|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 28, 2015 19:38:33 GMT -5
When you pay people not to work, guess what? They don't work. Duh... I forget which one, but at one time one of the Scandinavian countries (I think) used to carry people for a number of years on unemployment, and when the unemployment benefits ran out, those people somehow found jobs. The gov't there recognized this and cut the unemployment benefits period shorter by a year. And, sure enough, those whose benefits ended earlier managed to find jobs for the most part, when their benefit payments stopped. Unemployment compensation is not intended to pay people not to work... it's to tide them over financially until they can find new work... that'a why one can't qualify for it if they left their job voluntarily... they must have been separated from their job due to no fault of their own... AND they must continue to seek work... I was on unemployment compensation for two months... and even during that short period of time, I was required at attend an 8 hour class on how to look for and get qualified for a job... That I know for a fact is BS, I had an employee that moved to West Virginia on his own accord (I wanted to keep him) then he couldnt find work and went on unemployement in WVA. WVA hit Maryland and because I was his last employer MD hit me for his benefits, 6 months of not working. This and some other shenanigans have proved to me that unemployment compensation is a set up to screw innocent employers.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 28, 2015 20:56:43 GMT -5
Unemployment compensation is not intended to pay people not to work... it's to tide them over financially until they can find new work... that'a why one can't qualify for it if they left their job voluntarily... they must have been separated from their job due to no fault of their own... AND they must continue to seek work... I was on unemployment compensation for two months... and even during that short period of time, I was required at attend an 8 hour class on how to look for and get qualified for a job... That I know for a fact is BS, I had an employee that moved to West Virginia on his own accord (I wanted to keep him) then he couldn't find work and went on unemployment in WVA. WVA hit Maryland and because I was his last employer MD hit me for his benefits, 6 months of not working. This and some other shenanigans have proved to me that unemployment compensation is a set up to screw innocent employers. Obviously this individual screwed you... and lied to somebody... did you contest his application?... I have gone to several unemployment compensation appeal hearings where the applicant claimed to have been terminated without cause, and appealed... if an applicant leaves on their own accord, they are NOT eligible for unemployment compensation... my own son applied and was turned down just a few months ago because he left his job voluntarily... my wife was also denied several years ago...
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 28, 2015 21:08:39 GMT -5
Personally, I'm doing exactly what I want to do. However, I have been poor, out of work, wondering where my next meal would come from. Not for long, because I got myself trained to do whatever I had to do to get a job. Eventually, I joined the Army, because it was a steady pay check. Good for you... I honestly can't say I've ever been there... I learned to be responsible young... very younng... As did I. And now you support paying for those that weren't.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 28, 2015 21:13:16 GMT -5
Yes, I did. Just in a roundabout way. No one should "pay for them" under extortion. Those of us that are willing are welcome to pay for them voluntarily. Welfare, and food stamps, should only be for those that are actually unable to work, not those that quit school, got pregnant with no husband, or got into drugs. Those are all voluntary actions, and it shouldn't be up to the rest of us to pay for their decisions under duress. People are going to make bad decisions in life. There are a number of reasons why that happens. And while I don't personally believe in cleaning up after the stupid, for a lot of reasons, I don't see it changing any time soon, because a lot of people do believe in doing that. It ain't gonna change any time soon. So... do you assume some ideal that poorly models the world, or try to work within the framework of how the world actually runs? An inability to do that latter is what will eventually rip apart the TEA party. And likely the GOP. They just don't seem to understand people. That depends. More and more people are waking up to the scam. The Pubs need to start hammering those that are living off the work of their neighbors, holding them up to scorn. Kids need to start realizing that its not up to the government to care for them, that they either learn, and learn to work, or starve. That only the truly lame will be cared for. Otherwise, we wind up worse than Greece.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 28, 2015 21:18:41 GMT -5
And have you reported her to the authorities? If not, you are complicit in her crime. No, because I can't prove it... just like I can't prove where "W" was instead on his NG meetings... but I know... I don't report things I can't prove... Its not up to you to "prove" anything. If you have suspicions of illegal activity, you have a duty to report it.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 28, 2015 22:13:17 GMT -5
No, because I can't prove it... just like I can't prove where "W" was instead on his NG meetings... but I know... I don't report things I can't prove... Its not up to you to "prove" anything. If you have suspicions of illegal activity, you have a duty to report it. I suspicion that YOU are up to some unusual activity that may be illegal... you think I should report you?...
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 28, 2015 22:20:25 GMT -5
That depends. More and more people are waking up to the scam. The Pubs need to start hammering those that are living off the work of their neighbors, holding them up to scorn. Kids need to start realizing that its not up to the government to care for them, that they either learn, and learn to work, or starve. That only the truly lame will be cared for. Otherwise, we wind up worse than Greece. You can try that, I guess. Human nature being what it is, I don't think it will work. Shaming people might have worked once, but all it will do now is get the person doing it accused of a lack of empathy. In a lot of cases, because that's true. To accomplish what you want to accomplish here, a sea change in public thinking, you will have to convince people to let a lot of folks starve (or otherwise meet bad ends), including probably some blameless small children. I don't see that happening. I don't disagree that the current system is unsustainable. But I don't see any realizable path to change. I suspect the country will eventually collapse under the weight of the entitled, after which people will learn what real hardship is. And a lot of wealthy blood will run in the streets, also. Wealthy being defined as anyone who has something the violent man lacks.
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 28, 2015 23:18:50 GMT -5
That I know for a fact is BS, I had an employee that moved to West Virginia on his own accord (I wanted to keep him) then he couldn't find work and went on unemployment in WVA. WVA hit Maryland and because I was his last employer MD hit me for his benefits, 6 months of not working. This and some other shenanigans have proved to me that unemployment compensation is a set up to screw innocent employers. Obviously this individual screwed you... and lied to somebody... did you contest his application?... I have gone to several unemployment compensation appeal hearings where the applicant claimed to have been terminated without cause, and appealed... if an applicant leaves on their own accord, they are NOT eligible for unemployment compensation... my own son applied and was turned down just a few months ago because he left his job voluntarily... my wife was also denied several years ago... I wrote a letter but to do more I would had to travel to WVA, (I'm sure the bastards knew that), No the answers I got over the phone was the workmens comp showed that they were screwing me. They admitted he had left me voluntarily.
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 28, 2015 23:27:26 GMT -5
Second Case I fired a guy for being drunk on the job. Which everyone at the unemployment office agreed was ok, and denied his claim on me. He went to work for someone else He was laid off for the winter, and applies for unemployment, and gets it. FROM ME AND THE SECOND EMPLOYER. Screwed again into paying for 1/2 of his winter lay off.
AB Dont come back with another of "my family member got denied" story.
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 29, 2015 0:36:57 GMT -5
Nobody has mentioned Workers Comp, Rocketwolf... the mention of it makes me think there's more to it than you're telling... and it's your fault if you didn't pursue the application appeal... regardless of what it would have cost you... which means the approval was your fault... and I can back up the only three claims I mentioned...
|
|
|
Post by aponderer on Jan 29, 2015 7:11:01 GMT -5
When you pay people not to work, guess what? They don't work. Duh... I forget which one, but at one time one of the Scandinavian countries (I think) used to carry people for a number of years on unemployment, and when the unemployment benefits ran out, those people somehow found jobs. The gov't there recognized this and cut the unemployment benefits period shorter by a year. And, sure enough, those whose benefits ended earlier managed to find jobs for the most part, when their benefit payments stopped. Unemployment compensation is not intended to pay people not to work... it's to tide them over financially until they can find new work... that'a why one can't qualify for it if they left their job voluntarily... they must have been separated from their job due to no fault of their own... AND they must continue to seek work... I was on unemployment compensation for two months... and even during that short period of time, I was required at attend an 8 hour class on how to look for and get qualified for a job... It's perhaps the unintended consequence of unemployment compensation programs, but the effect is too many people quite often return to the workforce only right about the time the unemployment checks stop arriving.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Jan 29, 2015 8:03:37 GMT -5
When you pay people not to work, guess what? They don't work. Duh... I forget which one, but at one time one of the Scandinavian countries (I think) used to carry people for a number of years on unemployment, and when the unemployment benefitsd ran out, those people somehow found jobs. The gov't there recognized this and cut the unemployment benefits period shorter by a year. And, sure enough, those whose benefits ended earlier managed to find jobs for the most part, when their benefit payments stopped. No doubt, you are thinking of Denmark. The Economist has been covering there adventures with unemployment for years. economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/08/16/why-denmark-is-shrinking-its-social-safety-net/?_r=0Regarding US unemployment, some posters on this board may not understand that these "benefits" are State designed and managed. So one's anectdotal exparience in one State may not apply to all others.
