Skip to main content

Greg Sargent finds two more prominent Republicans who seem to think the unemployed are just lazy. It's not the fault of the worst economy since the Great Depression, it's the easy living provided by unemployment benefits.

Ron Johnson is the Tea Party favorite who is opposing Wisconsin Senator Russ Feingold. As he explained to Wisconsin Public Television:

Quite honestly, one of the economic advisors to President Obama actually wrote a paper or made statements a few years ago talking about the extension of unemployment benefits actually prolongs unemployment. When you continue to extend unemployment benefits, people really don't have the incentive to go take other jobs. They'll just wait the system out until their benefits run out, then they'll go out and take, probably not as high paying jobs as they'd like to take, but that's really how you have to get back to work. You have to take the work that's available at the wage rates that's available.

Exactly. When there's no work, and no money, people will do anything, at any price. And then maybe our wage rates can be allowed to drop to those of our overseas labor competitors, and everything will be just grand. As for that Obama economic advisor, Johnson didn't bother to provide a name, or explain where he supposedly read or heard about it.

And then there is Republican Senator Richard Burr, of North Carolina. Caught on C-Span (viewable here), and quoted by Sargent:

The wrong thing to do is to automatically today extend unemployment for 12 months. I think that's a discouragement to individuals that are out there to actually go out and go through the interviews.

If you're unemployed, or know anyone who is unemployed, it should be gratifying to hear that a Republican Senator from North Carolina and the leading Republican Senate candidate from Wisconsin think so highly of you. According to them, it's probably your fault. The jobs are there, if you'd only go look for them. It's not the economy, it's you.

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:46 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  this form of blaming the 'people' isnt new: (21+ / 0-)

    "teabaggers say: i want my country back. well, i say: i want my country forward! ... " (bill.maher)

    by CoEcoCe on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:48:06 AM PDT

    •  For Conservatives, It's an Article of Faith (12+ / 0-)

      that people who do not have the advantages that they take for granted are lazy losers, and that successful people have no responsibility toward their fellow citizens unless they feel like tossing them a bone, but it certainly shouldn't be expected...

      Only fools do battle in a burning house

      by Uthaclena on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:55:32 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  ya, from my experience, conservatives are unable (11+ / 0-)

        to feel any empathy (most of the time they dont even know what that word means). they think that their privileged upbringing is common to all people..and that all they need to do, is to do something with boot-straps...
        they are mostly unable to put themselves in other people's shoes.
        and of course there is the whole issue of greed and selfishness...

        "teabaggers say: i want my country back. well, i say: i want my country forward! ... " (bill.maher)

        by CoEcoCe on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:59:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Blame America First. (14+ / 0-)

        It's what they do.

        I just can't figure out how they reconcile "The jobs are there; it's just that people are lazy" with "Throw the Democratic bums out because they've been in charge two eyars and there are no jobs."

        They probably just don't reconcile those two ideas. Anything that gets the you-know-what out of the Oval Office, they'll sign on to.

        Fight until we win. Then we can begin arguing about the details. - Kwickkick (RIP) 2009

        by RickMassimo on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:03:47 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Was It Bush the First (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wenchacha, RickMassimo

          who had no idea what everyday items like a gallon of milk cost? That was an example of how out of touch they are.

          Beside the myth that there are plenty of jobs available "if they're just willing to work hard and put down the crack pipe (because they're spending their unemployment or welfare on drugs, ya know)," there is likewise a pretense that they are jobs that provide liveable wages and will pay for housing, food, and transportation to those plentiful jobs.

          Only fools do battle in a burning house

          by Uthaclena on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 10:10:08 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Sometimes I think Grayson wasn't exaggerating (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            wenchacha, Uthaclena

            when he said Republicans think if you're out of work and broke, just sell some stock.

            That said, I always thought the gallon-of-milk thing was stupid. Of course Bush the First didn't know that; I bet Obama and Clinton don't either. (Heck, I don't; my wife and I don't drink milk and I only have my son a few nights a month.)

            My populist rage is much more directed at supply-side cluelessness, to coin a term - those who constantly scream that $200,000 a year "isn't that much money, really" or about how much it costs to be rich, as if you HAVE to buy two mansions.

            Fight until we win. Then we can begin arguing about the details. - Kwickkick (RIP) 2009

            by RickMassimo on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 10:55:12 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thing is, Bush the First probably didn't have (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              nellgwen

              to buy his own gas, either, seeing as how Presidents have special transportation.  But I'm willing to bet that he still knew the price of oil.

              It's really just a question of priorities.  Politicians should have some awareness of prices for food and other necessities.  They can easily direct a staffer to collect the information in a handy report for them to read.  When they don't do that, it tells us something about their priorities.

    •  Fitting to show Phil Gramm... (10+ / 0-)

      He's the primary author of the legislation that set allowed the economic collapse of 2008 to happen, after all.

