questionsdid you know that government cash handouts now…


I loved this comment in your article "Does the workforce erode because it is easier to collect a check than answer to an alarm clock each morning?"

I have one question then... WHERE IS MY CHECK!


@missellienc: Right?

"The average person can't even contemplate a TRILLION dollars, or, a trillion anything. Here's an example:

A million seconds pass in 12 days.
A billion seconds pass in 31 years.
A trillion seconds pass in 31,688 years!"


And I thought this was pretty clever:

Obama Budget Cuts Visualization

Seriously, watch it.


I think I'll take my paycheck in silver, please.


Your own source points at LOWER TAXES as one of the main reasons for this. Not sure how this is supposed to be Dems' fault.

Oh, and the other main cause for this figure is the fact that a much higher number of Americans are either unemployed or under-employed than in previous years, thereby lowering their tax brackets.


this chat made me die a little inside. maybe the disaster of 2012 is the climax of printing all that money and the resultant waste by-products killing us all. (not well thought out)


@llandar: I never said I agreed that it is the Democrats fault. Democrats and Republicans are the same thing to me. Obama is playing the same game as Bush.

Also, I am assume you're talking about the 2nd link. That is obviously an opinion piece by a hardcore Republican. I just listed it for the quote I put. It doesn't change that fact.

I never knew there were so many liberal Texans working at Woot.

I'm not trying to blame anyone really. I'm just putting into perspective what 14 trillions dollars of debt looks like, and how funny it is to think cutting 100 Billion is going to help. How we got here doesn't matter now, but we can try to do something about it. Or we can live in this fantasy world thinking we can live like this forever. With that said, I'd rather keep my savings in something other than the fiat paper dollar.



"Oh, and the other main cause for this figure is the fact that a much higher number of Americans are either unemployed or under-employed than in previous years, thereby lowering their tax brackets."

Duh? Still doesn't change the fact that the government is giving out more than it is taking in, does it? Welcome to American, home of the Welfare State.


@iggz: My fault for rushing to assumptions. It's tough to see a Fox News link and not figure you for a specific agenda.

I'm not a Texan.

I agree that blame matters less than correcting the situation.

It is insulting and disingenuous to look at millions of Americans knocked out of work due to the recession and imply we're a "welfare state." Extraordinary circumstances have put them in this situation, and it feels like you're suggesting they're just happy to keep collecting unemployment. That's not the case for the vast majority, and the extreme minority of people who DO want to just "collect a check" would be scamming whatever system was available, government program or otherwise.


@llandar: Okay I'll give you that. But we are approaching a welfare state whether you agree or not. And I think you'd be surprised how many people are perfectly content with collecting a check from the government without looking for other work. It's like vacation all day every day!


@iggz: I disagree, but I have to commend you for presenting your argument and not resorting to "U R TEH STOOPID!11!" when I countered. It's almost like discourse!

In a utopian world, of course we wouldn't work. It's called "work" for a reason. But I do believe that most people would rather work for a living than scrape by on handouts. It's possible I'm a naive optimist in that regard, but I think part of the conservative argument centers on inflating the "welfare mom" bogeyman.


@llandar: We will see, we will see.

Have you read A Brave New World by chance?

Ron Paul 2012! Wooop wooop


@iggz: I am waiting for my medical soma card to be processed.


@llandar: Screw that. I'd take my herb over soma any day ;)


time after time, as limits on unemployment benefits are reduced, people seem to find work quicker. denmark was a prime example.... used to be you got 5 years of benefits, and people seemed to find work about 2-6 weeks before the 5 years was up.
then it was cut to 3 years, and wow, magically, people started finding work in about 2 years 11 months.
then it was cut to 2 years, and wow again, people magically started finding work at 23 months.

The problem is people who are laid off often expect to find a job that is equal to their previous one, and are unwilling to accept a lower paying or lower-ranked position. I've been out of work several times myself, and each time started a new position elsewhere that paid less, and worked my way back up the ladder. No one ever said life is fair, so people need to start being more realistic and downsize their lifestyles if need be.

This goes for people in their first 10 years of employment in particular; those who've coined the term "funemployment".