This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Jobless Benefits Extension Voted Down As Republican Opposition Sinks Latest Attempt For Perpetual Entitlement State

Tyler Durden's picture




 

A last minute attempt by Democrats to pass a 90 day extension of jobless benefit just failed to pass in Congress. Before the vote, which only sought a 3 month extension instead of a year long one, Steny Hoyer said: "I think every Democrat will vote for it. I'm hopeful that the Republicans will vote for it." However, since democrats brought the measure up as a "suspension" bill, meaning
that it required the approval of two-thirds of the House to pass, instead of under normal house rules which would have allowedthe vote to pass, the extension failed. Therefore just like the last time this extension failed, look for up to 4-5 million unemployed to fall off EUC and extended claims over the next few months, with a hit of up to 2 million by the first/second week of December. To be sure, there was also a political flavor: as NBC reports "But with suspension bill now coming to the floor on the last day of
votes before the Thanksgiving vacation, the vote will give House
Democrats the opportunity to argue that the GOP blocked unemployment
benefits for the jobless during the holiday season."

From the Associated Press:

Republicans in the House have blocked a bill that would have extended jobless benefits for the long-term unemployed beyond the holiday season.

The most recent extension of jobless benefits expires Dec. 1. Two million people will lose benefits averaging $310 a week nationwide by the end of the year.

The measure would have extended jobless benefits through the end of February at a cost of adding $12.5 billion to the nation's debt. Republicans opposing the measure said that the measure should be paid for by cutting unspent money from last year's economic stimulus bill.

Democrats brought the measure to the floor under fast-track rules that required a two-thirds vote to pass, so the measure fell despite winning a majority.

The bottom line is that billions in disposable income courtesy of Uncle Scam are about to be taken out of circulation. Now add the possibility that the Bush tax cuts may not be extended, and the economic picture could suddenly be turned upside down.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:29 | 738516 Bastiat
Bastiat's picture

And add a VAT to that.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:55 | 738632 Instant Karma
Instant Karma's picture

WTF? Get a job, get fired, and collect a check for life. It's the new way.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:42 | 738825 VegasBD
VegasBD's picture

My buddy in only a couple months in on his unemployment and loving life. He WILL NOT look for work until it completely runs out.

I envy him. I pay to live in a beach house and he gets to enjoy it 7 days out of the week unlike my 2 days. At least he watches my dog. But if/when i get unemployed (and trust me im fucking hoping for it) I will be doing the same thing.

Looking forward to my two years off. I make 100k+ but fuck it, rather have a nicer lifestyle than a job.

"i got 99 paychecks and a job aint one" -not jayz

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:11 | 738919 I Am The Unknow...
I Am The Unknown Comic's picture

Now that's the spirit!  Be sure your buddy is on food stamps (that's about $200 a month I think), and also enrolls in Medicaid.  I am told by people I know that their Medicaid plan is better healthcare (and 100% totally free) than the health plans they had at P&G, WalMart and Merck - all of them as mid-level executives/managers/dogs.  They feel they have paid so much in taxes throughout their lives, and with the outright fraud in our country, that the age of "giving back" has now turned into the age of "getting back."   

I sincerely hope your buddy and you are able to "get back" as much of your paid in tax money as you possibly can, via welfare programs. 

Good luck to you and don't be afraid.  I know lots of people who are getting by just fine, and some would argue that with much more time on their hands, their quality of life has improved dramatically.  One friend of mine is raising his kids (his wife still has a job), another is writing the play he always wanted to write but never had the time, another is travelling and is presently in Germany, another is taking care of her Mom who is terminal.  Another started his own business (yeah, good luck on THAT one in this economy, but oh well, he is following his dream).

Take 99 weeks off and go John Galt while the shitstorm rages. 

As for the moral issue of right or wrong...well the Fed, the Treasury, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citibank, two American Presidents, and a multitude in congress have already set the precedent about what is right and what is wrong (hint: there is no longer a rule of law and without that, there is no moral or social contract to bind us together as a society).  Don't be the only one at the table playing by the rules.  If you are, then YOU are the MARK, sucka. 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:31 | 739065 Tortfeasor
Tortfeasor's picture

I'm not exactly sure John Galt would approve.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:51 | 739150 Ludwig Van
Ludwig Van's picture

 

I am exactly sure Galt would not approve. It has to do with a refusal to undergo the mental contortions required to get okay with it.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:42 | 740125 snowball777
snowball777's picture

I am exactly sure I don't give a fuck what a fictional character in a braindead novel would find acceptable.

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 04:01 | 740502 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

 "It has to do with a refusal to undergo the mental contortions required to get okay with it."

 

Oh please, I don't know very many people, wealthy or no,  who can get through a day without a couple of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rationalization_(making_excuses)

"...mental contortions..." gimme a break. right.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:54 | 739162 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Careful kid. The sarcasm flag is optional here.(read the manifesto http://www.zerohedge.com/about)  If you can get by on subsidy for yourself (while taking care of your parents) you are john gault.

If you use the system for illegitimate love children, then we will name a bank, a school of economics, and a park after you.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:24 | 739253 I Am The Unknow...
I Am The Unknown Comic's picture

I'm gonna need a bigger sack.  ;>)   

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:33 | 739476 wisefool
wisefool's picture

There is no 5th stage.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:36 | 739482 Ludwig Van
Ludwig Van's picture

 

Wisefool -- Thank you, sir, for your kind attention, and for calling out my ambiguity (along with my misspelling of *Gault* [gack!]).

Because unemployment is a circumstance, there is not -- and should not -- be a distinction among who gets it as long as they qualify. The cost is so small its issuance should not be questioned.

We all need help at some point in our lives. It is the assumption of the attitude of *entitlement* to a free ride to the limit that I've seen make mushy the thinking and bodies of once-crisp, once-firm people.

If I'm "entitled" to something, I've got no gratitude because I'm just taking what belongs to me.

If I'm accepting help, there's some pride I shed in acknowledging  that. We're a nation of compassionate people. "No problem, happy to help." With humility comes gratitude, an earnestness to pay it back, or pay it forward; to get back into the game, whatever form that takes, whatever the new position -- even if it's a position without title or pay.

