Alaska state employee's pull idiot move with Belarus birth certificate

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Maybe you should suggest that to your congressman. I tend to support all of our fighting men and women equally, but it's a free country. If you thnk our troops should be paid according to their distance from danger, you should suggest it. Sounds kinda socialist to me though. I bet they have that in France.

The only choice I challenge is why he would continue to work for a company that doesn't respect him or his dignity. I'm glad there are people out there willing to work dangerous jobs, but it doesn't make me happy that the companies they work for are taking advantage of them and the American taxpayers.

Have you suggested to your congressman they should end unemployment and make it a private industry obligation?

Should Social Security and Medicare be privatized? It works for workman's comp, why not for UI ans SS and MC?

he is in a union job, Mox. Are you anti-union? Who is disrespecting him?

[mox 298]

It is called unemployment insurance for a reason. His company DOES pay for it. Yje cpompany I wor for pays Unemployment Insurance premiums to the Federal and State goverment. Also if there is anyone here that b*tches about corporate suits getting the profit more than Kip I haven't seen them.

The ONLY reason taxpayers have to pay for any of this is because Deocrats keep extending benefits beyond what the premiums covered and refuse to allow the Republicans to "pay for it" with cuts to other programs.

Ahhhh, I see. So it's the Democrats fault that Why_Me has to live half the year on government handouts. That's a very liberal position, to blame others instead of placing responsibility firmly where it belongs.

I do not understand how miserable someone and empty must be to support programs such as this over and over and then bash someone who simply makes use of the program that was put in place. If you do not like it CHANGE THE PROGRAM

It's easy. I support government assistance to somebody who needs a hand up. I don't support government handouts as a supplement to their income. I've said this in at least three threads, so I'm surprised you're unable to comprehend. Judging by the typos, I'm guessing it's because the weekend's started a wee bit early over in your neck of the woods.

he is in a union job, Mox. Are you anti-union? Who is disrespecting him?

Why would I be anti-union? As I've said before, I'm an independent. I think if workers are able to unionize, they should be allowed to. I also believe that if corporations reject unionization, that's ok too. To force one or the other on either workers or corporations would be the very antithesis of democracy.

The shift to the extreme left in this group over the last few years is truly breathtaking. Next thing you know, you guys are going to want to take away my guns.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Just want to say that what why_me is saying about the seasonal and shut down variations in employment is 100% accurate for down here in TX too, Mark has said almost the same things ; my husband has done a lot of shutdowns and seasonal stuff for the oil industry and sometimes it's a feast ( 100+ hours a week and good money) and then it's quiet. Nothing for a couple of months. To be honest, he traveled a lot and we got fed up of that and now he has a job that's more or less fixed nearer home

Talking about up there in Alaska, he was headhunted recently to take on a contract up there. He was thinking about it......Brrrrrrrr...I told him how bloody cold it is. He's still thinking :/ Money looked pretty good, I guess.

Anyway, just want to say that down here in TX it's the same as up there in Alaska ( minus the cccccold).

I'll also say this, Mark could have applied also for unemployment and would have done if he'd not been hired for another contract. I can't fault anyone for doing that. As far as I know- if you've not paid into unemployment- you don't get it. he has paid in ( like why_me) and if he had applied and got it whilst looking for another contract....What's the problem? I cannot pretend at all that Mark wouldn't have applied.

The "problem" is that Kip is being taken to task by a person that does not like him for other reasons and despite his long term support of government programs, welfare, affirmative action and any other liberal kink...he takes a position against Kip on this because he does not like Kip. Kip will be labeled a "bum" and taken to task on any topic he posts and said to be a Bum. There is a group of people here who label people they do not like and repeat it over and over until other people believe it.

Since he does not care about you or your husband, it is OK with him.

Slim probably has a problem with your husband but Slim at least always has a problem with it and doesn't pick and choose sides based on who the opponent will be.

[visaveteran1 33]

It is called unemployment insurance for a reason. His company DOES pay for it. Yje cpompany I wor for pays Unemployment Insurance premiums to the Federal and State goverment. Also if there is anyone here that b*tches about corporate suits getting the profit more than Kip I haven't seen them.

The ONLY reason taxpayers have to pay for any of this is because Deocrats keep extending benefits beyond what the premiums covered and refuse to allow the Republicans to "pay for it" with cuts to other programs.

I do not understand how miserable someone and empty must be to support programs such as this over and over and then bash someone who simply makes use of the program that was put in place. If you do not like it CHANGE THE PROGRAM

How do YOU defend such programs? You want to end unemployment insurance?

You're correct Gary.

