Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 223 of 422 FirstFirst ... 123173213221222223224225233273323 ... LastLast
Results 3,331 to 3,345 of 6317
  1. #3331
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    104,055
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    you realize he wasn't saying their system was structured that way on HIS direction, right?

    and that's what the PPP program was for, to reduce the number of people filing for unemployment

    I guarantee there are plenty of red AND blue states with programs set up similarly. Minnesota, a blue state with a Dem governor, most certainly falls into that category. I have family that were both laid off and self-employed...the laid off took near 2 months to get their first check and the self-employed I'm not sure to this day ever did.

    Did you read the article?

    Did I say it was deSantis fault?

    DeSantis did not set the program but his predecessor did and he deSantis admitted that the system was set to frustrate those looking for unemployment benefits by setting as many roadblocks as possible.

    It goes on to say that after the Great Recession many states went out of their way to make it harder for people to receive unemployment benefits.

    If you go deeper here are the states that have the lowest rates of people who receive said benefits.

    15% or less Nevada, Arizona, Georgia and Tennessee

    15% to 20% Utah, Wyoming, Kentucky, Kansas, New Mexico, Indiana, New Hampshire and Virginia

    20% to 25% Colorado, Ohio, Missouri, Maryland, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Alabama, Idaho, Texas and Arkansas.

  2. #3332
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,812
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    There is a difference between an unemployment system that is actually designed to limit unemployment and a State not getting every individual their benefits right away during a pandemic with the rules changing/much needing updating/clearer standards from the bill that was passed is a bit different than a system designed this way long term.

    Unemployment is not PPP and the unemployment system is going to be different animal.

    The unemployment system in a state should be designed to help the people in need not limit as much as possible how many in need can receive benefits. He is describing a very flawed system and that's a massive problem bigger than 2 individuals in MN. I am not sure about the blue/red state stuff and it seemed unnecessary but generally what is being described in Florida seems much worse. The system being structured that way IS the massive issue and while it wasn't him it was Rick Scott as the article notes (republican senator).
    I am fully aware the PPP is not unemployment. I've been fully involved in it, completing both application forms to get the money and forgiveness paperwork to deal with it for my company. I mentioned it because the point of it was for more companies not to send their people to the unemployment rolls to further clog up the system.

    I'm also fully aware the problem is bigger than (4 actually) a few people in MN, that was simply an example I had first hand knowledge of. We use those things here, yes? Examples?

    Yes, it's a flawed system....and my entire point of even responding was to, once again, point out that not everything is partisan because yes, his pointing out that this was a red state was irrelevant and unnecessary, but it continues to happen regularly in here. Remember when you asked me to point out when that happens? Well, here I am, pointing out when it happens. A senator doesn't determine the structure of a state's employment system by themselves.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  3. #3333
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Did you read the article?

    Did I say it was deSantis fault?

    DeSantis did not set the program but his predecessor did and he deSantis admitted that the system was set to frustrate those looking for unemployment benefits by setting as many roadblocks as possible.

    It goes on to say that after the Great Recession many states went out of their way to make it harder for people to receive unemployment benefits.

    If you go deeper here are the states that have the lowest rates of people who receive said benefits.

    15% or less Nevada, Arizona, Georgia and Tennessee

    15% to 20% Utah, Wyoming, Kentucky, Kansas, New Mexico, Indiana, New Hampshire and Virginia

    20% to 25% Colorado, Ohio, Missouri, Maryland, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Alabama, Idaho, Texas and Arkansas.
    You posted explicitly to suggest these problems only exist in red states with Republican governors, correct? While linking to the comments of a Republican governor of a red state. And whether it was him or his predecessor, governors don't 'set the program' by themselves in a vacuum. There have been a lot of administrations in every state since the 30s...by both parties.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  4. #3334
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,932
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    I am fully aware the PPP is not unemployment. I've been fully involved in it, completing both application forms to get the money and forgiveness paperwork to deal with it for my company. I mentioned it because the point of it was for more companies not to send their people to the unemployment rolls to further clog up the system.

    I'm also fully aware the problem is bigger than (4 actually) a few people in MN, that was simply an example I had first hand knowledge of. We use those things here, yes? Examples?

    Yes, it's a flawed system....and my entire point of even responding was to, once again, point out that not everything is partisan because yes, his pointing out that this was a red state was irrelevant and unnecessary, but it continues to happen regularly in here. Remember when you asked me to point out when that happens? Well, here I am, pointing out when it happens. A senator doesn't determine the structure of a state's employment system by themselves.
    Examples are fine it doesn't match up to a system designed this way nor is it any significant aspect in describing what actually has happened on the whole necessarily. That is about all that was relevant was a couple examples which were happening all over the country given the situation/pandemic described so again not nearly the same or that telling on the whole.

    Well he did just also provide data on which states have those %'s and this one was partisan in some ways as it was a republican in charge as the article noted. I do agree it was over the top as I said but it doesn't change the main issue/points either.

    You can point it out by simply pointing it out and saying stop being so partisan or something. IF you respond with points that don't necessarily make a ton of sense to me (where did you get the idea he thought it was Desantis? PPP reducing filing doesn't change a very bad system design in Florida which is the key issue. I don't think those 2 examples during a pandemic are a good example and many other states like Florida handle it much worse despite 2 examples still which again is the main point) I will point out issues or things I disagree with. It's like the EC thing that is what I care about the validity/arguments not the partisan stuff nearly as much.

  5. #3335
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    The Boogie Down
    Posts
    104,055

    COVID-19 Response: An issue that shouldn't be at all political....yet here we are

    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    You posted explicitly to suggest these problems only exist in red states with Republican governors, correct? While linking to the comments of a Republican governor of a red state. And whether it was him or his predecessor, governors don't 'set the program' by themselves in a vacuum. There have been a lot of administrations in every state since the 30s...by both parties.
    Then you have a reading comprehension problem.