|
|
|
Post by stevez51 on Jan 29, 2015 8:09:53 GMT -5
I have a family member who lost her job when the company closed operations in MD and moved to NC. She collected for almost 2 yrs knowing she was never going back to work. Did she not want to go back?... or could she not find another job?... there are a number of reasons former employers might do this... and I'm not against it as long as they follow the rules and qualify... Not going back, she was going to take care of the grand kids. Husband made enough at his govt. job. So used it til it ran out. Congress kept adding extensions to sustain it.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Jan 29, 2015 8:16:22 GMT -5
Second Case I fired a guy for being drunk on the job. Which everyone at the unemployment office agreed was ok, and denied his claim on me. He went to work for someone else He was laid off for the winter, and applies for unemployment, and gets it. FROM ME AND THE SECOND EMPLOYER. Screwed again into paying for 1/2 of his winter lay off. AB Dont come back with another of "my family member got denied" story. I understand how that works rocket! I am also in Maryland and have seen many former employees "draw" upon the accounts of their former employers. But you know how it is! As an employer funded program, where is the incentive for an average taxpayer and voter to care? The employer falls under the category of "the guy behind the tree being taxed"!
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 29, 2015 8:32:38 GMT -5
Unemployment compensation is not intended to pay people not to work... it's to tide them over financially until they can find new work... that'a why one can't qualify for it if they left their job voluntarily... they must have been separated from their job due to no fault of their own... AND they must continue to seek work... I was on unemployment compensation for two months... and even during that short period of time, I was required at attend an 8 hour class on how to look for and get qualified for a job... It's perhaps the unintended consequence of unemployment compensation programs, but the effect is too many people quite often return to the workforce only right about the time the unemployment checks stop arriving. Responsibility went out a long time ago with so many things to make our life easier... I'm just a 1948 model... and find it hard to get away from the concept of working for what I get... I even enjoy washing, drying, and putting away the dishes here at home... my wife... from another generation it seems... (7 years younger)... had rather use the dishwasher... and if you want a dish, get it out of the dishwasher... IO've said it before... I bought my wife a dishwasher... my dad married one...
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 29, 2015 8:41:20 GMT -5
Did she not want to go back?... or could she not find another job?... there are a number of reasons former employers might do this... and I'm not against it as long as they follow the rules and qualify... Not going back, she was going to take care of the grand kids. Husband made enough at his govt. job. So used it til it ran out. Congress kept adding extensions to sustain it. My wife did the same thing... she was an LPN and left work when two grand kids came to live with us full time six years ago... she was almost to the point of having to quit due to her health... (I won't go into the details)... and had a ton of medical evidence to back it up... she was denied unemployment benefits... eventually including SS disability after she got worse... (even on appeal... she did not request a hearing)... because she left work voluntarily... (Sorry, RW... this is not another claim... it's one of the three I already mentioned... )
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 29, 2015 8:46:05 GMT -5
Second Case I fired a guy for being drunk on the job. Which everyone at the unemployment office agreed was ok, and denied his claim on me. He went to work for someone else He was laid off for the winter, and applies for unemployment, and gets it. FROM ME AND THE SECOND EMPLOYER. Screwed again into paying for 1/2 of his winter lay off. AB Dont come back with another of "my family member got denied" story. I understand how that works rocket! I am also in Maryland and have seen many former employees "draw" upon the accounts of their former employers. But you know how it is! As an employer funded program, where is the incentive for an average taxpayer and voter to care? The employer falls under the category of "the guy behind the tree being taxed"! Are employers not required to have unemployment insurance?... we paid it for our members when I was a Local union president... we never had anyone try to claim it... does an employer have to actually pay anything when a former employee claims UC?... or is it covered by their UC insurance?... I really don't know...
|
|
|
Post by Evil Yoda on Jan 29, 2015 9:15:52 GMT -5
I have to pay unemployment insurance premiums even though my S-corp employs only me. It's kind of unfair because as a contractor, I'll never file an unemployment claim (in fact, I am fortunate never to have been fired or laid off, although since becoming a contractor I have been without work for periods of time).
rocketwolf, please explain a little more how unemployment works when you fire someone and he files a claim - it sounds like if they decide you did not have cause to fire him you have to keep paying him?
