Really? This needs to be a law?

[LuvOrlando]

I would much rather our Pennsylvania tax dollars go into the hands on a mother who could use more money to pay for her kids to eat better food or get a new coat than to pay for some degenerate gambler to get his/her jollies. I don't know that this obscene abuse of other people's money can be legislated but I applaud my State for at east TRYING to discourage the flagrant abuse of our hard earned money by attempting to make this at least a little difficult. People should be ashamed of themselves... but they aren't are they? This is the trouble with the honor system, so many people simply don't have any.

As an aside, I tend to think that any attempt of saying where money does or doesn't come from is pretty pointless these days. With all the bailouts and white washing going on I think it's safe to say that the good men and women who are working at the moment are paying for it all because they keep getting the bill. Kind of ticks me off to think that my DH is out of the house 13 hours a day to pay 40% of his income in taxes so someone else can park it on their rear at The Sands (a few miles away) all day blowing it all.

 

[3 MEN AND A BOAT]

people refer to unemployment as insurance. anyone who thinks it's a insurance the EMPLOYEE pays in and it's part of your salary package, try going to your employer and tell him that you would rather he cancel this insurance on you and simply give you your contribution each pay period. it's a tax plain and simple. i as an employer would love to get out of this Tax, it just tripled up this last year, it's a very big expense on small businesses who quite often work with very small profit margins some years.

but i do not agree with government telling anyone how they spend their payments, simply because i think gov. is involved enough already.

People should be ashamed of themselves... but they aren't are they? This is the trouble with the honor system, so many people simply don't have any.

I agree

 

[Liberty Belle]

So, I wonder. How many of you think that someone should not collect unemployment if they've been layed off, but do not absolutely need the money to survive?

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

people refer to unemployment as insurance. anyone who thinks it's a insurance the EMPLOYEE pays in and it's part of your salary package, try going to your employer and tell him that you would rather he cancel this insurance on you and simply give you your contribution each pay period. it's a tax plain and simple. i as an employer would love to get out of this Tax, it just tripled up this last year, it's a very big expense on small businesses who quite often work with very small profit margins some years.

but i do not agree with government telling anyone how they spend their payments, simply because i think gov. is involved enough already.


I agree

Just because the law requires employers pay it, does not make it a tax. I have to pay car insurance, by law, but that's separate from the vehicle taxes I pay each year. Plus, if I ever get in an accident and it's my fault, my insurance covers it. It ensures that I am protected monetarily. Same thing with unemployment. If it was just a tax, the unemployed would not benefit from it. It is income protection, ie. insurance. Taxes don't protect in the event of a loss. Insurance does.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

So, I wonder. How many of you think that someone should not collect unemployment if they've been layed off, but do not absolutely need the money to survive?

I don't think this at all. Like someone else pointed out, it's not a need based program. I guess you could have a million dollars in the bank and you could still receive unemployment. I know it's that way with SSD. It doesn't matter how much money you have, only how much you are approved to receive. You could be Bill Gates and still receive disability from SS if you qualify.

 

[tlbwriter]

people refer to unemployment as insurance. anyone who thinks it's a insurance the EMPLOYEE pays in and it's part of your salary package, try going to your employer and tell him that you would rather he cancel this insurance on you and simply give you your contribution each pay period. it's a tax plain and simple.

It's a cost of doing business. And yes, it is part of your salary package. When employers are deciding how much to pay, they have to consider not only the cash they give to the employee, but the benefits as well. Unemployment insurance is a benefit. It may be a mandatory benefit, but it's a benefit all the same.

 

[DMRick]

Some states give you two years of unemployment? Most give 26 weeks (with exceptions).


http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/uifactsheet.asp

I couldn't care less how anyone spends their unemployment checks.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

In addition, as an employer, you have to pay workers comp insurance. This is protection for you, in the event one of your employees is injured on the job. It is required, but not a tax. Insurance.

 

[LuvOrlando]

So, I wonder. How many of you think that someone should not collect unemployment if they've been layed off, but do not absolutely need the money to survive?

How do you mean should? Do you mean should as in it should be made illegal or do you mean should as in their own moral compass should be working so that they won't collect and waste limited public money on luxury spending while other people can't take care of their families?

