Do you consider unemployment benefits welfare?

I know for a fact that you can be turned down if you leave on your own. Not always, but you can be.

However, I do not think that you can be declined no matter why you were fired. The reason I say this is I know a guy that was fired for coming into work drunk at 2 in the afternoon and knocking his boss out. He ended up getting unemployment for almost a year.

 

Now its time to take it outside MM. If you recall, after the election hooplah of the "chads" and recounts and after the supreme court decision was handed down; an idependant firm was granted permission to get ALL the ballots from Florida. They sat and counted everything. The story was in the USA today a few months later april/may maybe. It was a tiny paragraph burried somewhere around page 4 and it said. Firm counts all votes, bush actually gained. I'm sure it just had to be a tainted firm, or a conspiracy, or somehow or another aliens slid a few more in there for dubya. You guys just never give up do ya?

 

No, its not welfare.
I look at it as getting some of your dollars back because you are forced by the government, law to pay into it, same for social security.
I don't like all these programs we have to live under but there is no way in getting around it!
I do understand that as far as unemployment goes, it does make sense.
You can look for a job and receive a little bit of income while looking.

 

sorry, i misunderstood. yes, even then you could file no matter what the circumstances.

i thought you meant that the employer could no longer challenge.

i often saw the employer win by being able to show "just cause" for the firing. one sticks in my mind because i thought the terminology was hysterical. the employee "wantonly and willfully" disregared the specifics of the tasks given.

i guess things have changed in louisiana with unemployment since i was there!

 

Like missouri, "Show Me", I gave up but I hade to bring it up. I dont think that ever happen. Still the fact of the matter is the Supreme court and a attorney general influenced the decision.

 

so are there not people on welfare that have had jobs and paid federal taxes? these people were forced to pay into welfare too.


i think most peoples hate for welfare is misplaced. i think it needs to be tightly controlled, but we need a safety net for our citizens. not for capable people without dependents, but especially when children are concerned. with all the domestic violence out there this is an absolute must.

 

I don't know the answer to this but I will assume yes and possibly no also.

I can only speak for myself but I prefer a smaller government, less regulations, so that people can work and live up to their potential.
There is a fine line between too much government and not enough, regulations, etc.
The problem that I see is that is subjective to whoever is calling the shots.
Another problem that I have is that I never have figured out who says enough and when is enough including size of government, amount of taxes, etc.

 

I don't know if it was on this board or somewhere else, but the best quote that I read on this was, "We should have a safety NET, not a hammock".

 

It welfare abuse that is hated.

 

so i am wrong in believing that a significant % of americans hate welfare itself?

dont remember too many on the right reflecting fondly on The New Deal or The Great Society.