number - who've suffered long term unemployment and are frankly therefore unlikely to be employed again at anything close to their previous level.
And finally, I'm pretty sure that the crappy employment level is going to be persistent for some years into the future, because the prior bubbles were not just "real estate bubbles" or "tech bubbles", but fundamentally employment bubbles. Jobs were created by ever rising levels of debt, public and private. The growth of that debt is now over, and it is slowly shrinking. This is a real and ongoing drag on the economy.
The sum of these considerations prevents me from becoming overly vexed by the existence of scammers and whingers among the 99ers.
As a matter of policy, it is an unfortunate economic truth that stuff that you subsidize will tend to be overproduced - including that pernicious stuff called "idleness". So that's grounds to avoid further subsidy right there.
But I'm mindful of the intangible costs of withholding assistance, and not eager to judge those who ask.
Fay and florrie, unemployment benefits are a type of social safety net. Employers (not employees) pay into a fund on behalf of each of their workers. In the event the worker loses his job, they can draw up to 26 weeks of unemployment from the state and/or feds, to tide them over until they find another job.
ReplyDeleteThe system has been abused for years, but in this case, the length of time some workers (in high unemployment states) have to draw benefits has been extended repeatedly. These people have now been drawing an unearned check for 99 weeks, and are about to be extended again. It's created a small class of subsidized people who are receiving benefits all the rest of the country's unemployed aren't.
Why should a jobless person in Nevada (for example) get a check every week, while a jobless guy in New Hampshire doesn't? Out of work is out of work.
If they're not going to actively change their situation, the least the 99ers could do is shut their yap, take the dole money, and be grateful they live where they do.
Thank you, Tom! It's good to see you on TCKT! Your input as an employer is a cornerstone to this conversation. You're seeing some of the same things I am, at ground level.
ReplyDeleteAlphie, I respect you and your wife so much for taking the bull by the horns and doing whatever it takes to survive this %^&* Recession. It's people like you who keep the fabric of our nation strong.
Lewy, I saw that scary chart yesterday. Yikes! I agree with you on the "employment" bubble. Without manufacturing, it's difficult to have a comfortable working class/middle class, and I don't see us recouping our manufacturing base any time soon.
ReplyDeleteI guess I shouldn't let the 99ers jaw-flappin' irk me, but it does. People around here are working their tails off at whatever they can find. Some of the menfolk have boomed out, and are sending money home. In other instances, whole families have uprooted and moved to where they can find a job that pays more than nine or ten bucks. These are the same people who's sweat is printing an UE check for somebody else NOT to work. These are also the same people, while barely scrimping by, manage to find a can of corn to donate to the local food bank, or an outgrown winter coat to donate to the school.
I'm not totally heartless; I don't want anyone in my country to go hungry, or be without shelter and warmth. Also, it's not my intention to "judge" the 99ers, or to deny anyone a hand up if they truly need it. It's the "gimme gimme gimme" mentality that sends me into orbit, ya know?
Lewy14 # 12 ....
ReplyDeletePlease explain that graph/chart to me. The numbers do not compute for me ... I so assume I am missing something.
Otherwise I fairly agree with your summary, in particular the cause and effect part. We will not see "full employment" (4% UE or so) again in my lifetime from what I can divine from the financial tea leaves.
Khrushchev's rant that we'd bury ourselves keeps coming to mind for me...enough so that I am going to re-read his book on the topic.
I said I doubt we will see "full employment" (4% UE or so) in my lifetime .... here's why:
ReplyDeleteWe and our government have become addicted to bullshit, both political and financial. That reminds of a banana republic to me.
Those persons and firms (there really are some) who rode the positive side of various bubbles, but never dallied in the phony paper of derivatives or the absurdity of the sub-prime "securities" (rated AA+ of course ... until they weren't), nor worshiped at the "liquidity" (shell game) altar.
Well where are they now? The one's I know are still in business and profitable and paying their employees very well ... albeit fewer employees than before, still not a blood letting ... the most productive were retained as a core. That "core" now works 75+ hours per week and make a lot of money, with little time to actually enjoy it.
Another "bitch & moan" general topic of mine... the idea today the $250K per year defines you or anyone as "rich." In the 1960's maybe, but then I am biased by growing up among Automotive barons. Today, you ain't even near "rich" unless you knock down well over $1 Million after taxes... and I define "rich" as not having to work to get by quite well.
This leads us to the "fair share" argument ... so what is the "fair share" for the falsely defined "$250k rich?" I hear 2% of the population fits in the category .... so tell me what "share" of total taxes do they pay now? Are we trying for over 50% of citizens not paying any taxes what-so-ever? Once that tipping point is reached, we will be in a one party system. Call us Venezuela del Norte.