      And I'm actually GLAD to see Richard Burr say this, as well as the Repubs' Congressional Leadership, and/or those running for office this year. The more they say it, the more the "average" American knows full well they're clearly NOT on their side--in this recession, or in anything else. Gallup's Congressional generic ballot poll went from +2 Repubs to +7 Democrats inside of a month, largely because of this kind of talk from them. They not only have no plan to get us out of this, they're BLAMING us for it!

      "Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it."--Miguel De Santa Anna

      by GainesT1958 on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:57:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Richard Burr (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        loftT, Egalitare, nellgwen

        I AM NO FAN OF Richard Burr and when his office called me the other day I discussed this with his 24 year old staffer.  From what I gathered from my conversation, Burr is apologetic (whatever) for making that remark but it will come back to haunt him in November.  Burr is "sympathetic" to the unemployed but says that the extension MUST be paid for, not added to the deficit.  Again, WHATEVER.  I made several suggestions on how we can save money in the budget to pay for this, which were all met with counter suggestions.  Anyway, Elaine Marshall is using his comment as a commercial against him for the November Election.  She needs your help in raising funds because she had to spend a lot in a run-off in May.  Please help send Richard Burr to the UNEMPLOYMENT LINE.

        •  Oh and one other comment (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          loftT, nellgwen

          the staffer told me he gets more calls from people that aren't looking for a job vs those calls from people like me who have sent out hundreds of resumes and have had less than 10 interviews in a year.  I explained to him that when you are one of 300-400 applicants, it is hard to get an interview and then when you are considered 'overqualifed' for other jobs you apply to (code for being over 40) you don't have a chance.  He said I was the exception to the calls he gets.  I told him that Sen. Burr needs to talk to the real unemployed, those that made over $75K and can't find a job (that is myself and my former peers), instead of listening to his big business contributors.  I got a small laugh on the other end of the line.

        •  Ms. Marshall ROCKS!! n/t (0+ / 0-)

          "Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." -- Frederick Douglass

          by Egalitare on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 12:14:23 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  The mental recession is a good description for (3+ / 0-)

      the transition from Clinton/Gore to Cheney/Bush. The nes media started the professionalism recession during the Carter administration from which they have never recovered.

      Slow thinkers - keep right

      by Dave the Wave on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:02:02 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The regional Republicans ... (0+ / 0-)

      Are on a mental regression.

      The Republican brand: "Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich"

      by D in Northern Virginia on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:05:42 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Larry Summers was the WH Economist (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      One Opinion

      being referred to.

      Larry Summers, Pres Obama's Director of the National Economic Council has written about this aspect of unemployment benefits.  Below is an online article written by Summers while he was at Harvard.

      See his article on unemployment

      What Causes Long-Term Unemployment?

      To fully understand unemployment, we must consider the causes of recorded long-term unemployment. Empirical evidence shows that two causes are welfare payments and unemployment insurance. These government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment in two ways.

      First, government assistance increases the measure of unemployment by prompting people who are not working to claim that they are looking for work even when they are not. The work-registration requirement for welfare recipients, for example, compels people who otherwise would not be considered part of the labor force to register as if they were a part of it. This requirement effectively increases the measure of unemployed in the labor force even though these people are better described as nonemployed—that is, not actively looking for work.

      In a study using state data on registrants in Aid to Families with Dependent Children and food stamp programs, my colleague Kim Clark and I found that the work-registration requirement actually increased measured unemployment by about 0.5 to 0.8 percentage points. If this same relationship holds in 2005, this requirement increases the measure of unemployment by 750,000 to 1.2 million people. Without the condition that they look for work, many of these people would not be counted as unemployed. Similarly, unemployment insurance increases the measure of unemployment by inducing people to say that they are job hunting in order to collect benefits.

      The second way government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment is by providing an incentive, and the means, not to work. Each unemployed person has a “reservation wage”—the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase that reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed longer.

      The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

      by nextstep on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:58:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Context. (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wenchacha, nextstep, Egalitare, nellgwen

        I'm pretty sure he's talking about when the economy is functioning normally.  When there are jobs, this probably is a factor.  I know when I've been unemployed in a normal economy, I was willing to wait for a better job that fit my skills, because I knew I'd find it long before my benefits ran out.

        This isn't a normal economy.  Even applying for jobs at half what I was making, or at a level far below where I would normally look, the jobs aren't coming.  Of course, that's because it is all well and good to say an unemployed worker should take what ever comes along.  Hiring managers, even in this economy, do not like to hire people that are clearly way over-qualified for the job.  They recognize these people are applying because they have no choice, and will just use it as a stepping-stone ot something better once they can.

        •  Even to the extent what Summers's wrote is true (0+ / 0-)

          As employers can fill the positions as fast as they can go through the review process in most cases - some people holding back accepting jobs does not increase total unemployment.

          The most important way to protect the environment is not to have more than one child.

          by nextstep on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 01:05:03 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  And you do need to search for work! (0+ / 0-)

            Many years ago, I remember having to make the calls, make a record of where I applied, and other job search activity. After X-number of weeks, they would send people to Job Services, or some similarly named govt. office.

