Once again, Democrats stand in the schoolhouse door.

[Gonz]

It does buy votes, though.

The one & only reason it exists as is does.

 

[jimpeel]

When you catch me contradicting myself about this stuff le me know. I won't wait up.

Me neither.

 

[Inkara1]

It does indeed.

That's a bunch of crap and you know it.

It nullifies any argument that's your money anyway.

Nope.

From taxes all employers pay.

...into an insurance fund.

So? Since Gonz has paid into welfare for awhile now if he went on that program you wouldn't consider the program a handout anymore?

Welfare is a handout because you don't have to pay to play. With unemployment, you have to pay first before you can withdraw. That is what I've been saying all along. That is the simple concept.

If you had to pay in first, it seems pretty obvious that it's not a handout.

Glad you kept my sentence in there. It's an important point.

Not a chance.

I obviously do understnad it better than you.

No hypocrisy, you started trolling and insulting. I did not. Quit being childish and talk like an adult.

If you refuse to see how almost everything you post here is trolling, insulting, childish and hypocritical, I can't help you.

You are refusing to grasp a simple concept. Getting paid while offering no goods or services in return is a handout.

You are refusing to grasp a simple concept. Getting paid from a fund that requires you to pay in first is not a handout. Getting paid from welfare, which does not require you to pay in first, is a handout. Further, when on unemployment, you are required to search for a job, which is an attempt to offer goods or services in return.

The level of insurance that you get, the company you use for insurance, your deductible, the other people you insure to drive your car is all of your own choosing. By your logic i have just proved that it is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than unemployment.

You've proved nothing. Also, the level of insurance isn't completely of your own choosing; there is a "state minimum" that you have to get. You cannot choose to carry insurance that pays out less than $15,000 per person/$30,000 per incident. You can choose to pay more for higher amounts of coverage.

Also, you DO know you can also purchase private unemployment insurance in addition to the state fund, right? It would also be possible to get out of that private fund more than you paid in. Would you consider that to be a handout as well?

One is called welfare and one is called unemployment. If one is a handout the other is too.

All other things being equal, that would be the case, but all other things are not equal.

You misunderstood apparently, the finger puppets comment was the childish trolling.

In comparison to a lot of the stuff I've seen you post over the last couple of years, that comment was absolutely nothing. I'd think someone so good at dishing it out would be able to take a little in return.

 

[MrBishop]

No, UI you are getting paid from the UI deductable you pay with every paycheck.

...once that money has been put into a slush fund and given to the GVT to invest...much like retirement funds. It's not literally an account with your name on it from which only you can withdraw. If that were the case, then you could request that money back upon retirement or your family could upon your death.

 

[MrBishop]

The one & only reason it exists as is does.

I'd have to disagree. Both parties draw votes from the program.

 

[MrBishop]

You are refusing to grasp a simple concept. Getting paid from a fund that requires you to pay in first is not a handout. Getting paid from welfare, which does not require you to pay in first, is a handout. Further, when on unemployment, you are required to search for a job, which is an attempt to offer goods or services in return.

That statement assumes that all/most people on welfare never put money into the system prior to them falling into Welfare. The second half assumes that all/most make no effort to find employment.

It casts a shadow over the concept of Welfare..as does the term 'handout'.

 

[paul_valaru]

...once that money has been put into a slush fund and given to the GVT to invest...much like retirement funds. It's not literally an account with your name on it from which only you can withdraw. If that were the case, then you could request that money back upon retirement or your family could upon your death.

wow, that is sorta how insurance works too....

 

[MrBishop]

wow, that is sorta how insurance works too....

and welfare.

There are working-poor - on welfare.
Median time-period for welfare is 6 months...not 6 years.

People on welfare most likely gave money into the program (through taxes) from current/previous employment.

It's time to hang up the straw-man of the eternal-welfare-taker to dry. It's a boogeyman that has little resemblance to reality.

Welfare is an insurance that everyone pays into, hoping that they never have to take from.

 

[2minkey]

Welfare is a handout because you don't have to pay to play. With unemployment, you have to pay first before you can withdraw. That is what I've been saying all along. That is the simple concept.


You are refusing to grasp a simple concept. Getting paid from a fund that requires you to pay in first is not a handout. Getting paid from welfare, which does not require you to pay in first, is a handout. Further, when on unemployment, you are required to search for a job, which is an attempt to offer goods or services in return.

um, but we all pay into welfare too through taxes. in any case, with all of these programs, it is gubmint-backed risk pooling. and that makes it all commiesocialist and such if you're a blustery freedom-loving american who objects to horrible intrusions of horrible motivation-sapping and freedom-destroying government bureaucrats. so for certain members here to lambaste welfare as they regularly do, yet defend unemployment pay, well, it don't quite work in a grand sense.

