The disappearing black middle class

[MARIS61]

[Austin thinks more black people than ever before could fall out of the middle class because the unemployment rate for college-educated blacks recently peaked and blacks are overrepresented in state and local government jobs. Those are jobs that are being eliminated because of massive budget shortfalls.

Austin blows any assumed credibility he had by demonstrating he is clueless as to how Affirmative Action works. He correctly points out that it unfairly tips the scales so blacks are more likely to be hired than any other nationality. What he seems to be unaware of is that once in, these same often unqualified employees receive higher job protection than more qualified employees with more seniority. The more qualified workers will "have their jobs eliminated", then the exact same duties will be assigned to a "new" position which the black employee will be trained at taxpayer expense to fill.

In the future, ALL government employees will be black.

 

[Masbee]

Then your issue isn't unemployment; it's welfare. Stop pretending that a safety net doesn't exist.

Really. What safety net is that?

If I am a non-disabled 55 year old, childless male, who loses a job after 10+ years, where the work was very specific to the company, who will not be rehired due to age and company specific skills and experience, what "safety net" exists after unemployment runs out?

Please.

Educate me.

 

[maxiep]

McDonalds has a job fair in April for 50,000 jobs. Not new jobs, mind you, just the positions they normally fill due to turnover anyway, but they have the fair for a publicity stunt. They said they had 1,000,000 applications.

And yet, you have the nerve to think that people out of work aren't trying hard and have no incentive. How out of touch are you?

And whose policies are to blame? Recessions happen; the recoveries are almost without exception robust. The problem is that the policies of the current administration are dampening recovery and growth and the only answer we're hearing is "more of what's failed before". Jesus. How much more evidence do we need that these policies have failed utterly and completely?

 

[maxiep]

Really. What safety net is that?

If I am a non-disabled 55 year old, childless male, who loses a job after 10+ years, where the work was very specific to the company, who will not be rehired due to age and company specific skills and experience, what "safety net" exists after unemployment runs out?

Please.

Educate me.

Welfare. Medicaid. Sell your stuff. No one promised you a standard of living.

 

[Masbee]

How did people live before unemployment benefits? I believe in the ingenuity of human beings.

Are you fucking serious?

In recent history, they were known as farms.

duh for the win.

 

[Masbee]

Welfare. Medicaid. Sell your stuff. No one promised you a standard of living.

Which states will give that person welfare?

 

[maxiep]

Are you fucking serious?

In recent history, they were known as farms.

duh for the win.

EVERYONE had a farm? Really? Nice try, sparky.

 

[julius]

Then your issue isn't unemployment; it's welfare. Stop pretending that a safety net doesn't exist.

Im not saying it doesn't exist. I'm saying that it isn't the cause of the "disappearing black middle class".

 

[MARIS61]

How did people live before unemployment benefits? I believe in the ingenuity of human beings.

They attacked the castles and killed the land barons who hoarded the wealth.

They overthrew tyrannical governments by force.

I see both happening in my lifetime.

 

[maxiep]

Which states will give that person welfare?

The states they live in. If you have nothing, you can apply for government assistance.

Or here's another crazy idea: what about a charity?

 

[maxiep]

Im not saying it doesn't exist. I'm saying that it isn't the cause of the "disappearing black middle class".

No, the disappearing black middle class is their continued adherence to a failed ideology and their voting for it no matter how much it hurts them.

 

[Masbee]

And whose policies are to blame? Recessions happen; the recoveries are almost without exception robust. The problem is that the policies of the current administration are dampening recovery and growth and the only answer we're hearing is "more of what's failed before". Jesus. How much more evidence do we need that these policies have failed utterly and completely?

I disagree.

This wasn't a "recession". It was a financial pryamid collapse that almost brought down (and still may) the entire world economic order. And it started under Bush, and the foundation was decades in the making.