            There, you'd meet with a counselor, get tips on job-hunting, and look at lists of jobs you were not too damn likely to get. It was not geared to all levels of workers, really. I already had a contract shop that would call me when they had work. All my friends in the same profession (contact drafters) were out of work, too! Job Services only needed to check with Kodak and Xerox and GM to see if there was work I could do that I was somehow avoiding.

            And yes, I could have waitressed or been a cashier or something. Then your time is squeezed by a job that doesn't pay very well but manages to keep you from getting to an interview today if you're already scheduled to work.

    •  Clueless pols (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nellgwen

      I wonder when the last time was any of them actually had to interview for a job.

      A recruiter at Google told me they had 150 job reqs open; and received 175,000 resumes a month.

  •  Wonder how my unemployed (14+ / 0-)

    Republican brother in NC feels about Burr now.

    Hige sceal þe heardra, heorte þe cenre, mod sceal þe mare, þe ure mægen lytlað

    by milkbone on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:48:59 AM PDT

  •  MN GOP gov candidate Tom Emmer thinks so too (7+ / 0-)

    Visit http://theuptake.org/ for Minnesota news as it happens.

    by Phoenix Woman on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:49:18 AM PDT

  •  Unemployed people ARE interviewing, (17+ / 0-)

    Burr, you gutless fuck.

    They aren't fleeing interviews like your shitbrained buddy Sharron Angle.

    I'd like to see Burr employed as a human toilet.

    •  'syntax error'... (5+ / 0-)

      he's already full of shit, no more room for other....

      "teabaggers say: i want my country back. well, i say: i want my country forward! ... " (bill.maher)

      by CoEcoCe on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:52:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  asdf (6+ / 0-)

      don't most states actually require that you make applications, go on interviews, etc. in order to receive the benefits?

      •  You have to be actively looking for work. (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        wenchacha, mchestnutjr

        Years ago (in the sixies when I was last unemployed) I had to go to a weekly interview at the California Dept. of Employment and show what I had done the past week trying to find a job. The employment counselor would also give me job "leads" and follow them up with me the next week. If the counselor was satisfied I was trying to find work I was approved for that weeks benefit check.

        Now I am only required to answer "yes" on the bi-weekly form to the question "Did you look for work?". Several other questions relate to availability, possible schooling, and if I worked or earned any money.

        With the hundreds of thousands of unemployed in California they are swamped just getting the bi-weekly checks out. There aren't enough employees in all of the state government to be able to check on individuals like they did in the "good old days".

        "Democrats treat dogs like people and Republicans treat people like dogs."

        by Templar on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:34:03 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  "to automatically today extend" When Burr (10+ / 0-)

    splits an infinitive, he really splits an infinitive.

    Once in a while you get shown the light, in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:51:48 AM PDT

  •  some needs to remind these guys (14+ / 0-)

    that if you are used to a decent salary and collect unemployment, it can be 25% of your normal salary...or even less.

    Inconceivable! You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    by hopeful on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:51:51 AM PDT

    •  And taxed (8+ / 0-)

      Wasn't there a time when unemployment compensation wasn't taxed?  If so, I wouldn't be surprised if these guys still think it's not taxed.

      I've always thought that taxing the unemployed was a real bad policy.  

    •  And you gotta look for work (4+ / 0-)

      typical ignoramus lie that living on unemployment equals lazing around on the couch.

      Here's how it's done in my state:

      First question: Were you able to work, and available for work?
      Next: Did you refuse any offer of work, or referral to a job?
      Next: Did you look for work as directed?
      then they dig a bit to find out if you've got severence, Workman's comp, etc. If you answer yes to any of these, the system hangs up on you and you are shut out until you can plead your case with one of the few state employees still working in the employment office. Typically the same week, in my small state.

      Worth noting is that during the instructions, the recorded voice informs you that: "Giving false information, or filing for anyone other than yourself, constitutes fraud and is punishable by law."
      I have been audited twice by the employment folks (no rancor - it's their job) and both times I was presumed guilty of fraud until I could prove otherwise (I did). Needless to say, benefits were held up throughout the investigations.

      Like most all hate driven republican fantasies, their barely-updated vision of st. ronnie's  Welfare Queen bears ZERO resemblance to the reality.

      The Republican Party will never die until there is a new political home for racists.

      by kamarvt on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:40:31 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  and this totally ignores the state requirement (16+ / 0-)

    (at least in my state) that those who receive ue must document a continuing job plus register with state Dept of Labor and apply for any jobs to which they are referred in order to continue receiving benefits.

  •  Burr gotta go. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    karmsy, nellgwen
  •  and if you are lucky enough to earn (7+ / 0-)

    anything during this time, whatever you earn is subtracted from your benefit.

    Inconceivable! You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    by hopeful on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:53:44 AM PDT

  •  Why is it that America is "The Best" (10+ / 0-)

    Yet American Workers are not, nor do not deserve, The Best?

    We can beat the crap out of them over this if we wanted to........