 

[paul_valaru]

and welfare.

There are working-poor - on welfare.
Median time-period for welfare is 6 months...not 6 years.

People on welfare most likely gave money into the program (through taxes) from current/previous employment.

It's time to hang up the straw-man of the eternal-welfare-taker to dry. It's a boogeyman that has little resemblance to reality.

Welfare is an insurance that everyone pays into, hoping that they never have to take from.

Welfare and UI are2 different things,

I have nothing against welfare, it is needed by some people at certain times. I do believe the government has a certain responsibilty to it's citizens. But I think UI is and insurance program, and welfare is an aid program.

UI benefits come from the UI deductible people pay on there paychecks, no, not everyone claims them, like not everyone has car insurance claims, but when you do claim them, it is coming from money you put into it (not the direct dollar for dollar of course) but you are paying for you.

Welfare come from taxes, there is no welfare deductible. It is more other citizens paying for people who can't find work, or who's work does not pay enough. And I don't see a problem with that, if you want to live in a 1st world country, welfare is part of that, it is what keeps people from starving to death. It is a integral part of a 1st world country that we take care of our citizens. If you don't like it, then move to some other place that does not have it, and the split between the rich and poor is so large it's almost the same split as life and death.

A country should be judged on how it treats it's poor.

What they should do is crack down on those who abuse the system,

with all that said, welfare is still not the same as UI.

 

[MrBishop]

Semantics, Paul. They're both there to do the same thing...a cleanup crew for when the shit hits the fan. Like food stamps, and Sun Youth, and food baskets. One way or the other, we all pay into it.

 

[spike]

Welfare is a handout because you don't have to pay to play. With unemployment, you have to pay first before you can withdraw. That is what I've been saying all along. That is the simple concept.

Both are handouts because you don't have to work to receive money. That is a simple concept.

I obviously do understnad it better than you.

Not a chance.

If you refuse to see how almost everything you post here is trolling, insulting, childish and hypocritical, I can't help you.

I don't need your help. You are just making lame excuse for your childish behavior. I didn't start the insults, you did. In two different current threads. If you can't talk like an adult maybe you shouldn't try to join adult conversations.

You are refusing to grasp a simple concept. Getting paid from a fund that requires you to pay in first is not a handout. Getting paid from welfare, which does not require you to pay in first, is a handout. Further, when on unemployment, you are required to search for a job, which is an attempt to offer goods or services in return.

You're distinction is crap. If I needed money and tried to borrow it from someone and they said "I tell you what, you give me a dollar and I'll give you $5000" I would still be getting a handout.

So paying in first does not define something as not a handout.

You've proved nothing. Also, the level of insurance isn't completely of your own choosing; there is a "state minimum" that you have to get. You cannot choose to carry insurance that pays out less than $15,000 per person/$30,000 per incident. You can choose to pay more for higher amounts of coverage.

Wow that sure is a lot different from unemployment and you say tax money isn't involved either?

All other things being equal, that would be the case, but all other things are not equal.

All things don't have to be equal for something to be very similar. Football and baseball are both sports. Unemployment and welfare are both handouts.

In comparison to a lot of the stuff I've seen you post over the last couple of years, that comment was absolutely nothing. I'd think someone so good at dishing it out would be able to take a little in return.

If you have an issue with something specific I've posted "over the last couple years" than bring it up. Otherwise just face the facts that you have been trolling with insults in two different current threads and quit being childish.

 

[paul_valaru]

Semantics, Paul. They're both there to do the same thing...a cleanup crew for when the shit hits the fan. Like food stamps, and Sun Youth, and food baskets. One way or the other, we all pay into it.

Just because the end results are similar, does not mean they are the same.

a bicycle and a car both can get you from point a to point b, but it does not make them the same.

 

[paul_valaru]

Both are handouts because you don't have to work to receive money. That is a simple concept.

Wrong. For UI you had to have worked to receive it.

you also have to supply proof that you are looking for a job to continue receiving UI.

Looking for work is hard work.

 

[MrBishop]

Wrong. For UI you had to have worked to receive it.

you also have to supply proof that you are looking for a job to continue receiving UI.

Looking for work is hard work.

