Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

What do you think of Republic Senator Jim Bunning's filibuster move to block the unemployment benefits extension? Is he just denying millions of Americans financial support or cautiously avoiding the pile up on our country's national debt?

 
Anonymous

Asked by Anonymous at 3:11 PM on Mar. 2, 2010 in Politics & Current Events

This question is closed.
Answers (21)
  • Both, unfortunately the continued availablity of unemployment keeps certain people from accepting low paying jobs. Why work when you can make more on unemployment. But the shortage of jobs, geez it is that rock and a hard place. Still we can't just keep racking up the debt. I don't know what the solution is.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:21 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • I think blocking the unemployment extension is going to cause major major problems.


     If we have it hard now, just think about all the things that will come to a screeching halt because people will have absolutely no money for food or shelter.


     Low paying jobs are not available...some of the reasons could be because we have a illegal immigration issue in America...but that is another topic.


    This could be handled much better than it has been and who takes the hardship for this? We the unemployed do.


    Not the baby mommas laying on their backs for welfare and food stamps.

    tyme4me2day

    Answer by tyme4me2day at 3:33 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • I saw a report on the news recently where a local temp company reported there are many on their rolls being called for jobs and these individuals are turning them down--why? Because they are receiving unemployment. Many are abusing the system and something needs to be done. I don't have a solution, but this seemed like the right place to share what is happening locally. If it is happening here, it is happening elsewhere. In many respects, our government makes it too easy.
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:41 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • Well crap, I get turned down for even the low paying jobs. My unemployment benefits ran out last month. I have to admit that it would have been nice to have another extension. I'm hoping to have a job soon, but that's what I've been saying for months now. I have at least two interviews a week out of all the applications and resumes I have sent out weekly. The only thing that's saving our hides right now is that it is the busy season for my dh's business. Well, I have two interview tomorrow. Hopefully something will come from those. If something doesn't come up soon, we'll have to apply for PA. It's going to backfire on the Republicans if they don't pass this. More people will go on PA (which I think is what Obama and Co want), and they'll be angry come election time. I understand where they Republicans are coming from, but they picked the wrong battle here, I think.

    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 3:41 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • He has the right idea - the problem is he chose Unemployment to be his test case. THAT is where he screwed up. His argument is sound - pay for the unemployment extensions with the 400 billion in stimulus money they have sitting there doing nothing instead of spending yet more money outside the stimulus.
    NotPanicking

    Answer by NotPanicking at 3:43 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • Bunning is my hero! LOL Not really but he is spot on and I wish there were more like him.
    Truth is it's our government encouraging people to stay on unemployment and even get on welfare. It sickens me. If i had to do it I would feel so dirty but if I wanted to do it... well I can't even imagine that.
    We have to stop spending and I don't think people really understand it. Our country is broke and just because Obama can wave his magic wand and have them print more money that is not without consequences and you will see them within the next couple of years.
    Even without explaining there is one excellent reason they should not do this. They are not offering a way to pay for it and once again the Dems were the ones who are promising paygo. I guess paygo is gone already.
    itsmesteph11

    Answer by itsmesteph11 at 3:56 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • How about stopping the outsourcing and start bringing some REAL jobs home and no one would need the unemployment.

    tyme4me2day

    Answer by tyme4me2day at 4:10 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • The Government could save a ton of money by not funding WARS all over the place.......
    Anonymous

    Answer by Anonymous at 4:22 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • I don't agree with the way he is going about this... But what is the point of the Pay As You Go Law that Obama signed and enacted? Obama in 2009~"“Congress can only spend a dollar if it saves a dollar elsewhere.”

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 4:23 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

  • "Even as we make critical investments to create jobs today and lay a foundation for growth tomorrow -- by cutting taxes for small businesses, investing in education, promoting clean energy, and modernizing our roads and railways -- we have to continue to go through the budget line by line, looking for ways to save," ~President Barack Obama

    grlygrlz2

    Answer by grlygrlz2 at 4:24 PM on Mar. 2, 2010

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN