What should Obama and the NEW congress work on when the next session starts?

The two most important things right now are unemployment and deficit spending. Obama will allow further spending if it creates jobs, but it hasn’t worked as well to date as we’d hoped. This must continue to be the focus of this administration.

As to unemployment…I think the biggest cause of unemployment right now is the never-ending Unemployment Benefits. Congress needs to get back to “You get six months to find a job then you’re on your own.”

@Dutchess_III That’s idiotic. There are a record high number of applicants for every job out there. In some cases I’m hearing over 100 per ONE job offer. I don’t know a single person on unemployment benefits (which btw are a TINY fraction of what they made when employed) who wouldn’t rather be employed, and who hasn’t been trying to find work the entire time.

The belief that getting an unemployment check (that you paid into and earned in the first place with your tax dollars btw) makes people lazy is FALSE beyond all belief.

@tedd just to clarify something about your statement that employees pay into an unemployment fund with taxes. That isn’t true. In the majority of states, state unemployment benefit funding is based solely on a tax imposed on employers. Only three states require minimal employee contributions.

I know of two people personally who are on unemployment and are fine with it and aren’t making any effort to find work.

@bkcunningham You pay into federal unemployment. Its included in your taxes.

@Dutchess_III Well then they’re idiots and you should treat them as such. If I’m not mistaken if you can’t prove you’re looking for work you lose unemployment eventually. And more than that, congress is only throwing out emergency safe guards now because there are so many people unemployed. Those safe guards won’t last forever. Sooner or later everyones unemployment runs out.

@tedd sorry. Employers pay, not employees.

http://workforcesecurity.doleta.gov/unemploy/uifactsheet.asp

I think it’s digusting too, @tedd. I watch Judge Judy and so many of the people on there are losers who’ve been on unemployment for a year, year and a half. Just losers.
It’s easy to make it look like you’re looking for work. Easier yet to make sure you don’t get hired.

@bkcunningham Employers pay 6.5 and employees pay 6.5.

@Dutchess_III what state is where employees pay 6.5? Only three states require require minimal employee contributions.

@Dutchess_III and @tedd the Federal Unemployment Tax Act tax rate is bascially 6.2% of taxable wages paid to employees (there is more to it than a flat tax, but on average). This tax is imposed on employers by the federal government for administrative costs and then an additional state tax that varies from state to state is also imposed on employers. ALL states require employers to pay this tax and the federal government requires ALL employers to pay this tax. Only three states requires employees to pay a very small portion of the state’s UI.

NJ deducts 0.003825 from the employees paycheck to fund unemployment insurance for 2010.
Pennsylvania employee unemployment insurance rate varies based on unemployment and other factors, but – .08% for 2010 is withheld from gross wages.
Employee withholding for UI in Alaska is 0.5%.

I don’t expect much but constant gridlock for the next 2 years. Republicans have made the cold calculation that the more they can do to harm the recovery and the US economy by voting No on anything aimed at reviving it, the more seats they will win in upcoming elections. Don’t look for much of substance to get done. The convergence of getting tax breaks and estate tax relief for millionaires and billionaires (the highest Republican priority and virtually useless for the economy) with getting unemployment insurance extended for the jobless (the Democratic priority and vital for any sustained recovery) plus the foreign policy imperative of things like the START treaty and the embarrassment of continuing to opose help for the 9/11 first responders led to this flurry of things suddenly getting through a Senate that the minority has kept dysfunctional via filibuster for 2 years. But that moment will be gone when the 112th Congress Convenes on January 5th. Republicans will control the House and be in even stronger position to roadblock the Senate as well.

So look for little to get done, lots of foolish partisan name calling, and the economy to get worse after a brief recovery. All the stimulative stuff in the tax deal runs out in 1 year. Only the breaks for the wealthiest last two years, and they are almost entirely without stimulative impact, because millionaires and billionaires already make enough they spend whatever they want to without and special breaks. What they get from breaks will largely be invested, often off shore where returns are higher. Look for conditions to deteriorate and see if American voters are smart enough to figure out who is causing it and punish them, or reward them as they did in 2010.

@bkcunningham Be that as it may, the fact remains, you have to work for an extended period of time before you are eligible for unemployment benefits. Unemployment is meant to help good hard working people who were cut for reasons beyond their control, and the vast majority of people on it are just that… good, hard working people, who were screwed when the economy collapsed. There are abusers, just like with any system, but its a tiny percentage of the overall. And without it… just imagine how many people would have ZERO income whatsoever.

@ETpro I hope you’re wrong. Thats the opinion I had about a month ago, but the recent bipartisan work has given me a bit of hope. Clinton started to get some of his best legislation done when the Republicans retook congress in 1994. Here’s to hoping some of that bipartisanship comes through.

@tedd – Very good point regarding unemployment. I’d like to add that an employer’s unemployment insurance contribution often increases the more that they fire and claims are entered by their former employees. Of course, claims that are based on termination for “gross incompetence” will not be honored. Therefore, there is a penalty on an employer that ends up having high turnover – and in the terms of reductions-in-force, layoffs, etc., it’s a factor meant to make employers consider increased costs placed on society by terminations that aren’t for cause by shifting an amount of those costs to the employer.

In that sense, it shows why this is appropriate. To qualify for unemployment, being terminated for cause is a hurdle. Employers can dispute claims based on for-cause terminations. So, it is mostly people who, although maybe not great, weren’t terrible. If companies were able to just drop all the dead weight without any concerns…well, again…it’s about shifting the cost to those who can afford to pay for it, and who are the ones that are contributing to the problem.

@tedd I was correcting something you said that was entirely false. Instead of accepting what you said was not correct, you seem to want to argue some imaginary point that I didn’t make.

@bkcunningham Ok you were correct, in no direct way do employees pay into unemployment (though you’re a fool if you think money taken in taxes and kept from their paychecks by employers doesn’t make its way there).... But the point of what I was getting at remains the same… You can’t get unemployment without first working and earning it.

I feel like the only problem with a Congressional majority of one party and a Presidency of another, or control of both the Presidency and the Congress, is that we have a two-party system.