For every earnest guy, I've seen another retreat from life -- basically check out for two years. He could have taken what he considered "menial jobs," but held out for the better, because he could, a better job that never came, and in fact got more remote the longer he stayed out of the workplace. By some point, the new habits and routines he'd adopted excluded much if any productive activity, even if just self-improvement -- reading, exercising, whatever. He no longer had time for a job, actually began to dread the day of the end of the checks, and the motivation to do anything outside his little sphere of life waned. He descended into a life of living free, for free, for himself, equating the end of it with the end of the new world as he knew it.

He finally takes a job -- he has to -- as a security guard or something. He doesn't try to make the best of it, but marks time 'til he can get laid off again.

I really don't believe there are social moral issues here. I simply find lamentable the wasting of time, of life. The *opportunity* to take off work two years can ensnare some people. It can quash -- I've seen it many times -- that grand old fuck-you American revolutionary spirit, and reduce a man to merely pitiable.

Only the recipient can judge what's right for him. The point is that whatever one chooses, there is a cost.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:53 | 739659 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Sarcasm partially on:

Ludvig,

Your post is inspiring. I think everyone without a PhD in Economics and unpaid back taxes should follow you to our post keynsian economy. We need to backfill alot of positions in government,media and academia.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:58 | 739674 thefatasswilly
thefatasswilly's picture

Mencken identifies Homo stultus' primary desire as security: the security of an inmate in a well managed penitentiary.

Millions of baby boomers loved Social Security, proving Mencken correct once again. Truly hilarious.

Sat, 11/20/2010 - 15:06 | 743302 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

You paint a dismal picture in your tall tales of the vicious cycle of unemployment insurance colletion woe LV, but everyone should keep in mind that is all they are; anecdotes or fantasies tapped to illustrate a point supported by nothing more than LV's credibility and rhetoric.

It is exactly the same as writing "anyone who drinks ends up waking up the neighbourhood, sleeping on a park bench, beating their kids, etc." While such annoying/tragic things do indeed occur,  it certainly isn't just to imply that such disgusting behaviors are the end result of all drinking.

Squashing this bill is the right idea, but with the wrong focus.

JMHO,natch.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:19 | 739242 mkkby
mkkby's picture

You morons missed the point.  Without the extensions it's 26 weeks max.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:37 | 739753 Max Hunter
Max Hunter's picture

queue the pitch forks

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:43 | 740128 snowball777
snowball777's picture

They can still afford pitchforks?!

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 01:52 | 740391 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture
6 Million Benefit-Paying Jobs Vanish in One Year!

Really sobering graph....

Covered Employment Stats of Merit

  • Covered employment is back to 2004 levels.
  • Close to 6 million benefits paying jobs have vanished in a year.
  • Over 8 million benefits paying jobs have vanished since the 2008 peak.
Fri, 11/19/2010 - 08:31 | 740629 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Lest we forget that money they are (all but) forced to divert to things like medical necessities doesn't get spent elsewhere.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:30 | 739610 goldfish1
goldfish1's picture

A 20 yo unmarried mother at work makes min. wage. She gets free food, medicare and babysitting. She jut now cut back her hours to 8 per week because the father who she lives with makes more in one day of work than she does in a 24 hour week. This way she can stay home with the little one and get by. It's a better life. 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:37 | 739948 wisefool
wisefool's picture

Somebody should do a PhD thesis in economics about this man woman and child. It might be too radical for the state universities. But U Chicago or Yale might assign an advisor. It'll rattle that 100% employment mandate of the fascist fed and their backwoods Harvard grads on staff.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:04 | 738942 oldtech
oldtech's picture

By the time we join them, it will be down to 13 weeks of unemployment and then you can starve....  even your(our) Social Security will be changed so you can't collect until your 70 or about to die..

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:44 | 740252 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

after 70, you'll be allowed to be a security guard in society..

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:43 | 738837 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

Negative, sonny, perpetual entitlement is about GE offshoring all the jobs and not paying any fed taxes in 2009, a continuing repeat for many years.

And ExxonMobil, and all the other over 70% American-based corporations and multinationals.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:55 | 738892 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Again. Corps do not pay taxes. They collect them. Tax them all you want, in the end we individuals and consumers are the ones who pay.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:44 | 739121 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

(*THUMBS UP*)

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:18 | 739021 cosmictrainwreck
cosmictrainwreck's picture

sgt_doom: AMEN to that. Now we're getting somewhere....[don't I wish]

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:48 | 739139 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture


by Instant Karma
on Thu, 11/18/2010 - 14:55
#738632

WTF? Get a job, get fired, and collect a check for life. It's the new way.

Instant Karma,

Republicans don’t want to extend the un-employment benefits for working Americans that are out of work.

The Republican Party did sign off on $700 billion dollars for TARP for the Banks, along with the 0% FED Window used to pay back those funds… as well as QE1 and now QE2…

 

$700 Billion Dollars for TARP for the Banks?

20% un-employment costs the United States of America $2 Billion a month in benefits coverage.

$700 billion dollars to the Banks equals 350 Months of unemployment coverage for un-employed Americans or ruffly 29 years of coverage.

 

The Republicans don’t want to help un-employed Americans but LOVE! Helping the Banks and Wall Street FUCK! Main Street un-employed America.

 

Make no mistake, Obama is Bush part Duex… so there is no difference between the parties really, only what 5th Ave. sells the sheep as differences… the lobby owns all of the whores within the beltway.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:27 | 739268 Agent P
Agent P's picture

Perhaps the government should take preferred stock and warrants in the people receiving extended unemployment claims that pay a handsome dividend back to the Treasury and can be bought back at a future date?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not endorsing TARP, etc., I'm just saying it's not exactly an apples to apples comparison.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:50 | 739510 nmewn
nmewn's picture

It's not apples to apples at all.

The republicans are the minority party...the dims have the same majority they had when they rammed through a "shovel ready jobs" package that only bailed out governments...local & state, along with tenured professors.

The same dim majority that passed Obama-Care that will now cost me $1,200 dollars more a year.