Ari, the chart illustrates the trajectory which unemployment took in the months after an employment peak.
ReplyDeleteE.g., starting in '74, employment hung out at close to its peak, then dipped, eventually losing 3% or so, and recovering to peak employment levels about 18 months later.
Note the later recessions caused less employment loss, but also took longer for that loss to come back.
The current employment loss is massively deeper, and looks to be lasting a lot longer, than any previous recession (post WWII).
I guess they want that 2% you talk about, Aridog, to pay 50% or more of the taxes.
ReplyDeleteI think they need to redefine "the wealthiest Americans" as well..
"99er?"
ReplyDeleteHeh, see Alphie's comment #8, RWC.
ReplyDeleteHere's what I think (and what *I* think is right, of course. Which is why I think it. Ahem.//sarc for the uninitiated):
ReplyDeleteWe don't take care of each other. Now, we all pay taxes, or we're supposed to. We HATE them. The taxes make social safety nets. We do need some form of those.
HOWEVER, we don't take care of each other as we did prior to the social nets. How many people do you know who have let their hard-luck friends move in with them? Aside from adult children moving home with parents, how many people do you know who have hard-luck FAMILY members living with them?
I think that's an important question, because it personalizes the whole issue. And, as humans, we don't pay attention to issues we can't internalize in that way.
The safety net makes it possible for us to remain separate entities with "help", but it doesn't galvanize us to do things to really mitigate that problem in ways that we are all capable of doing. In short, we're no longer an interconnected village. And that's a huge loss, huge.
My Pop comes to mind as an example of this. My grandparents bought their first farm during the Great Depression, then after WWII they sold it after it was flooded out and purchased another. When I was growing up, I always wondered why my grandfather had two tack rooms instead of just adding on to the first one when his various horse paraphernalia outgrew the space he had.
It was because Tack Room #2 had started out as a shed he allowed a family of 5 to build near his alfalfa field in the late '50s because they were homeless, they needed a job, and they needed a place to live. He paid a low wage (all he could afford for help he only marginally needed) and allowed them to live there until they could get back on their feet.
And until my Pop was in his late 80s, he had a small trailer on his farm that various out-of-luck people lived in in exchange for minimal help around his farm.
My Pop was NOT unusual in doing this. I remember nearly everyone I knew had someone outside of their immediate family living with them at some time or another to "get on their feet."
For various reasons we don't do this anymore, and it is a shame. Legally, you can get caught in a horrible landlord trap when necessity collides with a generation of people who walk around with their hands out and their stuck on overload. Legally, again, should you take issue with someone's bad behavior and the issue escalates, you can find yourself hit with assault charges, your insurance sued for millions for a fall that barely damaged someone's pride, or a million other things.
But I do think this - that if more of us were exposed to the problem directly, because someone NEEDS you and you have to make the decision to help personally, this recession might end a lot sooner than it will now.
The safety net makes it too easy to ignore this.
Oh Lord in Heaven, that's long-winded.
ReplyDeleteI'm going to go correct S2's request to the Bishop for Confirmation, now. That's where my wordiness will be put to best use, I believe.
Thanks florrie
ReplyDeleteAridog, I think we're already inching up on that "50% paying no taxes" mark. It's crazy. And scary, too.
ReplyDeleteAFW, thanks for your comments. You really hit the nail on the head. When I was a kid, my bio-dad was an insurance adjuster (as well as pounding fenders and selling tools). I don't know how many times he'd bring whole families to our house for a meal or to spend the night because they'd been in an auto wreck. It's the way things were done back then. How did we lose that? I deeply believe that we are our brother's keeper. This is not something we can delegate to our government.
Thanks, lady red. I think I'm particularly sensitive to that because we are forced into a Brother's Keeper's lifestyle in the military - you just can't hire people to do some of the things you need people for.
ReplyDeleteNow that I live in a civilian area, I miss it. And I live on a block in a neighborhood where people DO watch out for each other more than in other civilian places!
I think it is precisely because we do delegate it to the government that we are losing it. If someone else will take care of it, why should we?
No one remembers Isaiah 6:8, instead people assume someone else is already there.
Malkin discusses another consequence of the never-ending unemployment gravy train: small businesses are getting clobbered by sky-rocketing UE premium costs.
ReplyDeleteThanks for the beautiful menorah in the sidebar lady red :X
ReplyDeleteYou're welcome, darling Fay. I thought it was beautiful too. :)
ReplyDeleteKisses to you lady red.
ReplyDeleteInteresting - it turns out that the draft tax/benefit deal does not extend benefits past 99 weeks. In fact this was never on the table.