  •  Lazy unemployed? Tell that to my 30-year-old (18+ / 0-)

    son who just took a $10,000 cut in pay so he can hang onto some kind of a job and is hanging on by his fingernails trying to feed a new baby. He's probably going to lose his home and join the fully unemployed. I think he'd shovel shit out of horse stalls if he had to to keep food on the table. And so would hundreds of thousands of others in this country.

    •  A$$hats, all of them (11+ / 0-)

      After the company I worked for went bankrupt, I managed to start my own business. That's the good news.  The bad news is that the most I have managed during the past few years is a salary that is HALF of what I made previously.  Then my husband was laid off 1 1/2 years ago.  Like your son, he would shovel too, IF ONLY THERE WAS A JOB DOING THAT!  He spends hours each day searching the paper, the Internet, going out to companies, etc.  THERE ARE NO STINKIN' JOBS.

      How are tax revenues EVER going to go up when people aren't working?  Newsflash for Republicans:  if people are not working, THEY ARE NOT PAYING TAXES!  Thus revenues go DOWN!  I realize this is a difficult concept to grasp, so I'll wait while they read it again. If people are not working, THEY ARE NOT PAYING TAXES!  Thus revenues go DOWN!  

      Also, people who are not working are not PURCHASING!  Thus fewer goods need to be produced, which means what?  Wait for it... FEWER JOBS!  It's a vicious cycle.

      Gawd I hope voters remember all of this in November.

    •  MILLIONS! nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      phrogge prince

      "Liberalism is trust of the people, tempered by prudence; conservatism, distrust of people, tempered by fear." Gladstone, Me -8.88/-7.08

      by zedaker on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:22:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bingo (5+ / 0-)

      If these dumbass' think anyone can live on unemployment and be happy they have obviously never lived on peanuts.  Oh wait, they have'nt lived on peanuts, they live off of the cushy salarey's they make from saying "No", that comes directly from the people that actually do make an honest living, OUR taxes.  So basically, they too are welfare recipients and don't even realize it.

  •  I would like to interview Sen Burr (9+ / 0-)

    But I have a feeling he wouldn't want to go through that.

    In the last year and a half I've been on plenty of interviews. Every one that I interviewed with had stacks of resumes inches thick of applicants for the same job. I applied for jobs that I was overqualified for, under qualified for, and perfect for, yet with hundreds of other applicants  didn't get the job for one reason or another.

    I did get a job starting next week. It's paying about a third what I made in my previous job, for three months its contract, no benefits, no taxes taken out etc. After three months they'll reassess and possibly put me on the payroll at a decent rate, with benefits.

    I would love to see senator burr live on unemployment for six months and see of his attitude changes any. Who is running against him?

    "Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." Daniel Patrick Moynihan

    by atlliberal on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:56:14 AM PDT

  •  Let's "unemploy" some of the people (10+ / 0-)

    who are insulting the American labor force. Who the hell do they think they are, insulting the most once-productive labor force ever? The unemployed were WORKING until they were laid off, right? So what is the strange psychological mechanism that suddenly makes them LAZY?

    Maybe we can reverse-engineer that mechanism, treat Republicans with it, and maybe they'll be able to do something productive for a change, something besides lying and saying NO to everything that might help the people....

  •  what paper? (4+ / 0-)

    I would like to see the paper he quotes.  

    Quite honestly, one of the economic advisors to President Obama actually wrote a paper or made statements a few years ago talking about the extension of unemployment benefits actually prolongs unemployment.

    The new meme?

    "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

    by statsone on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:59:11 AM PDT

    •  I heard another republican (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Laurence Lewis

      say the same thing about a "report from the Obama administration" on C-Span yesterday. I'm googling, but can't find anything yet.

      How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

      by skohayes on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:31:10 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Where is the "Democrat" (5+ / 0-)

    with the sense as well as the guts to tell these guys to put up or shut up by creating a real job-creation program? I know that the Rethugs will come back with more of the same old tired crap about cutting taxes for business and the rich creating jobs. At which point we slam them back as hard as we can with this one simple fact: That doesn't work. It never has. If cutting taxes for the rich actually created jobs, we'd have had full employment for the last thirty years since Reagan cut taxes for the rich back in 81. It didn't work then, it didn't work in 2001 when Bush did it, and all the tax cuts in the stimulus package have yet to create anything like significant jobs growth in the private sector, either.

    What we need is a Green WPA which would create millions of jobs, end our oil addiction, end the wars, clean the environment, and turn the economy around. We need to be fighting our oil addiction the way we fought--and won!--WWII.

    Al Qeada is a faith-based initiative.

    by drewfromct on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 08:59:28 AM PDT

    •  That's socialism. (4+ / 0-)

      The government directly employing people?

      That's socialism.

      Even worse, it might give people some modicum of faith that government actually works, and therefore, our DINOs and republicans in congress can't possibly support it. That would be like admitting the earth is older than 6,000 years.

      See, anarcho-corporatism is the only real path to economic recovery.