The same dim majority that passed the Dodd financial deformed bill...I could go on.

Obviously I have an issue with the title of this piece...the dims are the majority party in the House until January 3 2011.

They can still do whatever they want. They control all three legislative branches of government.

Period.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:30 | 738522 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

about freaking time. An emergency act will probably follow to extend the entitlements forever.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:22 | 738748 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

Sheesh, I wonder how whoever junked me would feel if I collected unemployment for 99 months or however long it is now? If you junked me because you're unemployed and feel you're entitled to the fruits of my labor just think about what would happen if everyone started collecting unemployment. Unemployment is a temporary help, not a perminant free ride.

I'd scrube toilets to support my family. Many of the unemployed are too good for that type of work.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:15 | 738976 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Excellent! Have I got a job for you! Special deal too: I won't flush 'til you arrive with your little scrubber in hand <oh and I only pay min wage; and you have to get here yourself; it's only a temp contract position, so no benefits. and I expect a big smile on your pasty little face the whole time you're swabbing around in there, or it might take some time before you get paid. oh, and I plugged it with newspaper B4 I... nm>

I know, I know: U bene's are supposed to be only for dire situations: well guess what, there's been a dire situation happening to the US going on 3 years now, hello.

"Many of the unemployed are too good for that type of work"

Well, I'll be honest, I don't know too many unemployed where I am at so I can't go making broad, sweeping generalisations like this with any credibility, can you? But wtf, forget my arrogance and ignorance, let's just lump most of 'em into the 'too lazy to get off their fat asses' meme, forget all the others that are really trying. Hell let's kick to the curb the hapless peon who would gladly scrape feces for 12 hours of the day to feed his family, but all the feces scraping positions are taken everywhere he has looked, so he's been trying to get into urine sponging, but with no luck yet (it's a new field for him). There has to be at least a few of those poor sods around, no? Well, there must be now that YOU (yah YOU) had a hand in shipping all the decent low skill jobs overseas so that YOU could get a 15 dollar pair of mittens at Malwart for 6 bux.

Your obvious lack of empathy, your 'I'm all right so f all the rest' perspective, doesn't absolve you of your portion of responsibility, sorry.

Personally I agree that spending needs to be cut yesterday, but there are other places to consider first, rather than potentially putting another 4 mil or so unlucky, likely armed, people out on the street at the beginning of Winter, no?

Mainstreet or Wallstreet, freaking ONE of them is getting that cash whether the Ubene's end or no.

What are YOUR priorities?

Ask yourself,

"What would Ralph Nader do?"

(I mean before he was shot for doing it or trying to do it, of course)

We'd save, what, 8 billion or so by cutting these benefits?  I say there are far, far bigger fish out there to fry. Too Big To Fry?

JMHO,natch

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:36 | 739087 midtowng
midtowng's picture

It's weird non sequitur on ZH: Everyone here thinks we are in a depression and the economy is fucked. Yet at the same time they blame unemployed people for not getting jobs.

   Do people on ZH not realize that a fucked economy means there are no jobs?

While we are at it, for the people who claim that cutting off UE won't have any effect on hunger, I'm curious where they think the money from UE has been going?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:49 | 739142 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

It's not a question of "blaming" the unemployed for being unemployed; it's a question of fairness and affordability.

Inflow MUST have some concrete relationship to outflow or before too long...

(*SIGH*)

Beyond the math... no... I don't want a welfare state. 12 weeks of unemployment should cut it, however... for the sake of discussion let's just assume that 24 months is appropriate.

Bottom line... 99 months plus AIN'T appropriate.

BILL

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:09 | 739207 lawrence1
lawrence1's picture

You got a welfare state, welfare for the rich and corporations, yet you want to limit help to people who, most of them, need it.  I have a niece, very competent, who lost her job two years ago, spent 50 hours a week looking for work, finally found and took a job at much less pay... and that was two years ago before things got worse.  When the rich and corporations start paying taxes, we can discuss the appropriate cut-off point.  By the way, as an independent contractor most of my life, I never even qualified for unemployment benefits, and just think of other persons or small business people who have gone bankrupt or simply closed down and dont even qualify and you get an idea of the extent of the unemployment problem. When there jobs no being taken, then lets worry about the cost of unemployment benefits.  As GoinFawr suggests, there are other places to cut expenses that would yield more bang for the cut.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:20 | 739433 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

I'm not saying we don't have a welfare state in the sense of crony capitalism - we're on the same page; what I'm saying is that two wrongs don't make a right. What I'm saying is you don't compound one problem via expanding a different problem.

Second... (*SIGH*)... corporations don't pay taxes. If you don't understand that... (*SHRUG*)

We need major tax reform in this country. Taxes need to be based upon individual behavior - period. Not "family" behavior and decisions... not corporate behavior and decisions... but INDIVIDUAL decision-making.

(And on that note may I add the less "progressivity" the better!)

As to "the rich"... (*SIGH*)... who do you suppose is funding state and federal spending...???

Tax "the rich" fairly; tax "the poor" fairly; tax the lower-middle, middle, upper middle, and upper-upper middle classes" fairly.

If we're gonna have income taxes, then basic rule of thumb - NO American should have more than one-third of his or her earnings taken by the federal government. Period.

Finally... (*GRITTING MY TEETH*)... if you REALLY want to know what the future "employment" problem is we'll be facing, it's this: Most liberal arts degrees aren't worth the paper they're written on and we simply don't have enough Americans who KNOW HOW TO DO THINGS to keep this country running longterm.

Hope the truth doesn't burst your bubble my friend.

Respectfully,

BILL

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:36 | 739289 Agent P
Agent P's picture

It's 99 weeks, not months...I think you meant to say this.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:20 | 739436 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

(*SMILE*)

Yeah... weeks. Thanks.

BILL

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:56 | 739170 lawrence1
lawrence1's picture

Well said, GoinFawr.  I wish republicans would start their own country and you would see the most heartless, nasty country in the world, maybe rival Israel.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:47 | 740136 snowball777
snowball777's picture

I'd settle for letting Texas secede.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:27 | 739452 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

I work all day and live across from an apartment complex that I can't live in because I make too much money (which really isn't a lot). The people who live there have bbq's and enjoy the pool during the day while I come home to make myself lunch. The apartments also have central AC and I don't. My rent is also a lot higher for less space.