ReplyDeleteI'd blame Obama for either dissembling or not knowing what he's talking about, but really, it's a common enough political trait...
In any case, the blogger I'm linking ("Kid Dynamite") was laboring under the same assumptions as lady red when it came to the "extending unemployment benefits" question. The 99ers won't push into triple digits, but their population will grow...
Lewy, I saw a blog post about this at Ace of Spades last night. WTF?
ReplyDeleteEverything I'd read or seen on TV talked about this new measure extending the 99ers. The 99ers who were interviewed certainly thought so. The president even said as much.
Now it comes out that this doesn't extend the 99ers, it extends everyone in the system that hasn't collected for 99 weeks? I'm scratching my head here.
Off to read your link...
Hmm, Kid Dynamite was taken by surprise too. I can see that more digging is needed.
ReplyDeleteTut tut tut ... y'all need to bone up on the "Pelosi Method" (of mental masturbation). But of course, you got to pass the stuff so you can find out what's in it!!
ReplyDeletePsst: (One of the commentators on KD alluded to this ... and my bet is Obama didn't know any different either.)
Gabriel Malor tries to untangle the tangled tangles. He says: "So far, the Hill, OpenCongress, and Las Vegas' KTVN have correctly described the unemployment insurance extension. Other media, including CNN, ABC News, and Fox News keep incorrectly reporting that the unemployment insurance extension in the deal will add 13 months of coverage to the existing 99 weeks."
ReplyDeleteYou can read his post here.
Typical govt. fubar mess.
ReplyDeleteIn Comment #22, AFW said we do not take care of each other, any more. In that spirit -
ReplyDeleteJust had a call from my other sister, and it seems that our family, with all the financial problems caused by ill-health and no jobs, is still going to adopt another family for Christmas.
Someone my sister went to school with is the single grandmother-in-custody of two children. She works a crap job, and her water is about to be shut off after being unable to pay the bill for the last two quarters, and she has no money to have a Christmas for the kids.
We've already contacted our church about the water bill, and will find out about that soon, but the rest will come from us.
I was already going to be Santa for a church Christmas part next Saturday (no padding needed, sigh) so might as well just fill up the cars and continue on from there to do an early delivery.
No idea the age of the kids, but I already have concocted a story about it being so much work for the reindeer to pull the sleigh on Christmas Eve, that for any other night of the year, all visits I make are of the non-flying variety.
DWT, have I told you lately how much I love you? You and your wonderful family are everything that is good and right and decent, and we're blessed to have your friendship.
ReplyDeleteI know you're probably blushing down to your toes, but I mean it.
Me, too, lady red.
ReplyDeleteDWT's family is EXACTLY what we should all be. Especially now.
Bless you and your family, Dances. I firmly believe that's what it's all about - those who have a little more CHOOSING to share what they can with those who have less.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't about Christmas, but a girl who was our neighbor in a tenement-like, roach-infested apartment complex when I was 5 or 6 found me on FB this week. I have a few memories of her; she was a couple of years older than me and we carpooled to school together. But she told me that she had never forgotten our family because she couldn't forget how my mom was there for her when her mom walked out (I do remember that, and thinking how awful it was). I don't know what my mom did; I'm certain it meant spending time, energy and money she really didn't have. But 30+ years later, it's still resonating.
You never know just how deeply you may influence someone else and their future just because you choose to open your arms, heart or wallet for someone who can't pay you back. Funny how gargantuan government programs based on tax revenues just don't seem to do that.
I want to join the ladies in their sentiments to you, Dances.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't say it any better.
^^^^^Seconded^^^^^
ReplyDelete{{{{Dances}}}}
I am embarrassed, here. It was not the point to gather praise, but just to say that some of us do still try to help, and have not let the 'let (Uncle) Sam do it' attitude lead to lack of care for our neighbors.
ReplyDeleteBy way of update. The church has shouldered not only the cost of the water bill, but has taken special collections to help this family have a Christmas.
ReplyDeleteI am glad, personally, that I bought an extra turkey at Thanksgiving, because we now have another family, with three younger children, to help.
So the money from the church is being spread further, via my sisters shopping skills (close-out sales, etc) and while it will not be extravagant, it will be gifts to open on Christmas morning.
The first family knows that something is coming, but the second family does not, so the gifts and food will appear on their front porch, stealthily, on December 23rd.
but the second family does not
ReplyDeleteSo, you're feeding the Bidens? Funny, they don't look hungry...
---
SRSLY Dances you and your church are doing is truly what Christmas is about.
Absolutely, lewy. What Christmas is really about, but also what we are supposed to do for each other.
ReplyDeleteYou all are a great example to everyone, DWT.