      It is curious to see the periodical disuse and perishing of means and machinery, which were introduced with loud laudation a few years or centuries before. -RWE

      by Gravedugger on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:06:28 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  globalization is the ultimate socialism (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        drewfromct, Van Buren, nellgwen

        I know it isn't but the wingnut "idea" of it does apply. Downward pressure on wages in countries like ours to prevent the outsourcing of everything to China, then eventually to Myanmar child labor will eventually result in one worldwide minimum wage. My guess is about $.30 per day. Less if that downward pressure has a ripple effect on those lazy overpaid Myanmarian kids making $.40/day already. Which it will, ultimately.
        Of course, safety gear and protocols cut directly into profits, so there's another spot where we can race to the bottom, too. Then there's all that pesky regulation...

        The Republican Party will never die until there is a new political home for racists.

        by kamarvt on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:46:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  WA has a candidate that takes it to the extreme- (7+ / 0-)

    Meet Clint Didier, WA TP candidate running for Patty Murray's seat. He sez:

    People should take care of themselves, he said, instead of relying on government handouts.

    "We've got to get rid of this 'protecting the weak.' If we keep the weak alive all the time it eats up the strong, and then our economy will never come back," he said after a tea-party forum earlier this month in Bellingham.

    (my bold)

    He'd cut out any program that "protects the weak":  Medicare, Medicaid, food stamps etc.

    Sarah loves him....

    Dear Father, hear and bless the beings of the sea and singing birds; and guard with tenderness small things that have no words. ~A child's prayer (ParkRanger)

    by bwren on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:00:50 AM PDT

  •  One thing Burr is right about (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    scribeboy, melpomene1, SNFinVA

    Burr is, in my opinion, correct on how getting unemployment changes the way things work.  I just don't think he realizes that the reasons unemployment checks cause problems for the unemployed is because of the rules that are in place to prevent people from cheating.  

    My bro was on unemployment for about 8 months or so.  He's a professional who has a name in his business.  His name is his resume, and he's in one of those fields where you have to work with people who actually still have  money.  

    If he goes out and just takes whatever job first pops up, then his professional image will be tarnished, and it will reduce his future productivity.  

    Additionally, he can't take jobs on contract while unemployed just to make ends meet, because then he would have to consider himself a self employed person.  That would change all of the structure of his UI.  

    I always wanted to be in one of your fuckin' plays.

    by otto on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:01:13 AM PDT

  •  What "interviews?" (8+ / 0-)

    when I read stories of the current employment climate, no one can even GET an interview.

  •  Lazy CEOs (13+ / 0-)

    It's the CEOs that are really lazy. You got people like Anne Mulcahy who got a $31 million golden parachute from Xerox, but no one in Congress complains about that. What kind of lazy could you be if you had $31 million to play with between jobs?

    More at my diary on the issue.

    When are reporters going to start comparing unemployment compensation for workers with "unemployment compensation" for their bosses? If you're already rich, you get a thousand times as much money for being unemployed as the average worker. It's a two-track country with two sets of rules.

    •  30 years of tax cuts. (7+ / 0-)

      And where are the jobs?

      30 years of "if you lower our taxes we'll create jobs."

      30 years of tax cuts.

      No jobs.

      "Oh, the economy goes in cycles."

      Yeah, I know it does. So let's have a functioning government to help out when things are bad. I was there in 1980 - tax cuts for the rich were supposed to actually make things BETTER. If Reagan had said "Cut taxes for the rich and we'll have an enormous party with the money, and the next time the economy goes bad, well, maybe someone will think of something," not a lot of people would have voted for him.

      I do wish someone who tries to claim "the Reagan legacy" would address that. But I know why they don't.

      Fight until we win. Then we can begin arguing about the details. - Kwickkick (RIP) 2009

      by RickMassimo on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:07:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  They're in China, etc (3+ / 0-)

        The part they left out was "If you cut taxes, I will take that windfall and invest in a place where I don't have to pay a measly buck a day to get the work done. And I'll buy some influence to start a ginned-up war or two to keep fossil energy prices low enough to get that stuff across the Pacific"
        See? lotsa jobs.

        The Republican Party will never die until there is a new political home for racists.

        by kamarvt on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:50:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  31 million (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Liberal Thinking, nellgwen

      in unemployment benefits? NICE!

      "When the going gets weird, the weird turn pro." Hunter S. Thompson

      by SNFinVA on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 10:39:06 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Republicans (4+ / 0-)

    Really, these people are morons and bigots. Unfortunately, so are many Americans who will buy into their bs this fall to their own detriment.

  •  I'd love even one interview (6+ / 0-)

    What an asshole.  With 5 applicants for each job opening, that isn't happening out here.  Plus, state and local budgets are being cut because of his disinterest in stimulating his own state's economy, so workers are doing the jobs of more than one position already.  Asshole.  I hope he goes down in flames this November.

    Welcome to the headquarters of pulling facts out of my hindquarters

    by Mike E on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:02:40 AM PDT

  •  Uhm, do regional Republicans ... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, txdemfem, nellgwen

    Completely fail to understand that unemployed people cannot buy even the most basic of things?