Some folks b!tch, whine and complain...while supporting the very things they b!tch at with their vote. If Slim wants to go back to a way of being, before FDR set socialism into motion here, and promote that old school way of life, he needs to do more than project his sh!t onto another man. Don't like it...take some action. Personalizing discontent by attacking someone for sharing about their life just promotes everybody saying nothing. It's a subtle form of censorship and forum control. Who wants to be attacked for being open and honest? Frankly, unless someone is willing to share on that same level, they have no business running their mouths. I'd like to see that level of candor from a few other mud throwers who never talk about themselves. That's a form of cowardice in my judgment.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Ahhhh, I see. So it's the Democrats fault that Why_Me has to live half the year on government handouts. That's a very liberal position, to blame others instead of placing responsibility firmly where it belongs.

It's easy. I support government assistance to somebody who needs a hand up. I don't support government handouts as a supplement to their income. I've said this in at least three threads, so I'm surprised you're unable to comprehend. Judging by the typos, I'm guessing it's because the weekend's started a wee bit early over in your neck of the woods.

Why would I be anti-union? As I've said before, I'm an independent. I think if workers are able to unionize, they should be allowed to. I also believe that if corporations reject unionization, that's ok too. To force one or the other on either workers or corporations would be the very antithesis of democracy.

The shift to the extreme left in this group over the last few years is truly breathtaking. Next thing you know, you guys are going to want to take away my guns.

Very logical as always. But it is sufficient that you understand that his employer DOES pay for it and if the government wants to extend benefits, then the premiums should be increased. If you increase your level of car or life insurance you pay more. If that is not doen it is NOT Kip's fault.

How do you feel about employers that discriminate against people who are long term unemployed? Obama wants to end that and protect people who collect unemployment long term. You think I should be able to say, as I do now, "Sorry Buddy, you didn't get a job in 6 months...I don't need you" Or should I be required to hire someone who collects unemployment long term?

I expect either a non answer or another twist. We will see.

[visaveteran1 33]

The "problem" is that Kip is being taken to task by a person that does not like him for other reasons and despite his long term support of government programs, welfare, affirmative action and any other liberal kink...he takes a position against Kip on this because he does not like Kip.

This is true in my view, and a high form of dishonesty. Anyone who doesn't see his agenda is blind or too new here to monitor this milieu.

Slim has a history with this poster, so I'm not clear on his intentions here. I like Slim, and usually find myself agreeing with him, but he's gone off the reservation on this one...or he's joined in a "stir the pot" game. Either way, it's messed up.

[mox 298]

How do you feel about employers that discriminate against people who are long term unemployed? Obama wants to end that and protect people who collect unemployment long term. You think I should be able to say, as I do now, "Sorry Buddy, you didn't get a job in 6 months...I don't need you" Or should I be required to hire someone who collects unemployment long term?

Oh my. And here it comes, the Obama cheering. It boggles my mind that you would want to give the government so much control, as to decide who a company must hire. But then I guess it fits into the whole "handouts as wage subsidies" narrative that's been building here. Never thought I'd see this day in this forum.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

You're correct Gary.

Some folks b!tch, whine and complain...while supporting the very things they b!tch at with their vote. If Slim wants to go back to a way of being, before FDR set socialism into motion here, and promote that old school way of life, he needs to do more than project his sh!t onto another man. Don't like it...take some action. Personalizing discontent by attacking someone for sharing about their life just promotes everybody saying nothing. It's a subtle form of censorship and forum control. Who wants to be attacked for being open and honest? Frankly, unless someone is willing to share on that same level, they have no business running their mouths. I'd like to see that level of candor from a few other mud throwers who never talk about themselves. That's a form of cowardice in my judgment.

I can repsect people who disagree on issues. No problem. And I can disagree with you on an issue and agree with you on another and say so in both cases. And I won't "hate VV" because we diosagree on one thing or two or three...or twelve.

Slim is opposed to ...whatever. But he is always opposed to it. For everyone. That is fine and if he contacts his congressperson, all the better. Good for him!

On the other hand we have those ONLY opposed to these things when they do not like the person and choose to argue with someone because they are someone, the issue is not important. When I see then posting in the K-1 forum giving the same financial advice to someone asking about an I-134 as done here for Kip regarding unemployment, then I will believe they are sincere. There is a group of them that have nothing to contribute, do not offer advice or simply participate in conversation, they just jump in, throw rocks at the same old targets and jump out, then go off to their secret hideout and tell each other how they "got Kip", then they sign in anonymously and read what the others did and give 1+ s to them!

The bunch of them are like the sourpuss kid that comes along, runs through the four-square game, takes the ball and kicks it on the roof. Very troubled unhappy people.

Oh my. And here it comes, the Obama cheering. It boggles my mind that you would want to give the government so much control, as to decide who a company must hire. But then I guess it fits into the whole "handouts as wage subsidies" narrative that's been building here. Never thought I'd see this day in this forum.

twisted and no answer! A double header!