How long do you propose we keep people on unemployment?

Maybe instead of having two years of unemployment we have some kind of government related jobs force. I'm the bad guy while I loyal pay my taxes and support the unemployed but now I'm supposed to support those people forever.

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:03 | 740167 snowball777
snowball777's picture

If you really make that little money then you CAN'T be paying much in taxes, dipshit.

Why should we feel sorry for you because you did fuck all with your life, but not empathize with people who were most likely doing something more useful than you are in 2008 before the fucking bankers destroyed our economy?

Here's hoping you lose your shit job too so you can understand firsthand what it's like.

You want a fucking sob story? Try this on for size, asshole:

My dad went to work for a start-up in CA which was working on chips for software-defined radio. They were doing an excellent job on the technical front (sending high-bandwidth video over the air successfully), but were run into the ground by an idiot CEO who spent more money attempting to rebrand the company (while shuffling money to his friends). They cancelled the employee's healthcare without notice...people got bills in the mail as their first hint of this shit. They were stringing them along with promises of bonus money once they landed a deal with a Chinese backer and getting later and later on their payroll. They refused to lay anyone off, so they couldn't even collect unemployment. They weren't paid up on their SS taxes, but of course didn't inform the employees about this. One guy was so desperate to take care of his handicapped wife and infant son, that he blew his fucking brains out so that they could collect social security and cover her healthcare costs.

Here's a paper he wrote:

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1364445

And you're sniveling about your fucking pissant peanut taxes?! Fuck you, prick.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:31 | 739468 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

I LACK EMPATHY???

GO FUCK YOUSELF YOU UNGRATEFUL TOOL!!!

Yes, it's mean to ask people to support themself and their family.

Yes, it's mean to tell people they can't have a free lunch.

YES, LIFE IS MEAN!

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:52 | 740005 SRV - ES339
SRV - ES339's picture

You lack so much more than empathy... attacking the least fortunate among us is a sleazy, cowardly, act.

The homeless man in this clip has more class in his little finger than you could ever hope to have...

http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?cl=23097576

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:56 | 740283 Bananamerican
Bananamerican's picture

thumbs up!

THAT'S how we'll get through this national mess (if we do)

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:15 | 740053 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

My my, you are one helluva useful idiot (see:'tool'), aren't you?  

"I LACK EMPATHY???

GO FUCK YOUSELF YOU UNGRATEFUL TOOL!!!"

WTF does that mean? Why the hell would I be grateful to a self centered insignificant toe rag like yourself?!

 Careful my well-conditioned little Babbitt, practicing what you're preaching may come back to bite you on the ass one day...

It's not about poor lazy people who are subsisting on a tiny bit of your money, it's about the uber rich lazy people who are buying yachts with wealth that they are constantly stealing from you and everyone else while they have you distracted by making war on the poor and unfortunate. The worst part of this is that you go for it like a rabid dog, apparently just because you are so damn relieved to find that there is actually someone worse off than yourself, and you desperately feel like you deserve a laugh at someone else's expense.

You're falling head over heels for their 'pit the middle class against the poor as ruse while we rape everybody' stratagem, dupe. "Divide and conq..." do I really need to spell this out for you? Could you truly be that stupid?

I'd wager, your useless anecdote aside, that most people on Ubene's would rather be working, and are doing the best they can to get there.

Anyway, the bill has been crushed, so you can celebrate your dubious victory. I wonder if your taxes will still go up anyway? Want to make a bet?

Regards

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:35 | 740103 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

Well put.  I'll be for stopping unemployment benefits when the atmosphere of promoting moral hazard stops at the top: the Banks. 

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 01:45 | 740380 Sabibaby
Sabibaby's picture

I guess I thought that when unemployment benefits run out people would move to the next layer of support with welfare and food stamps. I apparently have no clue how the US support system works. I had no idea people wouldn’t be able to use those things after the unemployment benefits ran out. I believe unemployment insurance is a good thing. I didn’t mean to imply I don’t think it’s important I just thought a limit would be a good thing. As some posters have pointed out “…when the atmosphere of promoting moral hazard stops at the top: the Banks….” If the banks and Wall Street are going to take advantage of everything than so should regular people and when the moral hazard stops things can go back to the way they were in the past.

 

I really think this economy is a perpetual motion machine.

Sorry for typing in all caps and swearing. I actually have met people who collect unemployment but do other jobs on the side and are “double-dipping” and I guess I made that a stereo type for other unemployed people.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:53 | 739349 vxpatel
vxpatel's picture

why scrub toilets? we need brave mcSheeple like you in Afghanistan, go East young man, there are islamic extremists goat herders to be killed! lots of money in it for you...

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:46 | 738845 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

I suspect those who junk you feel as I do:  tired of all those filthy corps, aided and abetted and persuaded by the bankster class, to offshore American jobs and American-created technology, then whine and whine and whine, and blame everything on China, one of those very countries they offshored so much to.

They long ago dropped any and all pretense of a meritocracy in the Unforgiveable State of Assholes, run by the banksters, but for how much longer?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:53 | 739155 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

So what's your proposed solution?

Just curious...

BILL

 

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:40 | 739630 RKDS
RKDS's picture

You know Goddamned well what the solution is.  Don't play stupid, we won't put up with it here.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:38 | 740110 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

I'll put up with it.  I like stupid.  After enduring Johnny Bravo (alias Master Bates) for so long, stupid would be a relief.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:58 | 739678 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

New Constitutional amendment:  "Congress shall make no Law abridging the freedom of production and trade."