To think that we would or could quickly bounce back from that carnage is simply wrong. The choices were:

Very, very, very sharp and painful correction that lasted about 2 years and included many financial institutions collapse or takeover (and risked total financial collapse in the process), auto industry bankruptcy, hundreds of major corporate bankruptcies, etc. with a multi-year slow and steady recovery afterwards, or

Very sharp, painful correction that lasted 1 year and saved many bankruptcies, with a long, drawn out stagnation economy, and further corrections kicked down the road, lasting at least 10 years.

Bush picked option number 2. Obama continued with that choice.

But yeah, blame him. It must be his fault. Oh, and those lazy motherfuckers who refuse to work while they collect their LAVISH SAFETY NET.

Makes me fucking laugh when the biggest items on the national budget are: Medicare, SSI and Defense. None of those items are means tested.

 

[MARIS61]

99 weeks of unemployment benefits.

Unemployment is fully funded by the employer and in some states the employee, which all comes from reducing wages to the employee, and costs the taxpayer nothing.

In the end the entire cost is born by the employee.

 

[MARIS61]

99 weeks of unemployment benefits.

If there were just a few weeks of these benefits, people would have to sink or swim, sure. So how does one "swim?"

1) By taking a job. With a job, you might actually get a raise, unlike unemployment. You also force spending by your employer on your provisions, etc.
2) By making your own job. Become a consultant, start a company, etc. Now you're in position to hire those who would otherwise sink.

Are you on Venus? Ain't no jobs to take, ain't no paying customers to serve, ain't no needs to create a company to fill, hence the high rate of unemployment.


To qualify for unemployment insurance benefits, a person must:
1.have lost a job through no fault of his or her own;
2.be ready, willing, and able to take a “suitable” new job; and
3.have earned at least a certain amount of money during a “base period” prior to becoming unemployed. The standard base period is the first four of the last five completed calendar quarters at the time the person files for benefits, but states can adopt an alternative base period consisting of the four most recent complete calendar quarters.

States vary considerably in how they apply these general criteria. For example, some states do not cover part-time workers unless they are willing to take a full-time job, while other states allow these workers to qualify even if they are seeking another part-time job. Also, many states use the alternative base period for determining eligibility, while others use the standard base period.

For the past 25 years, fewer than half of unemployed workers have actually received unemployment insurance, except during recessions.


http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1466

 

[Denny Crane]

http://townhall.com/news/finance/2011/05/31/lower_jobless_rate_reflects_benefits_end_fed

CHICAGO (Reuters) - As much of a quarter of the recent decline in the jobless rate is due to long-term unemployment benefits running out, according to research from the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank published on Tuesday.

When people exhaust their benefits, the Chicago Fed study found, many find jobs or give up and leave the labor force altogether, both of which contribute to a decline in the unemployment rate.

Jobless benefits were extended to as long as 99 weeks under two federal programs created during the depths of the recent recession, up from the usual limit of 26 weeks. The extended benefits are thought to have kept some people from taking jobs they otherwise might have, boosting the unemployment rate, which peaked at 10.1 percent in October 2009.

About 10 percent to 25 percent of the decline in the unemployment rate from October 2009 to January 2011 can be attributed to the end of insurance benefits, the study said. Unemployment stood at 9 percent in January; it was also at 9 percent in the most recent April reading.

Prior studies have estimated that the extra benefits boosted the unemployment rate by as much as a full percentage point.

If the extended unemployment insurance programs are left intact, the exhaustion of benefits will have a "limited and diminishing effect" on the unemployment rate in coming months, according to the study, published in the latest Chicago Fed Letter.

But if labor market conditions continue to improve and the emergency benefits are eliminated, "we would expect to see bigger effects on the unemployment rate (as many recently unemployed hit the 26-week limit)."

 

[Denny Crane]

There are at least 5M jobs listed on Monster.com and careerbuilder.com.

 

[MARIS61]

There are jobs. There is no incentive to take a $900 a week job if you can get $900 a week in unemployment benefits for 99 weeks.

The longer you go without work, you lose skills.

You don't need capital to start a business. If you can mow lawns and have a lawn mower, you have a business.

If the govt. didn't regulate taxi cabs, all you'd need is a car and a map.

There is no market for more cab drivers and certainly no market at all for landscrapers.

Maybe on your home planet of Venus there is, but how can unemployed people with no car get there so you will hire them?

 

[MARIS61]

There are at least 5M jobs listed on Monster.com and careerbuilder.com.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

14.1 million unemployed.

 

[maxiep]

I disagree.

This wasn't a "recession". It was a financial pryamid collapse that almost brought down (and still may) the entire world economic order. And it started under Bush, and the foundation was decades in the making.

To think that we would or could quickly bounce back from that carnage is simply wrong. The choices were:

Very, very, very sharp and painful correction that lasted about 2 years and included many financial institutions collapse or takeover (and risked total financial collapse in the process), auto industry bankruptcy, hundreds of major corporate bankruptcies, etc. with a multi-year slow and steady recovery afterwards, or

Very sharp, painful correction that lasted 1 year and saved many bankruptcies, with a long, drawn out stagnation economy, and further corrections kicked down the road, lasting at least 10 years.

Bush picked option number 2. Obama continued with that choice.

But yeah, blame him. It must be his fault. Oh, and those lazy motherfuckers who refuse to work while they collect their LAVISH SAFETY NET.

Makes me fucking laugh when the biggest items on the national budget are: Medicare, SSI and Defense. None of those items are means tested.

It was a recession that should have followed the 1981-82 path. Instead, as a result of these ridiculous policies from this incompetent Administration, we're facing the 1930s. There was a playbook followed by both Republican and Democratic administrations to get out of this recession. Instead, this Administration wanted to try to achieve a political goal (expanding the role of government) at the expense of the recovery of the economy.

We'll see if Carville's dictum was right next Fall. I can't wait.

 

[MARIS61]

http://townhall.com/news/finance/2011/05/31/lower_jobless_rate_reflects_benefits_end_fed

CHICAGO (Reuters) - As much of a quarter of the recent decline in the jobless rate is due to long-term unemployment benefits running out, according to research from the Chicago Federal Reserve Bank published on Tuesday.

When people exhaust their benefits, the Chicago Fed study found, many find jobs or give up and leave the labor force altogether, both of which contribute to a decline in the unemployment rate.

Jobless benefits were extended to as long as 99 weeks under two federal programs created during the depths of the recent recession, up from the usual limit of 26 weeks. The extended benefits are thought to have kept some people from taking jobs they otherwise might have, boosting the unemployment rate, which peaked at 10.1 percent in October 2009.

About 10 percent to 25 percent of the decline in the unemployment rate from October 2009 to January 2011 can be attributed to the end of insurance benefits, the study said. Unemployment stood at 9 percent in January; it was also at 9 percent in the most recent April reading.

Prior studies have estimated that the extra benefits boosted the unemployment rate by as much as a full percentage point.

If the extended unemployment insurance programs are left intact, the exhaustion of benefits will have a "limited and diminishing effect" on the unemployment rate in coming months, according to the study, published in the latest Chicago Fed Letter.

But if labor market conditions continue to improve and the emergency benefits are eliminated, "we would expect to see bigger effects on the unemployment rate (as many recently unemployed hit the 26-week limit)."

Just a whack opinion piece by idiots who don't understand the difference between the % of people on unemployment insurance and the much larger (double?, triple?) number of people who have been unable to find steady employment over the last few years. The practice of not counting people who have actively sought jobs without success for years, ultimately losing their homes, their marriages, their children to poverty, and finally being forced to conclude there is no point to seeking that which does not exist, is dishonest. If there was a job available, they'd take it.


Nowhere does the "study" give any evidence or even hint as to how they arrived at their "thought".