|
|
|
Post by aboutwell on Jan 29, 2015 9:23:20 GMT -5
I have to pay unemployment insurance premiums even though my S-corp employs only me. It's kind of unfair because as a contractor, I'll never file an unemployment claim (in fact, I am fortunate never to have been fired or laid off, although since becoming a contractor I have been without work for periods of time). rocketwolf, please explain a little more how unemployment works when you fire someone and he files a claim - it sounds like if they decide you did not have cause to fire him you have to keep paying him? What I was asking, EY... is did RW have to keep paying them or did RW's UC insurance have to pay them?... which could result in a higher UC premium for RW... our rate at my Local... IF I remember it correctly... was between 1% and 3% of the wages paid out... Why would an employer want to contest an UC claim if it didn't effect him financially?... unless it is simply on moral grounds?... BTW... I don't believe it's fair for you tho have to pay UC premiums if you are self-employed...
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Jan 29, 2015 9:26:59 GMT -5
I understand how that works rocket! I am also in Maryland and have seen many former employees "draw" upon the accounts of their former employers. But you know how it is! As an employer funded program, where is the incentive for an average taxpayer and voter to care? The employer falls under the category of "the guy behind the tree being taxed"! Are employers not required to have unemployment insurance?... we paid it for our members when I was a Local union president... we never had anyone try to claim it... does an employer have to actually pay anything when a former employee claims UC?... or is it covered by their UC insurance?... I really don't know... I can't address unemployment benefits for states other than where I was an employer. I did chime in on Denmark since the Nordic societies "unemployment" issues have been widely reported upon and discussed and studied for some time now. My suggestion for anyone who is unclear about unemployment "insurance" would be to ask an employer in your area, since THEY are the ones who pay for it and hence generally are apt to know how it works.
|
|
|
Post by rentedmule on Jan 29, 2015 9:34:27 GMT -5
I have to pay unemployment insurance premiums even though my S-corp employs only me. It's kind of unfair because as a contractor, I'll never file an unemployment claim (in fact, I am fortunate never to have been fired or laid off, although since becoming a contractor I have been without work for periods of time). rocketwolf, please explain a little more how unemployment works when you fire someone and he files a claim - it sounds like if they decide you did not have cause to fire him you have to keep paying him? Thanks Yoda. In Md. employers must pay unemployment and workmans comp taxes even though the employer himself can Not draw benefits. My personal opinion is that is has Nothing to do with "fairness", but is a good way to build up reserves in the state fund.
|
|
|
Post by redleg on Jan 29, 2015 10:03:30 GMT -5
Its not up to you to "prove" anything. If you have suspicions of illegal activity, you have a duty to report it. I suspicion that YOU are up to some unusual activity that may be illegal... you think I should report you?... Uh, uh. You said you "knew" she lied. That means you had evidence thereof. Which means that you are willing to "overlook" criminal behavior, if it's inconvenient for you to report it.
|
|
|
Post by Ranger John on Jan 29, 2015 10:28:49 GMT -5
I suspicion that YOU are up to some unusual activity that may be illegal... you think I should report you?... Uh, uh. You said you "knew" she lied. That means you had evidence thereof. Which means that you are willing to "overlook" criminal behavior, if it's inconvenient for you to report it. Or, indeed celebrate it, if the criminal behavior is carried out by the Obama administration.
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 29, 2015 10:46:52 GMT -5
Nobody has mentioned Workers Comp, Rocketwolf... the mention of it makes me think there's more to it than you're telling... and it's your fault if you didn't pursue the application appeal... regardless of what it would have cost you... which means the approval was your fault... and I can back up the only three claims I mentioned... I meant unemployment compensation
|
|
|
Post by rocketwolf on Jan 29, 2015 10:50:15 GMT -5
Second Case I fired a guy for being drunk on the job. Which everyone at the unemployment office agreed was ok, and denied his claim on me. He went to work for someone else He was laid off for the winter, and applies for unemployment, and gets it. FROM ME AND THE SECOND EMPLOYER. Screwed again into paying for 1/2 of his winter lay off. AB Dont come back with another of "my family member got denied" story. I understand how that works rocket! I am also in Maryland and have seen many former employees "draw" upon the accounts of their former employers. But you know how it is! As an employer funded program, where is the incentive for an average taxpayer and voter to care? The employer falls under the category of "the guy behind the tree being taxed"! Yeah the government hides the cost in our wallets
|
|