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:10 | 740182 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Shift the income tax burden onto corporations by eliminating every loophole they use, every Double-Irish-Dutch-Sandwich scam, and nixing their ability to repatriate foreign cash tax-free.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:39 | 739958 SRV - ES339
SRV - ES339's picture

Don't believe I've ever used foul language on this site before, but you are a fucking asshole... and I would love to have an opportunity to tell you face to face one day.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:34 | 738527 John McCloy
John McCloy's picture

 Uh oh..time for some MSNBC smear efforts to paint them as America haters. The SorosHuffingtonPost is already on it:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/11/17/still-no-plan-on-unemploy_n_784...

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:41 | 739103 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

Hufffington's thought leaders in the WH are worried about holiday retail sales numbers...

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:33 | 738529 Mr Lennon Hendrix
Mr Lennon Hendrix's picture

I am in no way in favor of a "Perpetual Entitlement State" but it is too bad QEs and TARPs are still being discussed like they are the bee's knees while people who were laid off by the corporations set to inherit the economic landscape thanks to "economists" such as Paul Krugman who say it is to the benefit of society to have firms run the world do not have enough monie to eat.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:45 | 738591 cosmictrainwreck
cosmictrainwreck's picture

Right on, Mr.L-H. Try to get a little perspective, ya'll. Reminds me of the old guy back in the good ol' days when a billion was a billion: "a billion here, a billion there...pretty soon yer talkin' about some real moey" Half a dozen GS guys could pay the whole tab out of their fuckin BONUSES.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:55 | 739166 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

Hey, LH... do you know where you are...???

The vast majority of us here were and are anti-TARP, anti-QE, anti-Crony Captialism, and pro free - and fair - market.

BILL

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:33 | 738532 TheGoodDoctor
TheGoodDoctor's picture

Well it's a battle over the tax cuts for the rich. It's the last card the Dems have left to play.

But I agree, you cut off the tax cuts for the rich, and no unemployment extension. Christmas will be shit and there will be a hell of a lot of selling in the market.

But maybe with enough POMO by the Fed everything will look just fine!

Look, less people on unemployment. Look, stock market up. Until they get the retail sales for the Holidays.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:37 | 738552 HarryWanger
HarryWanger's picture

I think you're off base here by saying "Christmas will be shit and there will be a hell of a lot of selling.." That's not the case at all. UE benefits are not for discretionary goods but rather basic needs. It will in now way affect retail sales. People that can't afford to put food on the table with UE benefits aren't exactly rushing out to buy a new Coach bag for Xmas.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:09 | 738693 Prof Gulliver
Prof Gulliver's picture

Harry, you're wrong here. Many of the unemployed are second earners in a multi-income family. The families can meet the basics with the income from the still-working family member. The UI checks from earner No. 2 have been used for discretionary purchases. This will have an effect on retail sales. The amount can be debated, but you're misguided to say it will have zero effect.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:48 | 738855 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

If you truly believe that drivel you are spewing forth, perhaps your title should be:

 

Prof Gullible

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:54 | 739810 Cursive
Cursive's picture

Props to the professor.  All money is fungible and these bennies have had the effect of maintaining disposable income for formerly two income families.  There are enough government programs available that it's hard to imagine anyone starving to death, unless they are too lazy to apply themselves to the food gathering activities of knowing the government rules of where to find the next handout.  But if anyone has a problem with the current arrangement, I suggest they organize and start attacking the banking plutocracy that runs this county.

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 03:01 | 740468 GoinFawr
GoinFawr's picture

Hahahahaha!

Heh, that last sentence caught me completely off guard; I did not see you goin' that way cursive.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:12 | 738712 Alex in SFBA
Alex in SFBA's picture

You're right, people with UE benefits buy necessities.

People who sell necessities to those with UE benefits, buy Xmas Coach bags.

People without UE benefits will buy fewer / cheaper necessities, so those sellers of necessities will have less money for Coach bags.

Applies to everything (not only Coach bags).

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:50 | 738862 Panafrican Funk...
Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

Wait, hang on, are you saying everything is systemic when you're talking about the real economy?

What about "crisis contained"? 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:26 | 738767 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

Harry is so on crack why isn't there auto block ??

these people aren't in a vacuum like TPTB would like to think..  if your brother can't feed himself then someone in your family or his friends are taking money outta their pocket to help him and thus less retail sales for little jimmy on xmas

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:44 | 739124 carbonmutant
carbonmutant's picture

Most of the unemployed I know consider data plans for their iphones to be one of their basic needs...

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:47 | 739790 TheGoodDoctor
TheGoodDoctor's picture

If they don't have a land line or a data connection at home then yes it would be. How else will they look for jobs?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:57 | 739827 Cursive
Cursive's picture

I pay an Al Gore tax on my phone bill each month to pay for public internet access to schools and libraries.

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:18 | 740204 snowball777
snowball777's picture

Perhaps the unemployed people you know are assholes as big as you are.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:00 | 739175 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

Oh, Harry...

Harry... Harry... Harry...

That's the theory - the hope - but in the real world... guess what... how unemployment "income" is spent (just as with social security "income") depends up the overall family income level and the lifestyle of the recipient.

I'm not saying that the majority - probably the vast majority - of those receiving unemployment benefits aren't spending most of their checks on "necessities," but don't fool yourself... there's plenty of unemployment check money flowing towards non-necessities, luxuries, and even "recreational" drugs, booze, and cigarettes.

BILL

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:33 | 738533 HarryWanger
HarryWanger's picture

The bottom line is that billions in disposable income courtesy of Uncle Scam are about to be taken out of circulation. Now add the possibility that the Bush tax cuts may not be extended, and the economic picture could suddenly be turned upside down.

I wouldn't call jobless benefits "disposable income". These people need this money for survival not to buy an iPhone. This is a sad day. The irony of it is, this will give the illusion that unemployment is falling.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:40 | 738563 samsara
samsara's picture

Well Harry?

I applaud you sir.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:45 | 738589 packman
packman's picture

These people need this money for survival not to buy an iPhone.

These people do need money for survival.

How they don't need this money for survival.  Get your own damn money, and stop taking mine, by force of the government gun.

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:13 | 738715 Alienated Serf
Alienated Serf's picture

but if people lost their job in the first place through the destruction of our economy by banskters whom own and direct the government, didn't they have their job taken away by "force of the government gun?"

no easy answers on this one. 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:44 | 738827 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

they can't answer that. They don't even understand disposable income.