 

[MARIS61]

There are jobs. There is no incentive to take a $900 a week job if you can get $900 a week in unemployment benefits for 99 weeks.

Well, most people have pride and self-respect and those are incentive enough.

Oregon's maximum weekly unemployment payment is $482.00, and the maximum amount of time unemployment compensation can be collected through the Oregon Unemployment Office is 79 weeks.

Oregon's maximum weekly unemployment pay is $58.35 greater then the average maximum weekly unemployment payment of $423.65.

http://www.unemployment-rate.org/benefits/oregon-or-unemployment-benefits

 

[MARIS61]

It was a recession that should have followed the 1981-82 path. Instead, as a result of these ridiculous policies from this incompetent Administration, we're facing the 1930s. There was a playbook followed by both Republican and Democratic administrations to get out of this recession. Instead, this Administration wanted to try to achieve a political goal (expanding the role of government) at the expense of the recovery of the economy.

Apples and Oranges. Reagan's recession featured double-digit interest rates but America still had a strong unionized industrial base to bring us back from the result of his incompetent fumbling of the economy.

The current recession was deliberately engineered by the uber-wealthy who now run this country and there is no intention of correcting it. It is going as planned.

 

[THE HCP]

Will I be looked down upon here when I officially go on unemployment for the first time this fall? Already cancelled my wife and my health insurance. Is unemployment considered welfare?

 

[barfo]

Already cancelled my wife

Beerboy will be disappointed to hear that.

Or will she be syndicated?

barfo

 

[jlprk]

today's news...

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/07/rep-paul-ryans-pricey-pinot-noir.php

 

[maxiep]

Will I be looked down upon here when I officially go on unemployment for the first time this fall? Already cancelled my wife and my health insurance. Is unemployment considered welfare?

There's nothing wrong with unemployment insurance; you've paid into it. There's also nothing wrong with welfare if you really need it. The social safety net is an important part of our society; everyone should have clothing, food and shelter. My issue is when it becomes a lifestyle rather than a weigh station.

Do yourself and your family a favor and look at catastrophic health insurance for you and your wife. It's cheap ($40-50/mo per person) and offers you downside protection. You don't want to lose your house because one of you gets in an accident and gets sick.

 

[Nate Dogg]

Nearly 8 percent of African Americans who bought homes from 2005 to 2008 have lost them to foreclosure, compared with 4.5 percent of whites, according to an estimate by the Center for Responsible Lending.

My first reaction was, maybe its because black households are losing members to help pay the mortgages on the houses that they live in by gang activity. Sorry if that was racists but that's what i thought. Its crude i know but it could be fact.

 

[Klinky]

There are at least 5M jobs listed on Monster.com and careerbuilder.com.

Many of those are actually fake job listings created by temp agencies & headhunters to pad their client list or some are downright scams.

http://vsafuto.wordpress.com/2009/08/05/fake-job-postings-and-e-mails-continue-from-monster-com/
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/08/22/AR2007082202625.html

 

[Denny Crane]

http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2009/11/06/unemployment-extension-adds-up-to-99-weeks-of-benefits/

“The probability that a laid-off worker will find a job grows smaller the longer people have been out of work, according to studies in the 1980s by economists Lawrence Katz of Harvard University and Bruce Meyer of the University of Chicago. […] Mr. Katz, Mr. Meyer and other researchers also have found that wages the laid-off can expect when they do find a new job also tend to be lower the longer they were without work.”

 

[Denny Crane]

My first reaction was, maybe its because black households are losing members to help pay the mortgages on the houses that they live in by gang activity. Sorry if that was racists but that's what i thought. Its crude i know but it could be fact.

I don't see any technical reason why black people shouldn't excel. When left to their own devices, people of all races/colors do succeed. However, if government makes laws against their enterprises or gangs of white people burn down their businesses, then govt. has failed its police duties.