    The Republican brand: "Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich"

    by D in Northern Virginia on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:04:03 AM PDT

  •  These people are just nuts. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    badger, nellgwen

    My daughter quit college in january or 09 and it took her until two weeks ago to get a permanent job cleaning hotel rooms part time.  The only other work she had was temp work in forestry.  You do not get unemployment for quitting college either.  Her only income was from odd jobs and selling plasma.

    That passed by; this can, too. - Deor

    by stevie avebury on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:07:36 AM PDT

    •  My daughter graduated in May 2009 (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Brooke In Seattle, melpomene1

      She spent the entire summer trying to find a job, including lots of interviews. She finally landed a job somewhere around October, working at a Radio Shack. She was lucky to get more than 10 hours a week at minimum wage.

      She finally found another job at minimum wage that got her up to about 30 hours a week. She needed a car to get there, so we helped her buy one. The place shut down the week between Christmas and New Year's - no pay. Then they closed one location and laid her off, so she got unemployment for a few weeks.

      Then they hired back all of the laid off workers and put them to work part time at their remaining location - 10 hours a week or less. Of course if you refuse or quit the job - no unemployment. The repairs on the junker she bought were more expensive than what it would cost us to support her for the summer, so we told her to quit the job and we're supporting her (actually, our business is having a great year, luckily - if it wasn't, we wouldn't even qualify for unemployment).

      Fortunately she's starting grad school in the fall and has her loans all lined up.

      We are here as on a darkling plain Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,

      by badger on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:35:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Unemployment Insurance (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        badger, Brooke In Seattle

        barely keeps you afloat.  My son and daughter-in-law bought their first home in December.  In March my son was laid off.  Even with unemployment they were only going to be able to hold on to the house for a few more months.  Luckily, he found a job.  He starts work Monday.  A little less money, but enough to make the house payments.  This bullshit that UE is a disincentive to work is just that, Republican Bullshit.

  •   asdf (4+ / 0-)

    I'm tired of this bullshit. Seriously. They just put this crap out to the press and the blogs to piss us all off and divide us further along class lines.

    We need to quit enabling their hate by reprinting it day in, day out, eighty times a day. The problem is THEM. And everyone knows it.

    And so do they.

    STOP the demonstrable liars who deliberately and with malice ABUSE the private company airwaves which used to belong to The People.

    by o the umanity on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:08:24 AM PDT

  •  best (0+ / 0-)

    best solution is to give more to the rich

    a few drops may trickle down.

  •  Ben Stein says unemployed have a poor personality (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis, schnecke21, SNFinVA

    We've had the unemployed vilified by Republicans - Orrin Hatch wants drug testing, many of them say people are lazy, Angle says they're spoiled, people don't want to work while they get unemployment benefits and, strangely, that there are plenty of jobs. But Ben Stein takes the cake. He wrote an article in the American Spectator and said:

    The people who have been laid off and cannot find work are generally people with poor work habits and poor personalities.

    and

    I see people who have overbearing and unpleasant personalities and/or who do not know how to do a day’s work.

    and he talks about the desperation he sees - it never happened before to people he knows:

    In a word, I am seeing real desperation, which I have never seen before up close and personal. This is especially true of those facing retirement.

    I see it even in the very tony neighborhoods where I hang out, like Beverly Hills and Rancho Mirage and Malibu. Older people and even younger people are scared.

    He says there are exceptions to the bad personalities and work ethic. I guess these folks in Beverly Hills, Rancho Mirage and Malibu are the exceptions.

    American Spectator

    Think Progress -

  •  Obama on the economy---on TV now!!! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Laurence Lewis
  •  Johnson & Burr: the Early Years (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    I have to wonder (again and again and again) how these folks came to be the way they are.
    I suspect that if we could watch the mini-series of their teenage years it would have plenty of tear-jerking moments where they were continually told, "It's not you, it's me".
    We see them believing this, learning it can't be them. So yeah, it really must be you.
    Ah, those oh so important formative years.

  •  A few more Republicans... (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phil S 33, skohayes, conlakappa, nellgwen

    found a few new ways to say, "Let them eat cake."  Same old, same old.

    Barack Obama in the Oval Office: There's a black man who knows his place.

    by Greasy Grant on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:14:10 AM PDT

  •  Come down to the Unemployment Offices (4+ / 0-)
    Ron Johnson, Richard Burr, Sharron Angle, and the rest of you bitch ass cowards. Call the unemployment lazy to their faces. Talking shit from your protected environment is easy.
  •  Very Dickensian (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    conlakappa, melpomene1, nellgwen

    It's interesting to see that nature of certain types of people never changes.

    The Modern GOP: A holy pwned subsidiary of the Tea Party.

    by The Lone Apple on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:15:38 AM PDT

  •  To be honest, yeah, I knew some people that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    bilked unemployment benefits, but they were in their early 20s, got laid off in summer, and were still living at home with their parents.

    But I've also known people who were married, some had kids and mortgages, and no, unemployment benefits to them were not an excuse for a free-wheeling summer vacation. Nope, those people fretted every day they couldn't find a job.