Worked in the past year (less than that actually...I think that it's 40weeks in a row) - If you havn't worked at your last job for more than 40 weeks, you can't get UI. If you worked 39 weeks and were paying into UI the whole time, you still can't get it...you default to Welfare.

I'm thinking that welfare and UI basically take from the same pool of money. I'm not entirely sure, but...

"Proof" is relative. The last time I was on UI..the 'proof' consisted of me hitting "1 - for yes" on my phone when asked if I was "ready, willing and able to work for the week of X"

Looking for work is often harder than the actual work you'll have if your search ..er..works.

 

[paul_valaru]

Worked in the past year (less than that actually...I think that it's 40weeks in a row) - If you havn't worked at your last job for more than 40 weeks, you can't get UI. If you worked 39 weeks and were paying into UI the whole time, you still can't get it...you default to Welfare.

I'm thinking that welfare and UI basically take from the same pool of money. I'm not entirely sure, but...

"Proof" is relative. The last time I was on UI..the 'proof' consisted of me hitting "1 - for yes" on my phone when asked if I was "ready, willing and able to work for the week of X"

Looking for work is often harder than the actual work you'll have if your search ..er..works.

THere is an assumption that you are looking for work, but they can call you in to the office if clicking "1" isn't good enough for them.

 

[spike]

you also have to supply proof that you are looking for a job to continue receiving UI.

Looking for work is hard work.

You have to check a box.

 

[paul_valaru]

You have to check a box.

you have to look for work, they can call you in and ask for proof that you are looking.

 

[Inkara1]

That statement assumes that all/most people on welfare never put money into the system prior to them falling into Welfare. The second half assumes that all/most make no effort to find employment.

It casts a shadow over the concept of Welfare..as does the term 'handout'.

That's not the distinction I'm making and the distinction Spike refuses to see. Many people on welfare did work and pay into the system. BUT... it's completely possible for someone to have NOT worked, EVER, not paid a dime in taxes, unemployment, disability insurance, medicare, etc. and yet be able to get welfare. You also are not required to be looking for work. With unemployment insurance, you cannot get it if you've never worked. You also are required to look for work.

 

[Inkara1]

Both are handouts because you don't have to work to receive money. That is a simple concept.

One is not a handout because you have to pay in first and you have to look for a job (AKA give something in return). That is a simple concept.

Not a chance.

It's pretty obvious, even if you cannot or will not see it.

I don't need your help. You are just making lame excuse for your childish behavior. I didn't start the insults, you did. In two different current threads. If you can't talk like an adult maybe you shouldn't try to join adult conversations.

I guess the fact that all of this started because you were so desperate to make someone you don't like look bad that the facts didn't matter wouldn't count as "starting the insults" in SpikeWorld. Give me an adult conversation to join sometime. Feel free. Don't let me stop you.

You're distinction is crap. If I needed money and tried to borrow it from someone and they said "I tell you what, you give me a dollar and I'll give you $5000" I would still be getting a handout.

So paying in first does not define something as not a handout.

So I guess you also didn't pay in years of friendship first? "You're" argument here is crap.

Wow that sure is a lot different from unemployment and you say tax money isn't involved either?

There's a minimum amount the law says you have to buy. that makes it mandatory, even though earlier you claimed it's voluntary. You can buy more. There's also a minimum unemployment insurance, with the government as an administrator instead of a private company, but you can buy more (I noticed you ignored my link to a private unemployment insurance provider).

All things don't have to be equal for something to be very similar. Football and baseball are both sports. Unemployment and welfare are both handouts.

You really think football and baseball are similar? the objects of the games are a lot different and the processes required to get ready to play each game is a lot different. But also, cross country is a sport, and cheerleaders consider cheerleading to be a sport. Not many similarities between those.

There was no real point to that last paragraph, much as there was no real point to you trying to use football and baseball both being called "sports" as any sort of argument. Again, though, unemployment is not a handout.

If you have an issue with something specific I've posted "over the last couple years" than bring it up. Otherwise just face the facts that you have been trolling with insults in two different current threads and quit being childish.

Well, we can start off with your need to make someone you don't like look bad being so great that you're willing to ignore facts to continue your smear campaign. Maybe the fact that your preferred method of "debate" is to take a sentence someone wrote, change a word or two, re-post it and then act like you've totally pwned your opponent. I could bring up everything else, but last time I brought up some things, you told me I was trolling and being insulting and personal instead of, oh, I don't know, showing me why I might be wrong.