400/wk = 1600 a month

40hrs/wk = 160 hours a month

$1600/160hrs = $10/hr net

Say $10 is 70% of actual pay per hour.

One would need to make about $14.25-$14.30 an hour to make the same as unemployment benefits.

Is someone that was making $30 an hour going to take a $14.50 job or stay at home and draw unemployment? I'd say they are staying home.

Manhattan Buckeye wrote: "In the state of Ohio, your company pays an unemployment insurance premium on your behalf."

This is also correct in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and I presume all other states, I have to pay into the unemployment insurance fund based on various factors - it isn't supposed to be taxpayer funded. Now the federal extensions that have been in place I presume are.

Exactly, complaining about someone who has been out of work for a month or 2 because they are "living off of my dime" is just plain false.

That is why you have to file a claim, and your company can fight it. It goes against their portion of the trust and raises their rates in order to make up what was depleted

I believe that a problem people have is they feel they are not in jeopardy of ever losing their job. One poster on here comes to mind from a thread over on JJHuddle. With this feeling, they never have a second or third option if this where the case, other than unemployment. If I were to lose my job today, I would be working by this time next week, in the same field and also making similar pay.

I'm not saying to take less than your unemployment, I'm saying you may have to take less than what you were making. People don't understand that concept more than anything. 20 year factory workers making $30 an hour aren't going to take something at $15 an hour because they expect $30 still.

LOL @ these people criticizing people for taking unemployment benefits. I've never been laid off but you're damn right I'd draw unemployment benefits until I found another job I'd want to take. Now way am I drawing LESS money just to flip burgers. I've had two interviews in the last week that were less money than I'd like, but were at least 24-25 an hour. I wouldn't even think of taking a job less than 20 an hour right now. If it got bad enough that I couldn't find anything, I'd just contract my services out full time and live paycheck to paycheck. No way am I taking a job flipping burgers.

Keebler wrote: 400/wk = 1600 a month

40hrs/wk = 160 hours a month

$1600/160hrs = $10/hr net

Say $10 is 70% of actual pay per hour.

One would need to make about $14.25-$14.30 an hour to make the same as unemployment benefits.

Is someone that was making $30 an hour going to take a $14.50 job or stay at home and draw unemployment? I'd say they are staying home.

What's it matter to you? It's their money, not yours!

Society wrote: I believe that a problem people have is they feel they are not in jeopardy of ever losing their job. One poster on here comes to mind from a thread over on JJHuddle. With this feeling, they never have a second or third option if this where the case, other than unemployment. If I were to lose my job today, I would be working by this time next week, in the same field and also making similar pay.

Unemployment would not be an option for me. Couldn't collect it even if I tried. Self employed doesn't get unemployment.

Manhattan Buckeye wrote: "In the state of Ohio, your company pays an unemployment insurance premium on your behalf."

This is also correct in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and I presume all other states, I have to pay into the unemployment insurance fund based on various factors - it isn't supposed to be taxpayer funded. Now the federal extensions that have been in place I presume are.

In the Commonwealth of Virginia, unemployment benefits are on a flat scale. Whether you were making $100,000 per year or $25,000 per year, you are taking home the same as the next person as far as unemployment goes.

LJ wrote:

Society wrote: I believe that a problem people have is they feel they are not in jeopardy of ever losing their job. One poster on here comes to mind from a thread over on JJHuddle. With this feeling, they never have a second or third option if this where the case, other than unemployment. If I were to lose my job today, I would be working by this time next week, in the same field and also making similar pay.

Unemployment would not be an option for me. Couldn't collect it even if I tried. Self employed doesn't get unemployment.

Then you wouldn't apply to that statement.

Society wrote:

LJ wrote:

Society wrote: I believe that a problem people have is they feel they are not in jeopardy of ever losing their job. One poster on here comes to mind from a thread over on JJHuddle. With this feeling, they never have a second or third option if this where the case, other than unemployment. If I were to lose my job today, I would be working by this time next week, in the same field and also making similar pay.

Unemployment would not be an option for me. Couldn't collect it even if I tried. Self employed doesn't get unemployment.