    Fucking idiot republicans would generalize so broadly because it seems their brains can't process complexities greater then 1 + 1 = 2.

    Their simple-mined world is either black or white, preferably all white and wealthy.

    I'm sick to death of their cold-hearted conservative mentality. Fucking ruining a nation that once had the potential to be great. Turned us into a nation of greedy militant thugs.

  •  These guys think everyone thinks as they do. (3+ / 0-)

    Since these guys are rotten politicians who are capable of doing anything for a buck, they think all other people are as rotten as they are.  Fortunately for the world, most people are not that rotten or even capable of such thoughts.  Also, Republicans hate the poor and unfortunate.

  •  What is meant by "doing anything for a buck." (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Brooke In Seattle, conlakappa

    For the greedy politician, "anything" does not include hard labor.  It's more like the easy life of a lying and corrupt politician who outsources anything resembling work to his staff.

  •  More, Better Democrats (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    GrumpyOldGeek

    We need to strengthen our ranks and put Dems in who have the spine to fight for our interests.

    Please support them when they run. Especially in primaries. Even $5 helps.

    Here's one to support right now:
    Mac D'Alessandro: http://www.actblue.com/...

    we're trying to unseat Stephen Lynch who continually votes against his constituents and with corporate interests. Having "D"s in the seats doesn't mean a thing if they're not really on board with our interests.

    Please help out.

  •  Any idea of where Johnson's statement: (2+ / 0-)

    "one of the economic advisors to President Obama actually wrote a paper or made statements a few years ago talking about the extension of unemployment benefits actually prolongs unemployment.", comes from.
          Who, Where and WTF?

    "Education is dangerous - Every educated person is a future enemy" Hermann Goering (NRSC?)

    by irate on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:28:08 AM PDT

    •  Aha, I found something (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nellgwen

      Pelosi cited figures from the Congressional Budget Office to back up her claim, but the conservative Heritage Foundation has some countervailing data of its own, which suggest that repeated extensions of unemployment benefits reduce the need to search for new work.

      According to Heritage research:

      Extending either the amount or the duration of unemployment benefits increases the length of time that workers remain unemployed.

      Roughly one-third of workers receiving unemployment benefits find work immediately once their benefits expire. This happens both when unemployment is high and when unemployment is low, said a report in Industrial and Labor Relations Review.

      Each 13-week extension of benefits increases the average length of time workers receiving benefits stay unemployed by approximately two weeks.

      Families respond to unemployment benefits by reducing other income. Research in the Journal of Labor Economics found that wives’ earnings fall by between 36 and 73 cents for each dollar of benefits married men receive.

      http://www.sunshinestatenews.com/...

      Why is it that the Republicans only cite the CBO when it backs up their numbers?

      How come the dove gets to be the peace symbol? How about the pillow? It has more feathers than the dove and doesn't have that dangerous beak. Jack Handey

      by skohayes on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:43:48 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Beside the point, (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        skohayes, nellgwen

        Where does this come from: "one of the economic advisors to President Obama"? As far as I know "The Heritage Foundation" is hardly one of the "economic advisors" to President Obama.

        "Education is dangerous - Every educated person is a future enemy" Hermann Goering (NRSC?)

        by irate on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 12:07:48 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  G. W. Bush, in one of his moments of eloquence... (3+ / 0-)

    ... once said of Kim Jong Il, "I don't like a feller who don't take care of his folks," meaning that Bush disapproved of lil' Kim starving his population.

    And yet, Bush's own party is trying to see Americans go hungry.

    "Glenn Beck ends up looking like a fat, stupid child. His face should be wearing a chef's hat on the side of a box of eclairs. " - Doug Stanhope

    by Front Toward Enemy on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:28:48 AM PDT

  •  Whenever I read a newspaper article (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    about a job fair I notice that there are three to five times more applicants than there are jobs being offered. People show up before sunrise and wait all day just to drop off their resume or their cv.

    I used to be a hiring manager and I have to say, this economic scenario would have been a dream come true in terms of my ability to find the cream of the crop and hire them on a discounted pay scale. I would have come in under salary budget every time and probably would have gotten a little bonus for it.

    I want to live forever. So far, so good.

    by NMDad on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:38:03 AM PDT

  •  Breaking: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    kamarvt, Brooke In Seattle, nellgwen
     Washington D.C.'s entitled aristocracy is pissed at the layabout wastrels.

    The Bush era loyalists never bitched about the unemployed, because back then if you were young, poor & out of work, you signed up to go fight for the Glorious Cause in Iraq.

      Now that America has soured on Republican wars, the layabouts are getting on our great Patriots' nerves.

    True story: Zach Wamp sleeps with a gun beside his head. Nice to know his teabagger paranoia is intact.

    by wyvern on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:38:25 AM PDT

  •  What you don't think this is the plan all along? (5+ / 0-)

    Exactly. When there's no work, and no money, people will do anything, at any price. And then maybe our wage rates can be allowed to drop to those of our overseas labor competitors, and everything will be just grand.