I guess it now means IPads instead of calories and basics like FIRE industries. This money is the FIRST money spent. It goes directly into the economy. It also acts as a weak put for corporate profits. Not admitting the basic facts is delusional. 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:53 | 738878 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

It is a Keynesian axiom that for gov stimulus to have any net effect in the short run, it needs to be given to the POOR who have no choice but to SPEND IT. That way you are not left waiting for tight-fisted oligarchs to trickle-down their loot in some arcane fashion. However, poor people spending their benefits check is immediately inflationary (potentially) so they didn't take that route.

Thus, the current impasse. POMO and QE1/2/3/N and nothing in the retail channel.

Insane.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:11 | 738964 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

However, poor people spending their benefits check is immediately inflationary (potentially) so they didn't take that route.

Yet, they want the RMB increased by 20% plus? Think about that. No mater what anyone argues, the Fed is clearly moving against deflation, right or wrong. The ABA and banks have their own book. No doubt there is overlap with the FED, but also some not, as you see from the ABA fight with the Bernank over the T-buys, instead of bank-asset buys. Under the Fed's actions and ongoing theory of the economy, fighting deflation, there is plenty of room for US Treasury Labor notes for work, or as the banks prefer, DEBT notes handed out. 

I prefer labor notes. 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 21:08 | 739695 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

I watched Ms. Solis, the Secretary of Labor on CNBS state this morning, that these unemployment FRNs have a multiplier effect in the Economy beyond directly helping the unemployed people.  Using this logic, WHY is the Govt not simply handing out checks to everyone and thereby raising the Economy of the USA?  Idiotic thinking like this is precisely why the Govt is gonna crash the US Economy!

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:02 | 738933 Alienated Serf
Alienated Serf's picture

the homeless population is going to quadruple.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:54 | 739159 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

No it won't. Impossible.

That's just crazy talk.

Because before it quadruples, they'll mostly die.

It's an end-game. It ends badly for some people. And sometimes it just ends.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:28 | 739459 Rainman
Rainman's picture

No one in America needs to be homeless. Slip a "gimme the money" note to any FDIC-protected teller, plead guilty and get 3 hots and a cot, quality healthcare, cable TV and yer out in 10 when the depression recovery begins. Beats sleeping outdoors I be thinkin', but not by much.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:57 | 738904 packman
packman's picture

How "But they don't need this money for suvival", I meant.

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:23 | 740213 snowball777
snowball777's picture

From where, moron?

What part of DEPRESSION are you unable to fucking comprehend?

Here's hoping you're next.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:59 | 738659 Quinvarius
Quinvarius's picture

Nice how you got junked for speaking reality.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:12 | 738708 erik
erik's picture

the reality here is that people have had 2 entire years to find a job.

the people i know on unemployment, my girlfriend and brother, have looked for jobs but are unwilling to accept any job or pay that was beneath their previous job.  that is the reality.  it is a sense of entitlement.

whether it is disposable income or not doesn't matter.  what matters is that billions of dollars will be missing in the spending equation.  many more billions by spring if they don't do extensions by then.

i don't know the answer to the world's problems, but i do know that 2 years should be enough to find a job.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:33 | 738780 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

that wasn't the point of this discussion..  so many emotional blowhards gotta bring their talking points to every thread...

 

the discussion was only that retail sales will dive for xmas by the indirect loss due to financial support of fellow serfs to pay for the ones dropped off the free ride...

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:48 | 738853 erik
erik's picture

and i said that it doesn't matter if it is disposable income or not.  it is income that is lost and in the big equation that is negative.

jobless claims will go down.  unemployment will go down.  discretionary spending will probably go down.

happy?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:32 | 738784 dark pools of soros
dark pools of soros's picture

duplicate

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:33 | 738794 CJL_n_SF
CJL_n_SF's picture

I know people who were looking hard for work and ready to take anything.  Just as soon as UE benefits were extended they took off on a tour of Spain and Morocco.  That being said, when UE benefits are cut off we are going to have quite a bit of social unrest.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:49 | 738821 erik
erik's picture

exactly.  so how do you separate the people gaming the system from those who really can't get a job?  you have to stop paying unemployment benefits or you have to have a better screening process to check whether people are really trying to get a job.  or maybe you ween them off the unemployment benefits by dropping the weekly payout by a percentage each extension period.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:52 | 738871 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

unless you're rich as scrooge mcduck, I'd run the fuck away from that one.  I don't care if she loves to cook and suck cock....  that shit will change and you'll be left with a dependent slug.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:56 | 738903 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

... and dependent children, too! Useless little fuckers.

/sarc

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:06 | 739854 Cursive
Cursive's picture

unless you're rich as scrooge mcduck, I'd run the fuck away from that one.  I don't care if she loves to cook and suck cock....  that shit will change and you'll be left with a dependent slug.

+1 MachoMan.  This is the kind of brotherly advice that makes ZH worthwhile reading.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:45 | 740134 RockyRacoon
RockyRacoon's picture

That's not brotherly advice, that's the expression of a mother's love.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:54 | 738883 sgt_doom
sgt_doom's picture

What total arithmetic-challenged crock, sonny.

Real unemployment is at least 28% and climbing, sonny, no matter what BS spews forth from Government Sachs.

And Charlie Rangel's Singapore Accords loopholed in a dramatic number of foreign visa workers -- as in foreign scab workers the corps love so well.

And then there's those illegal human traffickers bringing in slave labor onto the shores of Amerika, not too mention undocumented workers from all over the planet.

When thousands show up for seveal jobs and camp out in tent cities in Chicago, and elsewhere, the real numbers become obvious.

When one examines the federal data, the real numbers become obvious.

