User Controls

Should we open the country now?

  1. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist Considering that these bills are only temporary measures, itā€™s highly unlikely that it would ā€œkeep Americans unemployedā€. Thatā€™s taking it a bit far.


    Was it a dumb? Donā€™t fully know their motives, so I canā€™t say. From the surface it seems dumb.

    But it takes a two party system to balance things out, which is exactly what we have, (barring the few independents).


    I guess you totally "skipped" over what Senate DemoCRAP Ron Widen said. Nor, does it anywhere in the provision/AMENDMENT did/does it say/s it's "TEMPORARY." If it does? find it for me. {I'm, certainly, interested in "seeing" it.}


    Quote:
    Senate Democrat Ron Widen: ā€œSupercharging unemployment has long been a priority for Senate Democrats. It was not a drafting error.ā€
  2. Technologist victim of incest
    Originally posted by Netflxchillr I guess you totally "skipped" over what Senate DemoCRAP Ron Widen said. Nor, does it anywhere in the provision/AMENDMENT did/does it say/s it's "TEMPORARY." If it does? find it for me. {I'm, certainly, interested in "seeing" it.}


    Quote:
    Senate Democrat Ron Widen: ā€œSupercharging unemployment has long been a priority for Senate Democrats. It was not a drafting error.ā€

    Those eligible to collect unemployment in their state would get an extra $600 a week in benefits for up to four months.

    So donā€™t go gettin your panties in a wad. šŸ˜˜

    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/03/27/how-unemployed-workers-could-get-more-than-100percent-of-their-paycheck.html


    Whereas unemployment isn't typically so generous in normal times, the current public health emergency necessitated richer benefits, the document said. Inadequate wage replacement may have forced workers, especially those who earn low benefits, to continue searching for jobs or working in violation of public health orders.
  3. Originally posted by Netflxchillr If you are single & w/o dependants- you are probably going to "wait" until Families or Head of Households with Dependant Children get paid.

    *just how the ball rolls… You're gonna wait in line.


    Not true ... what really pissed me off was a news article I read last week - people who make minimum wage as servers, single living with several roommates (cause thatā€™s what they had been doing before all of this) bitching on the news that they were only receiving their unemployment checks that were not calculating wages that included their tips.

    They were bitching because the 600 extra fed money was not being distributed yet.
  4. Technologist victim of incest
    God forbid we help the low wage earners for 4 months. I mean 82% of the elites got the rest, right?

    If anyone should be pissed itā€™s someone like me who has to work, and make my regular earnings. But I donā€™t mind one bit.
  5. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist So donā€™t go gettin your panties in a wad. šŸ˜˜

    https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2020/03/27/how-unemployed-workers-could-get-more-than-100percent-of-their-paycheck.html




    Amendments: H.R.748 ā€” 116th Congress (2019-2020)

    2. S.Amdt.1577 to S.Amdt.1578 ā€” 116th Congress (2019-2020)
    Purpose: To ensure that additional unemployment benefits do not result in an individual receiving unemployment compensation that is more than the amount of wages the individual was earning prior to becoming unemployed.

    Sponsor: Sen. Sasse, Ben [R-NE] (Submitted 03/25/2020) (Proposed 03/25/2020)
    Latest Action: 03/25/20 Amendment SA 1577, under the order of 3/25/20, not having achieved 60 votes in the affirmative, was not agreed to in Senate by Yea-Nay Vote. 48 - 48. Record Vote Number: 79.



    oh, yes... take the word of/from FAKE CNBC news... rather, than from the fuq'ing information on the HB itself?????? Erm... Yeah, O-kay!!
  6. Technologist victim of incest
    Originally posted by Netflxchillr oh, yes… take the word of/from FAKE CNBC news… rather, than from the fuq'ing information on the HB itself?????? Erm… Yeah, O-kay!!

    So you actually think this is a permanent thing? Is that your assertion?
  7. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist God forbid we help the low wage earners for 4 months. I mean 82% of the elites got the rest, right?

    If anyone should be pissed itā€™s someone like me who has to work, and make my regular earnings. But I donā€™t mind one bit.

    But as the Amendment stands... because the Senate Democraps quashed the vote...just who will "want" to come off unemployment??? if there is no CAP?? Most Lazy slags- will just keep on collecting "FREE" money instead of wanting/gaining employment.

    So, You're saying this isn't likely to happen??? People will most likely-do the right thing... by NOT taking "free" $$$ and go back to work??
  8. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist So you actually think this is a permanent thing? Is that your assertion?

    Well, no Amendment has passed to change it- and Until one is passed.. by congressional votes- YES, that is my assertion.
  9. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist God forbid we help the low wage earners for 4 months. I mean 82% of the elites got the rest, right?