    For the past 40 years this has been the plan. It is working. The destruction of the middle has always been the plan. That way people become disposable and cheap so they can do what they want with them.. like poison them with industrial waste. Or send them off to war.

  •  These Idiots (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    who think this way about the unemployed can go Cheney themselves and the horses they ride on.

    I've been w/o UI since June 15th.  Utilities got shut the hell off, save for the bills picked up by my roommates, and the whole purpose of house sharing is that everyone shares the expenses.

    I have not been able to do that since June.

    These jackasses needs to go to hell with this thinking, but I believe Hell wouldn't have their asses on a silver platter with a big breasted whore holding a line of coke.

    "Washington, DC: Where Corrupt Officials are discovered daily."

    by The Truth on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 09:58:54 AM PDT

  •  It really seems quite simple (0+ / 0-)

    When there are enough jobs that there is one for every American of working age, then you can call the ones who choose not to work lazy.  And provided those jobs pay people a wage that enables them to pay for their basic living expenses, then you can eliminate welfare.  Until then the HUMANE thing to do is to prevent decent people from falling through the cracks, and to protect them from being taken advantage of by insensitive, greedy hacks.  

    There will always be those who take advantage of an easy situation, of course.  One need not look much further than Congress to find an example.

  •  Scum. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    Just scum.

  •  Burr= asshole. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    Who but an asshole would think that the government fulfilling its commitment to provide at least 12 months of unemployment insurance is wrong? For every $1 in unemployment insurance, almost $1.80 is created in new wealth in this country. This is both people power and a boon to the economy. Of course Conservs could care less, they have "theirs", so they want to screw those of us who are unemployed or underemployed, who are not heterosexual or who are on medicaid or uninsured. They hate people power because they hate America.

  •  Wow (0+ / 0-)

    This view always baffles me.  If someone is unemployed the last thing you would think is that they are lazy.  I think part of it comes from a disconnect in society.  Check out my blog post on this topic: http://wwwstangblog.blogspot.com/...

  •  moving back in with Mom and Dad (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    Yeah the Republicans are right. This is what I really wanted to do, move back in with the parents at 49 years old.  Yeah there are some jobs out there but the competition is stiff too.  I have applied numerous places, but in a small to mid sized town everyone knows everyone in your field, and there are thousands looking for the same position.  So yeah, there are positions with lots of competition, but unemployment isn't the answer. One can barely survive on unemployment, but don't tell me I am lazy and not trying because I have an "entitlement" in unemployment.

  •  Boehner & Bachman to issue numerous subpoenas (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    This is what Boehner said he's going to do when the Repubs take back the house which is they fought against Eric Holder wanting to do.

    House Tea Party Caucus leader Rep. Michelle Bachmann (R-Minn.) and House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) agree: If Republicans win back control the House in November, they'll embark on an agenda of issuing subpoenas, repealing legislation, and holding hearings to investigate the Obama administration.

    "I think all we should do is issue subpoenas and have one hearing after another and expose all the nonsense that has gone on," Bachmann said Thursday at the GOP Youth Convention in Washington.

    Boehner said Wednesday that if he became Speaker of the House he would immediately repeal health care reform as it "not only ruined the best health care system in the world, it'll bankrupt the country." And last week, minutes after the Wall Street reform bill passed, Boehner said, "it ought to be repealed."

    Republicans must win 39 seats in November to take back the House, which White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs has acknowleged is possible, but Democratic leaders have since insisted it's not going to happen.

  •  I refused to interview while on unemployment (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nellgwen

    When I was "between jobs" during the dot-com bust, my wife would nag me to get a job "doing anything"... maybe something at McDonalds.  But the unemployment check was about the same as the take-home pay for a 30hr/wk minimum wage job.  So, at the ridiculous extreme, our conservative friend is correct.  But does he really think that our nation's human resources are best deployed in that manner?
    Besides, my wife has a "pre-existing condition" and the unemployment insurance just covered the COBRA payments.  So accepting any drop in income was out of the question.

    Don't be a DON'T-DO... Be a DO-DO!

    by godwhataklutz on Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 11:40:27 AM PDT

  •  My husband works for one of those sainted small (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    schnecke21, nellgwen

    business owners the right crows about.  In the last 2 years the company went from over one hundred employees to about 25, so yeah there were some tough times and the lead guy was stressed over that.  But since then, business has rebounded quite a bit - and there have been ZERO pay raises, bonuses or much needed new hires to help carry the workload.  

    My husband begged for help in his department to replace a position that last paid in the area of 50k.  The boss said that he'd only pay $35k for anyone in that position now.  There haven't been any takers - except one guy who didn't last more than a month.  

    It would be one thing if the boss were saying/showing "hey, guys - I appreciate you and we're in this together"  but nope.  He's still taking at least 3 vacations per year and got himself a new Mercedes.  Meanwhile our insurance costs have skyrocketed and my husband is working 60-70 hour weeks, at the same salary since 2007.

    It's a GOLDMINE for the business owners - they've got their employees by the short and curlies.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site