Negative, erik the brain-dead, the Wall Street-owned gov't has had two years to do something, but the R-Cons and faux crats have continued to screw the American worker and citizen, and will only pay attention once their blood begins to flow copiously.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:58 | 738914 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Word.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:51 | 739151 erik
erik's picture

sgt_doom, i don't see how you disagree with my point.  what i see is your anger toward government and globalization, and rightfully so.

there is a next line of safety net, it is called welfare and food stamps.  these people will not go hungry.

we agree on there being bigger fish to fry than people gaming the unemployment insurance.  i am hoping this will cause people to finally stand up to the government.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 22:11 | 739874 Cursive
Cursive's picture

we agree on there being bigger fish to fry than people gaming the unemployment insurance.  i am hoping this will cause people to finally stand up to the government.

Bingo.  Anybody in need of money?  Cut out the government middleman.  Find a local banker and make it happen.  Problem solved.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 20:06 | 739553 cosmictrainwreck
cosmictrainwreck's picture

To sgt_doom's: I repeat again: All the unemployment benefits, with limitless extensions dould be paid for in full with a few GS, JPM, et al fucking bonuses

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:41 | 739110 midtowng
midtowng's picture

"i do know that 2 years should be enough to find a job."

I'm sure there were plenty of people just like you in the Great Depression.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:47 | 739137 erik
erik's picture

is that your counter-argument?  i want to hear why you disagree.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:16 | 740055 midtowng
midtowng's picture

I made a statement that is almost surely true. You should be smart enough to see the significance of it.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:10 | 738701 Big Ben
Big Ben's picture

I know personally of a case where the wife has been unemployed for about a year and the husband has a high paying job. They are sending their kids to daycare and just bought a couple of iPads.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:16 | 738726 erik
erik's picture

that's the point.  we have been so spoiled for so long that giving up a new iPhone is not a sacrifice, it is a disaster.   

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:35 | 738799 DonnieD
DonnieD's picture

This is where Harry goes wrong. He assumes everyone collecting unemployment is a single man or woman who needs that money to have a place to stay and food to eat. But there are way too many recipients with working spouses who simply find it much easier to stay at home and collect unemployment rather than take a job they don't want. There are many jobs available but nobody wants them. I've witnessed this firsthand trying to hire at my firm.

I don't have a problem with people getting unemployment if they really need it to survive. I do have a problem with those who are gaming the system because it's easier than working. At some point they should factor in spouse's pay or gradually reduce the payment to motivate those who can get a job to get back to work.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:03 | 738941 Panafrican Funk...
Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

Employees pay for UI through lower direct compensation, and I have a problem with employers bitching about people accepting the benefits they've paid for.  It's also worth pointing out that, on a real earnings basis, the American worker has been left completely the fuck out of the "wealth effect" since 1980.

I employ people too, and I don't have a problem finding employees, because I actually compensate people fairly and give them a stake in our success through profit sharing.  Maybe turn around your thinking a bit and make it worth their while to work for you, instead of whining about it.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:43 | 739117 DonnieD
DonnieD's picture

Congratulations on treating your employees fairly. So do I. As a small family owned business I stretch to offer full benefits, a salary and a very generous bonus plan if you are successful.

And I'm not sure how you conclude that employee's have paid for these benefits when in states like FL where I live we're 1.75 Billion in debt to the Feds for unemployment and our state unemployment insurance is tripling next year on the low end to cover the losses. So my firm pays into unemployment insurance for them but it's obviously not nearly enough to cover some people's 2+ year vacations. 

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-11-17/fla-unemployment-compensation-t...

When you offer a job to someone who hasn't been employed for 6 months and they turn you down because there isn't enough guaranteed salary to make it worth their while to get off unemployment you can see where I'm coming from.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:23 | 738752 Hook Line and S...
Hook Line and Sphincter's picture

And to think, I had named you RogaineCock and now I have to take it back.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:05 | 739193 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

Ha! Ha!

Ironically... one of my nieces dropped by yesterday to visit and share her tales of woe with "Uncle Bill."

She told me how hard it was making her $100 monthly car insurance payment along with her $135 monthly cell phone bill now that she's "temporarily" out of work.

Unfortunately for America 2010, my 21 year old niece is the norm... not the exception... when it comes to her priorities.

Oh... and I've also got a friend in his early 50's who would cut his arm off before he gave up his cell phone... and he's on disability!

BILL

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:55 | 739526 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

"The irony of it is, this will give the illusion that unemployment is falling."

Yep. Absolutely.

If it's one thing that ALL of us should be able to agree on, it's that the government deliberate underreports both unemployment and inflation.

BILL

 

 

 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:03 | 740027 Fearless Rick
Fearless Rick's picture

Fuck you, Harry wanger, you douche bag asspunk. You know absolutely nothing. I know a guy who's an engineer, Masters from RPI, many years in business, took 99 week unemployment which ran out this summer. Has almost $1 million in stocks, no kids, wife works. Spent the last two years playing with himself. Now he can't find a job and is committed to day-trading. Good f-ing luck. Hope he loses it all as the markets collapse over the next two years.

Getting a job isn't the only way, you know. I've worked for myself 24 of the last 28 years. The other four years I took jobs out of choice. Haven't worked for anybody since 1998. Doing fine. Paying my bills, growing my business.

Want to know how I do it? 12 hour days, sometimes more. Weekends some times, but often, big paydays because I work at it. Fuck the govt., fuck having employees, fuck taxes, health care, all that extra shit. The system sucks and you have to know how to fuck with it.

These assholes who suck on the govt. tit end up with squat and that's what they deserve. Amerrica was built by people with guts and nerve and effort, not lazy fucktoads who wait for someone to hand them a check.

And these a-holes DO spend lots of money while on the govt. take. No doubt about it, because they don't know JACK about budgeting and frugality.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:33 | 738536 Rockfish
Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:33 | 738537 Xibalba
Xibalba's picture

Merry Christmas to all you who are hungry out there.  - the Grand Ole' Party

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:51 | 738615 Agent P
Agent P's picture

Um...I believe the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or Food Stamps if you're old school) isn't affected by this, so I believe your statement is a wee bit misleading.  However, Johnny won't be getting that pair of skates and Susie will have to go without her dolly. 

I agree the timing of this sucks, but I think it's long overdue.