    If anyone should be pissed itā€™s someone like me who has to work, and make my regular earnings. But I donā€™t mind one bit.

    Nothing wrong with "helping" the poor... however, "helping them" is a far fuq'n cry from "enabling" them to stay unemployed, now isn't there/it??
  10. Technologist victim of incest
    Directly from the amendment:

    ā€˜ā€˜(iii) the term ā€˜covered periodā€™ means the period beginning on February 15, 2020 and ending on June 30ā€œ,


    Gosh donā€™t make me do your homework for youšŸ˜

    https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr748/BILLS-116hr748eas.pdf
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  11. Originally posted by Netflxchillr ^^ lazy slag.
    get a better damn job. Bet, you're one of those that would stay on "unemployment," forever, huh? Chit's never "enough" BS.



    You cant stay on unemployment forever
  12. Originally posted by Netflxchillr Nothing wrong with "helping" the poor… however, "helping them" is a far fuq'n cry from "enabling" them to stay unemployed, now isn't there/it??

    Lol enabling them

    When they legally cannot go to work

    It's not like people are lazy. They're not working because they have no choice. 30% of Americans.
  13. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Stopffs Not true … what really pissed me off was a news article I read last week - people who make minimum wage as servers, single living with several roommates (cause thatā€™s what they had been doing before all of this) bitching on the news that they were only receiving their unemployment checks that were not calculating wages that included their tips.

    They were bitching because the 600 extra fed money was not being distributed yet.

    If they "claimed" them all (tips) it should show all said income on their income/pay/wage stubs or have kept a personal record of them. If they "didn't" claim all their tips- so, they can't prove they made them(tips)... they're probably going to be screwed for, possibly, cheating to begin with- or piss poor record keeping...is what runs through my mind. don't rightly know.
  14. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by MexicanMasterRace Lol enabling them

    When they legally cannot go to work

    It's not like people are lazy. They're not working because they have no choice. 30% of Americans.

    is that what we're talking about here? People not being able to go to work during the shutdown... and rightfully, getting unemployment to help through hard times???

    or

    about being able to collect Unemployment $$$ above and beyond a person's earnings that enables them to stay on benefits, possibly, long after they've reached what they earned and would have to go back to work??

    which?? because last I checked, I was talking of the latter. Stay on track, hobo.
  15. Technologist victim of incest
    Originally posted by Technologist Directly from the amendment:

    ā€˜ā€˜(iii) the term ā€˜covered periodā€™ means the period beginning on February 15, 2020 and ending on June 30ā€œ,


    Gosh donā€™t make me do your homework for youšŸ˜

    https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr748/BILLS-116hr748eas.pdf
  16. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Originally posted by Technologist

    last I checked, the amendent on mine says the same date of March 25, 2020 and is from the same site:Congress.Gov
  17. tr1pl3_thr3@t African Astronaut [your inextricably aecial moniliaceae]
    here are my thoughts:

    If you know, based on the statistics, you can work and do not live in fear
    By golly let's get you back to work

    If you know, based on the statistics, that you are more susceptible to the illness or actively care for someone who is
    Stay the fuck home

    If you can't be a damned grown up and make an informed decision for you and yours, you deserve to consequences
    The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
  18. Netflxchillr African Astronaut
    Oh, hey.. Pzzl
  19. tr1pl3_thr3@t African Astronaut [your inextricably aecial moniliaceae]
    Pzzl šŸ˜˜šŸ„°
  20. Originally posted by tr1pl3_thr3@t here are my thoughts:

    If you know, based on the statistics, you can work and do not live in fear
    By golly let's back to work

    If you know, based on the statistics, that you are more susceptible to the illness or actively care for someone who is
    Stay the fuck home

    If you can't be a damned grown up and make an informed decision for you and yours, you deserve to consequences

    This is dumb as fuck. Virus doesn't care if only healthy 20 year olds go outside. They may get it and be asymptomatic or have only mild symptoms, but it's not just the elderly at risk. Healthy adults with no preexisting conditions are dying. And even if they aren't dying, a lot of people still need to be hospitalized for it.

    This is serious shit and its why the scientists you pretend to listen to say that EVERYONE should stay inside. Not just certain people. We don't have immunity for this. It's not like the flu. You can have a strong immune system and still suddenly fall ill and be dead within the week. Chances are low, sure, but they're a lot higher than anything else going around.

    Flu deaths in US are usually 10-30k or so per year. Corona has already hit 50k and it is rising exponentially. We all go out now and we could very well see a time where deaths are going up by thousands or tens of thousands per day. The reason its ONLY at 50k is because people ARE staying in. Things would be a lot fucking worse if we just did nothing.
Jump to Top