Then you wouldn't apply to that statement.

Never said, or thought, that I did.

LJ wrote:

Society wrote:

LJ wrote:

Society wrote: I believe that a problem people have is they feel they are not in jeopardy of ever losing their job. One poster on here comes to mind from a thread over on JJHuddle. With this feeling, they never have a second or third option if this where the case, other than unemployment. If I were to lose my job today, I would be working by this time next week, in the same field and also making similar pay.

Unemployment would not be an option for me. Couldn't collect it even if I tried. Self employed doesn't get unemployment.

Then you wouldn't apply to that statement.

Never said, or thought, that I did.

Well, thanks for reminding us that you are self employed.

Society wrote:
Well, thanks for reminding us that you are self employed.

Thanks for thanking me. Let's not forget the fact that the self employed are the ones hurting the most during this high unemployment period.

Society wrote:

Manhattan Buckeye wrote: "In the state of Ohio, your company pays an unemployment insurance premium on your behalf."

This is also correct in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and I presume all other states, I have to pay into the unemployment insurance fund based on various factors - it isn't supposed to be taxpayer funded. Now the federal extensions that have been in place I presume are.

In the Commonwealth of Virginia, unemployment benefits are on a flat scale. Whether you were making $100,000 per year or $25,000 per year, you are taking home the same as the next person as far as unemployment goes.

I'm 99% sure this is incorrect, (1) It desn't make sense that someone could draw more in UI than they made working and (2) I have a couple of anecdotes that are counter to that - the first is I've done a lot of pro bono work the last few years for LL-Tenant disputes, I always had access to the tenants' finances as that was usually the crux of the dispute, some of these folks were on unemployment and they weren't getting $400/week from anybody, at least if they were being truthful (which I probably shouldn't assume), the second, I had an ex-coworker last year who lost his job in North Carolina, moved to Virginia and worked at my place and was laid off some months later (long story, I was pretty angry about it since he was a great guy), we weren't great friends but I talked with him some after his departure and we discussed his options, I'm pretty sure he told me that his benefits were limited do the time of employment but his relatively higher wage made up the difference, at any rate he moved back to NC and has found another job so it worked out for him.

Manhattan Buckeye wrote:

Society wrote:

Manhattan Buckeye wrote: "In the state of Ohio, your company pays an unemployment insurance premium on your behalf."

This is also correct in the Commonwealth of Virginia, and I presume all other states, I have to pay into the unemployment insurance fund based on various factors - it isn't supposed to be taxpayer funded. Now the federal extensions that have been in place I presume are.

In the Commonwealth of Virginia, unemployment benefits are on a flat scale. Whether you were making $100,000 per year or $25,000 per year, you are taking home the same as the next person as far as unemployment goes.

I'm 99% sure this is incorrect, (1) It desn't make sense that someone could draw more in UI than they made working and (2) I have a couple of anecdotes that are counter to that - the first is I've done a lot of pro bono work the last few years for LL-Tenant disputes, I always had access to the tenants' finances as that was usually the crux of the dispute, some of these folks were on unemployment and they weren't getting $400/week from anybody, at least if they were being truthful (which I probably shouldn't assume), the second, I had an ex-coworker last year who lost his job in North Carolina, moved to Virginia and worked at my place and was laid off some months later (long story, I was pretty angry about it since he was a great guy), we weren't great friends but I talked with him some after his departure and we discussed his options, I'm pretty sure he told me that his benefits were limited do the time of employment but his relatively higher wage made up the difference, at any rate he moved back to NC and has found another job so it worked out for him.

I should have clarified. If someone is only making $7/hour, obviously they aren't going to get the same as someone making $25,000/year. There is a max for the benefits and it is $378/week.

Ohio has a step system based on your income, but your insurance premiums are also based on your income.

So if you have a wife and 2 kids that you were supporting and made over $55k per year, you would get $500 per week in unemployment.

Motivation is the key. If someone is taking care of you, you have no reason to work. This is a lesson our government can't seem to comprehend. We have the Robinhood mentality in this country and with Obama, it's going to get worse.