And for the record, I did not junk you.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:43 | 739118 midtowng
midtowng's picture

Are they going to pay their rent with those food stamps?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:40 | 739311 Agent P
Agent P's picture

Should I have to pay their rent after 99 weeks of doing so?  I don't know about you, but I live in a town of about 125,000 people with around 9% unemployment, and my Sunday paper has four full pages of job listings every week (and has for the last 99 weeks).

I'm not against safety net programs, but at some point you have to cut the cord.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:15 | 738724 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

There are Food Stamps, WIC, NSIP and Free Lunches and breakfast at schools plus other Dept agriculture give aways for the hungry. 

Unemployment isn't for hunger it's to pay your bills.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:01 | 738927 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Utilities. Gasoline. Rent.

Still allows for a lot of "you are going to die on the street" even if there's something to eat.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:11 | 738980 Panafrican Funk...
Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

Exactly.  Section 8 / Section 42 housing is pretty damn scarce. 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:08 | 739203 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

Yes... (*SIGH*)... 12 weeks... 16 weeks... even 24 weeks of unemployment is for "paying the bills."

99-plus weeks of unemployment when you've paid "premiums" for 12/16/24 weeks of payout if you qualify... that's socialism.

BILL

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:42 | 739318 Agent P
Agent P's picture

I knew you meant to say weeks (see above).

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 19:23 | 739441 Bill - Yes That Bill
Bill - Yes That Bill's picture

(*CHUCKLE*)

(*BOW*)

BILL

 

Fri, 11/19/2010 - 00:41 | 740247 snowball777
snowball777's picture

"...plus other Dept agriculture give aways for the hungry."

These are AgriBiz subsidies, ignorant.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:22 | 738749 Ragnarok
Ragnarok's picture

The electorate wanted spending to stop, let's hope this is just a start!  Next the department of education, medicare prescription etc..

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:03 | 738943 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Doesn't even matter what the electorate wants.

It's all coming to a halt. And if there is anything bad coming our way as a result, then we're going to get it.

It's insane to act like we're steering this wreck. We're not. We're waiting for the wheels to fall off.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:16 | 739010 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

I noticed the 12 TRILLION backstopping the banks wasn't on this list....

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:34 | 738539 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

Nice Headline. That's ONE way to put it. 

The same people voting this down won't provide real tax incentives for new businesses either. They protect existing-industry.

Plus, they're all frontrunning domestic security companies and private jails. ha. 

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 23:12 | 740048 Fearless Rick
Fearless Rick's picture

How could anybody junk this guy? He's dead-on right about small business. There are no incentives, no tax breaks no loan guarantees, targeted industries, red tape reduction, accelerated depreciation, or moratoriums on UI, comp or any of the other myriad payments small businesses have to make. Nothing. And you junk him? Get a life.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:34 | 738540 pat53
pat53's picture

You can bet that those benefits will get extended, one way or the other. And the Bush tax cuts will get extended too. To deny either would spell disaster for stocks, which TPTB are not about to let happen.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:37 | 738554 HarryWanger
HarryWanger's picture

I agree with your statement 100%.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:47 | 738598 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Stocks are POMOed. They go up as long as the POMO gambit works. The UE benefits fuel Wal-Mart and Target retail numbers. Going into Xmas, UE benefits were going to buy a lot of plastic crap from China. Now, not so much.

They'll either extend UE, or just give people a ton of cash via some other channel, going into the critical holiday spending orgy. No other choice. Fund the spending, period.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 17:21 | 739039 Panafrican Funk...
Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

Yeah, but what happens when stocks don't go down all that much (or even stay flat?  or up?) in spite of terrible sales numbers?

The assumption is that they give a shit about earnings supporting stock prices.  That seems to have been successfully dislocated for quite a while now.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 18:00 | 739177 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

Forget about stock prices for a moment and think about income.

Wal-Mart is not (yet) a division of the Treasury. They need income to survive. Their stock can be at 1000x earnings, but without earnings they evaporate. Yeah I know, that would look insane. A stock price of $300 on the market, and they go tits-up for absolute lack of earnings. But that is what happens in a manipulated market.

You're right, totally dislocated. And the market will stay up if Wal-Mart implodes because the Exchange will halt trading and de-list them in a New York minute.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:36 | 738547 Cruel Aid
Cruel Aid's picture

They'll get paid, the Repubs want it to come from the previously banked stimulus. What is wrong with that? The tax hike is another matter, that might happen.

More games.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:37 | 738553 LadyH
LadyH's picture

So what happens in the US once benefits run out? Bag lady time or other welfare payments kick in?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:43 | 738582 cougar_w
cougar_w's picture

What makes you think it will turn out as well as either of those options? Doesn't have to. There is a lot of scary out there yet to visit.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:39 | 738556 virgilcaine
virgilcaine's picture

austerity lite..'the mood' has changed, bernake got his memo too.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:38 | 738559 pat53
pat53's picture

And notice that stocks completely ignored the news. The benefits WILL get extended, wait and see.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:41 | 738570 HarryWanger
HarryWanger's picture

Yes, the markets are completely ignoring this news. While I agree they will get extended, even if they don't, it really will have no affect on equities. Why would it?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:59 | 738657 faustian bargain
faustian bargain's picture

Why am I not surprised that this contradicts your comment from 4 minutes prior, where you said you agree 100% that to deny these extensions would spell disaster for stocks?

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:06 | 738682 HarryWanger
HarryWanger's picture

Should have been more clear - sorry. I was referring to the tax cut portion of that. The UE benefit extension will be extended for political reasons and will have no bearing on the stock market one way or the other. My apologies.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 16:08 | 738690 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

he must have agreed 99% and had a reverse merger of opinion.

Thu, 11/18/2010 - 15:43 | 738562 Fraud-Esq
Fraud-Esq's picture

U.S. Treasury Labor notes. 

Shouldn't Money represent work and production instead of debt? I'd rather get some production out of all these federal reserve notes being thrown around, instead of paying the private cartel a vig on each note. 

U.S. Treasury Labor notes! The time has come... It ends the monopoly (but not suddenly), without interest to cartel, converts welfare/interest payments into infrastructure production, puts money in pockets for WORK, supports PRODUCTION instead of financialization. Best part, the banks hate it.  

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!