 

[Colleen27]

people refer to unemployment as insurance. anyone who thinks it's a insurance the EMPLOYEE pays in and it's part of your salary package, try going to your employer and tell him that you would rather he cancel this insurance on you and simply give you your contribution each pay period. it's a tax plain and simple. i as an employer would love to get out of this Tax, it just tripled up this last year, it's a very big expense on small businesses who quite often work with very small profit margins some years.

Just because something is required by law doesn't mean it is a tax. Unemployment insurance is a required cost of doing business, just like workman's comp (another employer-funded insurance program), car insurance, appropriate licensing, code compliance, etc.

Sure, plenty of employers would like to get out of paying it. Plenty of people want to drive without paying car insurance too, but they don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to complaining about "car insurance tax".

 

[Liberty Belle]

How do you mean should? Do you mean should as in it should be made illegal or do you mean should as in their own moral compass should be working so that they won't collect and waste limited public money on luxury spending while other people can't take care of their families?

I see. Well, should people turn down raises, as well, if they don't need them? How about just those who work for the government?

 

[LuvOrlando]

forget it, I've heard enough to see where you're going with this and I'm, just not going to follow

 

[Planogirl]

I think that it's wiser if people use the money in other ways but it's not up to me. Government already has its nose in too much as it is and should stay out of this one IMO.

 

[Liberty Belle]

forget it, I've heard enough to see where you're going with this and I'm, just not going to follow

All right. I would like to see more of what you think, but fair enough.

 

[NotUrsula]

I'm sure that the way that unemployment is financed varies by state. In some states employees DO pay into the fund; those are states where you can collect even if you are fired. In my state only the employers pay in, and the circumstances in which you may collect are very limited. Out of the four times I was let go by an employer here, only once was I eligible for unemployment benefits: that case was a mass layoff.

 

[daughtersrus]

ETA my husband works in an industry where all you need is a drivers license and moderate people skills. That's it. If you put the time in you can make 6 figures your first year with insurance. No experience necessary and no it is not timeshare sales or something like that. My friend has a husband that has been out of work for 2.5 years and she knows the income you can make. Problem is her husband would never want to put the hours in I guess. It is not your typical 9 to 5 job and you have to work some weekend hours. The guy has sat home all this time rather then persue something like that. My husband personally wouldn't hire him because he knows how lazy the guy is but he could get hired on any number of places rather then sit home unemployed. I really don't get it at ALL. Alot more people would be working if they were willing to work alternate shifts and more then 40 hours a week. Even here where unemployment is at 15 percent these jobs are still available. I guess we don't know enough people that want to put the hours in though.

What type of job is this. I'm asking an honest question because a friend of mine has been laid off for over a year and when he spoke with the union last week (he's an electrician) he was told that it will be at least another 2 years before his name comes to the top of the list. He's looking every day for any job but hasn't been able to find anything.

If you don't want to post it here, could you please send me a PM? Thanks!

 

[sunnyday123]

Yes, and if the choose to gamble instead of eat, we as the taxpayers will just pay for their food via welfare.

I think it is a pretty big deal.

Do you REALLY pay in the FULL amount that you are receiving for 2 years on unemployment? Does 100% of it come from the unemployed person's pocket?

Well, welfare doesn't last forever either. And since I've worked since I was 15, yea, I think I covered my 2 years.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Do you REALLY pay in the FULL amount that you are receiving for 2 years on unemployment? Does 100% of it come from the unemployed person's pocket?

No, I'm guessing most people do not pay in what they may receive. But that's how insurance works. It's not a savings account. It's an amount that is paid to a company to protect you in case of a certain event; car wreck, health issues, unemployment. If someone gets a job and has only paid one insurance premium and then gets really sick, the insurance isn't going to limit the coverage to what the person has paid in. Same with unemployment. You don't receive only what you paid in. If it were like this, some people would be on unemployment a lot longer and some a lot shorter. There would be a large disparity and insurance really wouldn't be insurance, it would be like a mandatory savings account.
But for everyone who gets unemployment, there are more that don't. Same thing with car insurance claims. Everyone has to pay in, but not everyone ends up needing to make a claim.

 

[CaliforniaDreamin]

Well, welfare doesn't last forever either. And since I've worked since I was 15, yea, I think I covered my 2 years.