Hammerin'Hank wrote: Motivation is the key. If someone is taking care of you, you have no reason to work. This is a lesson our government can't seem to comprehend. We have the Robinhood mentality in this country and with Obama, it's going to get worse.

Not sure how claiming your own unemployment insurance premiums have anything to do with this statement, but we have a politics forum if you want to discuss the government and Obama.

If you can get unemployment take it, and continue it as long as you can while looking for a job. Fast food is not a career for 99% of people, they will not hire you full time anyways, I had a buddy who got laid off in August, was making about 22,000/year. He knew a friend who ran a fast food place, he took some work there, got hired part time, never worked more than 22 hours in a week, they ALWAYS sent people home to avoid making them full time. I wish everyone luck looking for work, most places in December will tell you to wait until after the new year. I was out of work at one time for 3+ years some by choice some not and I know it can be rough. Hopefully the new year brings good things for people who are deserving and are looking hard for work but there is nothing wrong with taking unemployment at all.

Didn't you start your own paper company?

Kidding aside, the job market now is the worst I've seen in my lifetime, we just got back from an Alabama trip and I met my sister-in-law's boyfriend, Junior at the University of Virginia, very nice, clean-cut young man who has a great family that is fairly well to do and even politically connected. He can't even get a job over winter break, and has no prospects for summer employment (although he's milking the political connection). We had several long conversations about how tough it is for young people and what they can expect for their futures, the good thing is that he's cognizant that it is going to be a battle for his generation. Hopefully 2010 will be better than 2009, but this is probably a generational shift in employment expectations.

Is Junior his class rank or his name?

On a related note:

"The number of newly laid-off workers filing claims for unemployment benefits dropped unexpectedly last week, a sign the job market is healing as the economy slowly recovers.

New jobless claims have dropped steadily since September, raising hopes that the economy may soon begin creating jobs and the unemployment rate could decline. That, in turn, would give households more money to spend and add fuel to the broader economic rebound that began earlier this year. ..."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091231/ap_on_bi_go_ec_fi/us_economy

LJ, I'm glad you seem to be motivated. I wasn't talking about using your own unemployment insurance. I was refering to others using my tax dollars because they can't get off their lazy a**.
There are people who really do need the help and there are those who abuse the system. The bigger the system, the more abuse occurs. LJ, for your benefit, I will move on over to the political forum.

made a career change about a year ago. had to do some schooling before i can get my new job and have been looking for work now for about 6 months. saved up a nice chunk of change before leaving my last job. even though i have heard i qualified for unemployment because i left the military i still am not taking it.

QCB, heh the young guy is from Fairfax Co., Virginia (the Alabama trip was for a debutante ball - don't ask...please), he and I had to deal with the event together.

Two more things:

1) I don't recommend driving from Richmond to Birmingham and back within 3 days. QCB I should probably personally apologize to you assuming you live in Charlotte, after getting stuck in Atlanta rush hour traffic on Monday, I was going to be damned before I got stuck in rush hour traffic in Charlotte yesterday, if you saw a silver Acura MDX driving like a lunatic in the northbound fastlane on I-85N around 4:30 p.m. yesterday, that was me. I don't think I caused any accidents.

2) Back to the point of the thread while utilizing point #1 above, during the trip it seemed that nearly every commercial on the radio dealt with the economy, debt relief, yadda yadda yadda, but one that jumped at me (around Fort Lee yesterday on the way back) was an ad by the National Guard talking about college loan debt relief for graduates that join the military. While watching the Air Force/Houston college football game today I saw an ad from the Marines about college graduates joining the Marines. For us old guys, does anyone else remember the early/mid-80's cheesy commercial with a bunch of teens at a diner discussing their futures, when one guy says "I'm going to go to college" [the other kids gasp], "on the GI college bill."? I mean ZERO disrespect for the military or the folks that have served, but what does it say about the direction of our country when a few decades ago the military was a means to get to college, and now college is a means to get to the military?

O-Trap wrote:Anyone Else Having a Hard Time Finding Work?

Yes and no.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091214/ap_on_bi_ge/us_male_prostitutes_nevada