[visaveteran1 33]

I think we're all getting that this thread has about run it's course. At least the ones not getting off on turmoil. Now we're justing feeding the lower part of the chain.

Deal me out.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

This is true in my view, and a high form of dishonesty. Anyone who doesn't see his agenda is blind or too new here to monitor this milieu.

Slim has a history with this poster, so I'm not clear on his intentions here. I like Slim, and usually find myself agreeing with him, but he's gone off the reservation on this one...or he's joined in a "stir the pot" game. Either way, it's messed up.

Look, Slim will go up to the K-1 fourm and say the same thing to a stranger asking about the I-134 and unemployment, or to you, or to me, or to anyone, because that is what he believes.

I can disagree with him on that matter, agree with him on guns and go on with life.

It is the difference between being a thoughtful person with opinions and just a d*ck

I think we're all getting that this thread has about run it's course. At least the ones not getting off on turmoil. Now we're justing feeding the lower part of the chain.

Deal me out.

I will go to. Mox wins. Enjoy the thread Mox.

My wife is home, she was out shopping and she is making me dinner now

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Employers who cause seasonal unemployment have to pay more into UI correct?

I know if an employer lays off people consistently they pay more as a result (think sales jobs where they churn through people).

[Rebecca Jo 1,962]

I don't care. All I care about is that I pay into welfare.

I shouldn't have to pay welfare for you or her.

The prison system is welfare.

On the other hand we have those ONLY opposed to these things when they do not like the person and choose to argue with someone because they are someone, the issue is not important. When I see then posting in the K-1 forum giving the same financial advice to someone asking about an I-134 as done here for Kip regarding unemployment, then I will believe they are sincere. There is a group of them that have nothing to contribute, do not offer advice or simply participate in conversation, they just jump in, throw rocks at the same old targets and jump out, then go off to their secret hideout and tell each other how they "got Kip", then they sign in anonymously and read what the others did and give 1+ s to them!

Have you got a mirror?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

You don't work for the government. You work for a non-government corporation. They may be hired by the government, they may derive a major source of their income from the government, but they are not the government. It's terribly twisted logic to justify a practice you yourself have criticized in the past, i.e. single welfare moms.

I'm going to pretend all of us here have an IQ above a peanut...even the pudgy little trolls on here.

"Boll Weevil, California" wants to build a new school, so they put it up for bids. The school is going to be built with tax dollars matched with grant funds from Uncle Sam. So Boll Weevil, CA puts out bids. Now if the wages are upped, all those bids are going to come in higher depending on how high the wages are, materials, etc...

So who pays the ticket on that? Who pays for the new school? The tax payers of Bo Weevil, and US tax payers for the grant. If wages were upped, and unemployment was done in with...the employer doesn't pay a nickel into unemployment seeing how there is no unemployment, the employee doesn't pay into it either, and the employee doesn't get taxed on something that doesn't exist.

So who eats the brunt of the construction workers getting higher pay? Joe Tax Payer.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The prison system is welfare.

Have you got a mirror?

That's the best you can add to this thread?

There's a group of wasted human life that congregates on the net...it's a Facebook page. This group of wasted human life has nothing better to do but create havoc and troubles on this site...especially in this forum. That's all about to come to an end....and it's going to be something on here that won't be forgotten for years unless this group of wasted human life stops with the trolling and gets a life.

[mox 298]

I'm going to pretend all of us here have an IQ above a peanut...even the pudgy little trolls on here.

"Boll Weevil, California" wants to build a new school, so they put it up for bids. The school is going to be built with tax dollars matched with grant funds from Uncle Sam. So Boll Weevil, CA puts out bids. Now if the wages are upped, all those bids are going to come in higher depending on how high the wages are, materials, etc...

So who pays the ticket on that? Who pays for the new school? The tax payers of Bo Weevil, and US tax payers for the grant. If wages were upped, and unemployment was done in with...the employer doesn't pay a nickel into unemployment seeing how there is no unemployment, the employee doesn't pay into it either, and the employee doesn't get taxed on something that doesn't exist.

So who eats the brunt of the construction workers getting higher pay? Joe Tax Payer.

Yeahhhhh...this is awkward. See...*ahem*. Wow. See...I kinda won this thread already. Nobody told you, I know, it's completely not your fault. I'm going to write a sternly-worded letter to the organizers, ok? But right now...it's just, see I can't really do anything about this. Really not my call. Anyway...good show, spirited defense and all that. Tell ya what, VV here is gonna take you back stage, we've got some lovely parting gifts, and there's a fruit basket in the green room that's all yours. Seriously, we'll just have to throw it away anyway. So come on people, give him a hand, he's been a great sport!