How does your states unemployment insurance stack up?

[KingCondanomation]

The plural of anecdote is not evidence. As with your causation problems you have serious selection bias problems stemming largely from your reliance on the Danecdote.

As for the life I have lived and whether it is more or less "elite" (whatever the fuck that means in this context) I venture that you haven't the foggiest idea what you are talking about. It's of a piece with your smug self-righteousness though.

Uh-huh, I said the obvious: that more government payouts mean more government taxes and that higher benefits mean less urgency to get a job, the anecdotal ADDITION was just that and I didn't rely on it at all. Most normal people can relate to that and in fact Chap saw the common sense in that point.
I think part of your starting out with an attack is that you live in Mass and take it personally. Well Chap brought the discussion up implying his state was better because of the higher UI payouts. I gave a rebuttal.

If you get MORE generous unemployment insurance, would that mean you pay MORE or LESS in unemployment insurance premiums?
Honestly, is it really worth arguing the illogical?

 

[Bonestorm]

Uh-huh, I said the obvious: that more government payouts mean more government taxes and that higher benefits mean less urgency to get a job, the anecdotal ADDITION was just that and I didn't rely on it at all. Most normal people can relate to that and in fact Chap saw the common sense in that point.
I think part of your starting out with an attack is that you live in Mass and take it personally. Well Chap brought the discussion up implying his state was better because of the higher UI payouts. I gave a rebuttal.

If you get MORE generous unemployment insurance, would that mean you pay MORE or LESS in unemployment insurance premiums?
Honestly, is it really worth arguing the illogical?

I don't take anything personally. If the issue is which state has a higher UI tax rate, you don't have to resort to dumbass Danecdotes about some guy traveling to China to find out the answer.

Also, I understand the point that unemployment insurance may make some people less urgent to find a job, but the idea that it should be scrapped altogether as a result is just plain stupid. That's what I have an issue with.

 

[Chapdog]

Uh-huh, I said the obvious: that more government payouts mean more government taxes and that higher benefits mean less urgency to get a job, the anecdotal ADDITION was just that and I didn't rely on it at all. Most normal people can relate to that and in fact Chap saw the common sense in that point.
I think part of your starting out with an attack is that you live in Mass and take it personally. Well Chap brought the discussion up implying his state was better because of the higher UI payouts. I gave a rebuttal.

If you get MORE generous unemployment insurance, would that mean you pay MORE or LESS in unemployment insurance premiums?
Honestly, is it really worth arguing the illogical?

not to move away from the focus on this tread but I am not so sure that its always a good thing to allow people to make there own choices when it comes to there financial security. lets talk about privatization of social security for a moment. If this had passed back in 2001 where would these people be now. No guaranteed social security and there retirement accounts worth a fraction of what they were? Generally speaking people dont make good financial decisions as a whole and proven by the levels of debt we hold on average.

While I love some of the libertarian ideas you really have to be willing to let a family lose everything during a crisis or for people to become very charitable if you take out all the safety nets.

 

[KingCondanomation]

not to move away from the focus on this tread but I am not so sure that its always a good thing to allow people to make there own choices when it comes to there financial security. lets talk about privatization of social security for a moment. If this had passed back in 2001 where would these people be now. No guaranteed social security and there retirement accounts worth a fraction of what they were? Generally speaking people dont make good financial decisions as a whole and proven by the levels of debt we hold on average.

Do you believe with now over 10.5 trillion debt and rising fast with each bailout that our government is BETTER with money?

You know I acknowledge there are irreponsible people but Chap what really stops an honest person cold on the belief of government doing for people being a good (and comfortable feeling) thing is to ask yourself: "How are people ever going to become more responsible and self-dependent by having them be made continually more dependent on the responsibility of government?"
Just let go and start trusting people again, life insurance is not forced, there CAN be hardship for those who don't buy it but overall it is not a crisis.

While I love some of the libertarian ideas you really have to be willing to let a family lose everything during a crisis or for people to become very charitable if you take out all the safety nets.

What makes you think they wouldn't be more charitable with lower taxes?
An intriguing and hopeful fact is that the average American is 9 times more charitable than the average Frenchman in left-wing France:
http://www.aeipoliticalcorner.org/NO Articles/no020620.pdf

 

[Cancel3]

Mostly true for sure, but my point is they will look harder with more urgency, it's just human nature or really nature in general.

Again, if you see value in it, by all means pay for it, that's how insurance should work, I just don't and others don't and we shouldn't be forced to pay for it.
There's a lot of value in life insurance, doesn't mean it should be forced either.

Well jeez, I am against the war in Iraq, but I don't seem to have a choice in paying for that.

I am against quite a few things that my tax dollars fund, but they still get funded.



The bottom line is that people still have to pay bills and eat when there are temporary job losses. We all pay for it.

 

[KingCondanomation]

I don't take anything personally. If the issue is which state has a higher UI tax rate, you don't have to resort to dumbass Danecdotes about some guy traveling to China to find out the answer.

I didn't resort to it, it was just a supporting piece. You know on the morning when I had first been laid off, I had just under 2 years experience and was pretty worried and went straight home and searching for jobs 45 minutes later after the layoff.
It just turns my stomach having to pay for people who want to take it easy, just as welfare reform was needed, so too is unemployment insurance reform needed and the right reform is to make it optional.

Also, I understand the point that unemployment insurance may make some people less urgent to find a job, but the idea that it should be scrapped altogether as a result is just plain stupid. That's what I have an issue with.

I didn't say it should be scrapped (though in a perfect world it should be), but in this world it should just be made optional.

 

[Chapdog]

Do you believe with now over 10.5 trillion debt and rising fast with each bailout that our government is BETTER with money?

You know I acknowledge there are irreponsible people but Chap what really stops an honest person cold on the belief of government doing for people being a good (and comfortable feeling) thing is to ask yourself: "How are people ever going to become more responsible and self-dependent by having them be made continually more dependent on the responsibility of government?"
Just let go and start trusting people again, life insurance is not forced, there CAN be hardship for those who don't buy it but overall it is not a crisis.


What makes you think they wouldn't be more charitable with lower taxes?
An intriguing and hopeful fact is that the average American is 9 times more charitable than the average Frenchman in left-wing France:
http://www.aeipoliticalcorner.org/NO Articles/no020620.pdf

Im guessing with the broken link its probably due to the fact that our tax code allows for a lot of deductions for charitable work/donations.
BTW I worked in the finance department of some very large charitable funds and believe me.. just because people are donating to those funds doesn't mean the money is getting distributed. Very few charities distribute the money they get in the same calendar year. Try 10years out.

 

[KingCondanomation]

Well jeez, I am against the war in Iraq, but I don't seem to have a choice in paying for that.
I am against quite a few things that my tax dollars fund, but they still get funded.

By forgoing paying for unemployment insurance, you would then give up your claim to obtaining them. You are not obtaining any TANGIBLE benefit from war, there is no benefit to renounce. Defence spending (whether right or wrong) can only really ever be a non-individual benefit.

The bottom line is that people still have to pay bills and eat when there are temporary job losses. We all pay for it.

And I may well be in a better position to handle that situation with the money I saved from not paying for unemployment insurance. If you feel different than by all means continue to pay for it, but let me have my free choice on it too.

People will always be able to eat, I once worked at McD's and did so through the last real recession in the 90's, NO ONE got laid off or even a remote chance of it, yet we were all forced to pay unemployment insurance that we didn't have the slightest chance of ever using.
Really it ended up being an income transfer from the poor to the (idler) better off.

 

[Bonestorm]

I didn't resort to it, it was just a supporting piece. You know on the morning when I had first been laid off, I had just under 2 years experience and was pretty worried and went straight home and searching for jobs 45 minutes later after the layoff.
It just turns my stomach having to pay for people who want to take it easy, just as welfare reform was needed, so too is unemployment insurance reform needed and the right reform is to make it optional.


I didn't say it should be scrapped (though in a perfect world it should be), but in this world it should just be made optional.

1) More smug self-righteousness.

2) Your perfect world was America circa 1920. It sucked.

 

[KingCondanomation]

Im guessing with the broken link its probably due to the fact that our tax code allows for a lot of deductions for charitable work/donations.
BTW I worked in the finance department of some very large charitable funds and believe me.. just because people are donating to those funds doesn't mean the money is getting distributed. Very few charities distribute the money they get in the same calendar year. Try 10years out.

I believe you, but one of the nice things in a free market is that you have a huge choice of charities and don't have to give your money/time to those that you don't think are doing a good job with it. As you know with government there is no such option.

 

[Chapdog]

I believe you, but one of the nice things in a free market is that you have a huge choice of charities and don't have to give your money/time to those that you don't think are doing a good job with it. As you know with government there is no such option.

I just think its a fantacy to belive that without safty nets charity alone would keep things status quo.. or improve them

Im thinking is 50% of thoes who no longer have to pay for safty nets will buy new boats and cars and not pay a single cent more to charity. The other 50% may increase there charity donations but to organizations that are just as corrupt as the governement and not nearly to the same amount as with the safety nets.

The results.. More people losing home, more starving people, more people on street, more crime and loan sharking.. It trickles down. Like everything there needs to be a balance. Benjamin Franklin invented insurance for a reason.

 

[Cancel3]

By forgoing paying for unemployment insurance, you would then give up your claim to obtaining them. You are not obtaining any TANGIBLE benefit from war, there is no benefit to renounce. Defence spending (whether right or wrong) can only really ever be a non-individual benefit.



And I may well be in a better position to handle that situation with the money I saved from not paying for unemployment insurance. If you feel different than by all means continue to pay for it, but let me have my free choice on it too.

People will always be able to eat, I once worked at McD's and did so through the last real recession in the 90's, NO ONE got laid off or even a remote chance of it, yet we were all forced to pay unemployment insurance that we didn't have the slightest chance of ever using.
Really it ended up being an income transfer from the poor to the (idler) better off.

And most employers would rather not make their contributions to unemployment insurance.

Its partly about your individual need, and partly about contributing to the society you live in.

And given a choice, most people will not contribute whether they are at risk of unemployment or not. A quick look at the credit crisis is ample evidence of that.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Unemployment insurance should be optional, often times poorer people work jobs where they have little chance of ever getting laid off (ie: gas station, fast food, retail) yet they are forced to pay unemployment insurance for largely wealthier people.
It should be optional. Push your rep to try and make it optional.

Dano, if you made unemployment insurance optional the wealthy people with job security would opt out and the poor would be left paying it, which most would choose not to do because the prices would become so outrageous.

Keep unemployment insurance mandatory and make it pay at least 75% of previous wages for a year.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

They try and find another job. Often people get packages or they have savings, I mean you yourself have a ton of stock. Worse case scenario is you find a job that was less than you had.
I've known at least 4 people personally who have dragged their heels after being laid off saying that they had no rush because the unemployment insurance is there. One even decided to take a trip to China because he felt it was a great time to take a vacation.

I don't want to pay for it, do you? If so, I respect your decision but please respect mine not to be forced to pay for insurance I don't want.

You're an idiot.

Try telling that to people who would starve to death under your regime. "Go get a job" when there are no jobs around. FUcking retard.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Try including the total tax burden, Alabama is the LOWEST in the nation, NO state beats them:

"Alabama can again claim to have the nation's lowest state and local tax collections per person. New Census Bureau reports for fiscal 2006 show Alabama's state, county and city governments collected $2,782 in taxes per person.
The national median was $3,700."
http://www.wkrg.com/consumer/article/tax_friendly_alabama/15646/

Chap, this is a silly point to debate anyway, obviously if Solitary says unemployment insurance is lower there, it stands to reason that the unemployment insurance contributions are also correspondingly lower as well.

That's because the conservatard regime has made everyone there so poor that any tax collection they do isn't going to turn up much.

 

[Damocles]

I'll look into that as soon as somebody I know needs to collect it.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Uh-huh, I said the obvious: that more government payouts mean more government taxes and that higher benefits mean less urgency to get a job, the anecdotal ADDITION was just that and I didn't rely on it at all. Most normal people can relate to that and in fact Chap saw the common sense in that point.
I think part of your starting out with an attack is that you live in Mass and take it personally. Well Chap brought the discussion up implying his state was better because of the higher UI payouts. I gave a rebuttal.

If you get MORE generous unemployment insurance, would that mean you pay MORE or LESS in unemployment insurance premiums?
Honestly, is it really worth arguing the illogical?

There should be a guaranteed minimum income at the poverty level whether or not you have a job.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Do you believe with now over 10.5 trillion debt and rising fast with each bailout that our government is BETTER with money?

You know I acknowledge there are irreponsible people but Chap what really stops an honest person cold on the belief of government doing for people being a good (and comfortable feeling) thing is to ask yourself: "How are people ever going to become more responsible and self-dependent by having them be made continually more dependent on the responsibility of government?"
Just let go and start trusting people again, life insurance is not forced, there CAN be hardship for those who don't buy it but overall it is not a crisis.


What makes you think they wouldn't be more charitable with lower taxes?
An intriguing and hopeful fact is that the average American is 9 times more charitable than the average Frenchman in left-wing France:
http://www.aeipoliticalcorner.org/NO Articles/no020620.pdf

France is one of the most conservative nations in the world.

 

[Damocles]

France is one of the most conservative nations in the world.

If you only count "social conservatism".

You never complete the statement.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

If you only count "social conservatism".

You never complete the statement.

Yeah but I hate dano.

I typically hate social conservatives a lot more than fiscal ones, but when they get as dogmatic as Dano...