    Because I said

    Lemme guess “Most” of these states had republican governors at the time.

    Most does not equal all.


    And clearly you did not read the article because they are talking that this became an issue from 2007-2019 after the Great Recession, not the Great Depression.

    Read correctly next time and please read the article in question till then am out.

  6. #3336
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,812
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Examples are fine it doesn't match up to a system designed this way nor is it any significant aspect in describing what actually has happened on the whole necessarily. That is about all that was relevant was a couple examples which were happening all over the country given the situation/pandemic described so again not nearly the same or that telling on the whole.

    Well he did just also provide data on which states have those %'s and this one was partisan in some ways as it was a republican in charge as the article noted. I do agree it was over the top as I said but it doesn't change the main issue/points either.

    You can point it out by simply pointing it out and saying stop being so partisan or something. IF you respond with points that don't necessarily make a ton of sense to me (where did you get the idea he thought it was Desantis? PPP reducing filing doesn't change a very bad system design in Florida which is the key issue. I don't think those 2 examples during a pandemic are a good example and many other states like Florida handle it much worse despite 2 examples still which again is the main point) I will point out issues or things I disagree with. It's like the EC thing that is what I care about the validity/arguments not the partisan stuff nearly as much.
    I wasn't looking to change the main point. I don't believe I suggested states didn't have systems in place designed to frustrate unemployment applicants. I simply suggested, and you've agreed, that it isn't specifically a partisan problem.....which was my entire point.

    My examples, only direct first-hand knowledge I have (because otherwise people in here suggest it's only opinion or not verifiable) was 2 people who had been employed were frustrated with the system and 2 people who had been self-employed were not only frustrated but I'm not sure EVER got in....all in a blue state, therefore citing why my opinion was further strengthened that the situation is not partisan.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  7. #3337
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    14,812
    Quote Originally Posted by Sick Of It All View Post
    Then you have a reading comprehension problem.

    Because I said

    Lemme guess “Most” of these states had republican governors at the time.

    Most does not equal all.


    And clearly you did not read the article because they are talking that this became an issue from 2007-2019 after the Great Recession, not the Great Depression.

    Read correctly next time and please read the article in question till then am out.
    You're correct, I misread Recession/Depression. I shall request myself be lashed heavily.

    My point....which still stands...was...what was your point in bringing up party in this...at all? I mean it was the only thing in your initial response. Without it, you said nothing.
    gotta love 'referential' treatment

  8. #3338
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,932
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    I wasn't looking to change the main point. I don't believe I suggested states didn't have systems in place designed to frustrate unemployment applicants. I simply suggested, and you've agreed, that it isn't specifically a partisan problem.....which was my entire point.

    My examples, only direct first-hand knowledge I have (because otherwise people in here suggest it's only opinion or not verifiable) was 2 people who had been employed were frustrated with the system and 2 people who had been self-employed were not only frustrated but I'm not sure EVER got in....all in a blue state, therefore citing why my opinion was further strengthened that the situation is not partisan.
    Alright I gotcha then, we agree it isn't solely one way partisan. I do think given the data he showed and what is currently holding up the relief bill up it is a bit partisan and each side generally speaking probably has a different approach though. Sometimes while it is not an all reps or dems ______ there are general ideas each one is largely behind type thing. I think sometimes people go over the top but generally speaking there is data or points to make showing where a party aligns more often.

    Alright so you were solely focused on partisan. I wasn't at all and I don't think anyone even said literally all dems are perfect on it and all republicans aren't? Is this what you were arguing against then? Otherwise it's just a couple examples of something happening in every state during the pandemic and looking to use it in a partisan way when it is meaningless (I know multiple people in NY who had this issue, also a blue state but not relevant to the general discussion I saw).

    So I think the way people view unemployment is often wrong and things like this system, data above, the way this relief debate has gone all do point to partisanship in some ways. The main issue is what the article point out and the system and how it was designed. Trying to limit benefits to those in need or make them out as lazy to limit in general is a political strategy often used. On both sides sure but I see it more often from one personally too. I just don't overly care which side is worse I prefer everyone move towards handling these issues better either way.

  9. #3339
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    53,735
    This is America. Not a comedy skit, not a rare example of an unhinged lunatic....this is America.


  10. #3340
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    53,735
    LIBERATE MICHIGAN!

  11. #3341
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    6,286
    This shouldn’t be legal and stuff like this is why the guy in that video is acting like this


    https://twitter.com/breaking911/stat...291044866?s=21


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #3342
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    15,301
    Quote Originally Posted by spliff(TONE) View Post
    Lol got a couple of real winners in the GD coronavirus thread straight face claiming that the "real" death totals are way off, with one claiming only 10% are accurate and the other claiming only 25% are accurate.

    ....all while saying that I'm a "troll" that isn't "willing to have a real conversation" for providing information that shows how full of **** they are.

    Distress call?

  13. #3343
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Hell on Earth- Missouri
    Posts
    15,301
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    This shouldn’t be legal and stuff like this is why the guy in that video is acting like this


    https://twitter.com/breaking911/stat...291044866?s=21

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    It's not legal, but I certainly hope they keep on keeping on. They're digging their own grave.

  14. #3344
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    53,735
    Quote Originally Posted by dbroncsinmo View Post
    Distress call?
    Absolutely. Better rush in there as I think they could really use your help.

  15. #3345
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    53,735
    Quote Originally Posted by Brewersfan255 View Post
    This shouldn’t be legal and stuff like this is why the guy in that video is acting like this


    https://twitter.com/breaking911/stat...291044866?s=21


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Leave it to you to stand up for idiocy.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •