Announcement

Collapse

Forum Rules (Everyone Must Read!!!) (updated: 04/28/2015)

Welcome to the Bankruptcy Forum. Bankruptcy (BK) Forum is known as BKForum.com and will be referred to as BKF hereinafter. In order to ensure a long term success of our vibrant community, we have established certain rules and guidelines to which everyone must adhere to. Please take your time to carefully read our rules, before you start to participate in the community.

Things you agree to do:
BKFORUM.com (BKF) users agree to use the search function before starting a new thread. This prevents duplicate discussions and allows for better organized topics.

All BKF users agree to read the sticky posts which may be available at the top of a forum page. These Sticky posts often contain valuable information. They may also outline more rules and guidelines specific for that particular forum, stickies are put in place by that forums moderator(s) or admin(s).

Things you agree not to do:

All BKF users agree not to call people names or write a post simply to make a personal attack, or get a negative reaction; this behavior is not allowed on our forum. The use of derogatory language aimed at anyone will be severely dealt with. There is no need to agree with each other, or to even like each other. However, by signing onto BKForum.com you agree to treat each member and guest with the respect they deserve. No threats or personal attacks will be allowed.

All BKF users agree not to discuss, engage, or encourage any behavior or activity which violates the law. Discussion of drugs, violence, murder, theft, vandalism, fraud or any other issue which could be used to help individuals break the law is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to "bump" old threads, unless there is a specific benefit to the community by doing so. But in most cases, please don't post in very old threads, instead start new threads.

All BKF users agree not to attempt/use another members account. It is against BKF rules to use any account other than your own. Impersonating another member will result in an immediate ban. It is also against the rules to open more than one account in your own name without permission from a moderator or administrator. If you have been banned for any reason, it is against the rules to open another account. If you were banned temporarily and you are caught using another account you will be banned permanently. Choosing a moniker which is similar in either sound or spelling as a moderator or administrator is strictly forbidden.

All BKF users agree not to private message any moderator, admin, or other member with questions related to their personal circumstances (Questions about the forum or issues with the forum are ok). This forum only works when members share their experience and insights with everyone.

Things you agree not to post:
All BKF users agree not to post any derogatory/racist/or sexist remarks. This includes attachments, links and all information contained within posts, signatures, and avatars, failure to comply with this rule will result in a permanent ban.

All BKF users agree not to post any copyrighted or trademarked information without the express written permission of the owner(s) / proper citation of source.

All BKF users agree not to post any real names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses, social security numbers, or any other personal details (their own or other people's).

All BKF users agree not to post links, pictures, attachments, videos, or the like of pornographic content, objectionable material or extreme violence, whether cartoon or real.

All BKF users agree not to use BKF for advertising purposes without a written contract between yourself/company/agent and the administration of BKF. Blatant advertising will result in a ban.

All BKF users agree not to spam the forums. Spam includes but is not limited to posting erroneous, non-relevant-useless, off-topic, or meaningless posts. Spam may also include posts which contain no text, or large areas of blank space between lines. Simply posting emoticons without text is considered spam. BKF is the largest bankruptcy message board and all the content is intended to help other users. Please help us improve the quality of our forum by making sure that your posts are well-worded, spell checked, grammatically correct and syntaxed.

Regarding actions of moderators and administrators:

The forum is no place to air out your opinion or be judgmental of our staff and its capabilities.

All BKF users agree not to abuse or mistreat moderators or administrators. It is against BKF rules to post any information regarding bans or any other action taken by a member of the moderating or administrative team. If you wish to discuss bans or warnings please do so via PM. To place a complaint against a moderator, send a PM to a super moderator. All Moderators are equal, any decision made by a moderator must be adhered to. If a moderator tells you something you do not like, do not go to another moderator looking for a different answer. If you are caught doing this you will be banned. The moderators work as a team and respect the decisions made by their peers and will help enforce them unless an administrator tells them differently.
If you have an issue with how the forum is run, then notify one of our administrator and we will look into the situation. We have in the past and still do appreciate any input that you offer this forum. But critical input and/or judgmental postings towards the staff will result in you getting banned.


Should you find a thread offensive or out of line, then notify a Mod in a PM so they can evaluate the situation and do the action deemed necessary.

All moderators do have active "other" lives outside of the forum and help moderate this forum in their spare time throughout the days and weeks.

If you have a problem with a member or Mod follow the proper channels of reporting it.

BKF reserves the right to delete any posts which contain anti-BKF comments or discussion. Any bashing of moderators or administrators, or any of their discussion or actions will also be deleted, and the responsible posting party(s) will be banned. Any public anti-BKF advertising, communication, or posts on another forum will result in permanent bans as well.

All warnings and bans are decided by individual moderators and administrators. Warnings are preferable to bans however, for serious offenses and repeat abusers bans will go into effect. The length of the bans can vary from several hours to permanent.

All messages posted or sent including through PM are the property of BKforum.com.

All BKF users agree not to advertiser on the forum (Niether by posting, private messaging or using your signature). If you are a company/attorney/legal adviser wishing to advertise on the site or sell a product, you must contact the head administrator and inquire about our advertising packages.

All bankruptcy related opinions expressed on BKForum.com are those of their authors and not necessarily of BKF, its staff or representatives.

You agree not to copy any material/post/content from BKF without written permission from our head administrator .

By posting on this forum you agree to these terms and conditions, including any punishment deemed appropriate by moderators or administrators in the event of an offense.

Administrators/Moderators can change these rules at any time without prior notice.
See more
See less

1 Year Unemployment Extension + 2 Year Tax Cuts?

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1 Year Unemployment Extension + 2 Year Tax Cuts?

    It looks like we may be close to a compromise with the democrats & republicans. I was bouncing this idea on a thread probably a month ago (with slightly different time amounts): I know this will cost the economy more money, but it's looking like the only way we can get our fricken legislative process moving again. I can only imagine a 2 year stalemate between both houses

    WASHINGTON (AP) -- An outline of a bipartisan economic package is emerging that would temporarily extend the Bush-era tax rates for all taxpayers, while extending jobless benefits for millions of Americans.

    Differences remained over details, including White House demands for middle- and low-income tax credits. But the White House expressed optimism Monday, raising the possibility of a deal in Congress by the end of the week.

    "They are making progress," said White House spokesman Bill Burton. "The president is confident that within the next couple of days or so we'll find a way to extend tax cuts to middle class families and do some other things that the president thinks are important, helping to grow the economy and create jobs."

    Questions remained about how many concessions Obama could extract from Republicans in exchange for extending current tax rates for high earners, a proposal he opposed.

    But without action, lawmakers face the prospect of delivering a tax hike to all taxpayers at the end of the year, when the current rates expire and revert to higher pre-2001 and 2003 levels.

    Negotiations between the Obama administration and a bipartisan group of lawmakers centered on a two-year extension of current rates.

    At the same time, a jump in the unemployment rate to 9.8 percent is putting pressure on Republicans to accede to President Barack Obama's demand that Congress extend unemployment insurance for a year. GOP congressional leaders had opposed an extension of benefits without cuts elsewhere in the federal budget.

    "I think most folks believe the recipe would include at least an extension of unemployment benefits for those who are unemployed and an extension of all of the tax rates for all Americans for some period of time," said Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona, the Senate's Republican negotiator in the talks.

    Obama was expected to call for an agreement during a speech Monday in Winston-Salem, N.C. Central to the deal, White House officials and Democrats said, is an extension of unemployment benefits.

    "Without unemployment benefits being extended, personally, this is a nonstarter," said Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the second-ranking member of the Senate Democratic leadership.

    Republicans have insisted that any extension of jobless aid be paid for with cuts elsewhere in the federal budget. The White House opposes that, saying such cuts are economically damaging during a weak recovery.

    Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said Republicans would probably cede that point to the Democrats.

    "Let's take care of the unemployment compensation even if it isn't ... backed up by real finances," Hatch said. "We've got to do it. So let's do it. But that ought to be it."

    About 2 million unemployed workers will run out of benefits this month if they are not renewed, and the administration estimates 7 million will be affected if the payments are not extended for a year.

    Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell on Sunday said discussions are still under way on a variety of unresolved issues.

    The White House wants to include renewal of several other tax provisions that are expiring. These were initially included in the 2009 economic stimulus bill and include a tax credit for lower- and middle-class wage earners, even if they don't make enough to pay federal income taxes, breaks to offset college tuition and breaks for companies that hire the unemployed.

    Any deal would require the approval of the House and Senate, and the president's signature. Obama told Democratic congressional leaders Saturday that he would oppose any extension of tax rates that did not include jobless benefits and other assistance his administration was seeking.

    The short-term tax and spending debate is unfolding even as Congress and the Obama administration confront growing anxieties over the federal government's growing deficits.

    A presidential commission studying the deficit identified austere measures last week to cut $4 trillion from the federal budget over the next decade.

    The movement toward a possible compromise came after Republicans blocked Democratic efforts in the Senate Saturday to extend the current tax rates on all but the highest income levels. Republicans prefer extending all the tax rates permanently, but that cannot win legislative approval either. Even if it did, Obama would be sure to veto.

    As part of a compromise, the Obama administration prefers a two-year extension of the tax rates. Officials say a one-year extension would place Congress and the president in the midst of a similar debate in a mere six months. A three-year extension, officials say, would cost too much and lose support from liberals.

    For Obama, the deal would mean relinquishing, at least for now, his long-held view that only middle-class voters should continue to benefit from Bush-era tax cuts. And Democrats, while resigned to a deal, were not eager to embrace one.

    Durbin and Kyl spoke Sunday on CBS' "Face the Nation," while Hatch appeared on CNN's "State of the Union" and McConnell on NBC's "Meet the Press."

  • #2
    i am glad they are extending the UB cause theres lots of people out there that can't find a job
    but every person receiving unemployment benefits should have to prove that they are ACTIVILY out there looking for a job before they get their checks every month
    why?cause i am almost sure theres lots of fraud,people are not looking for a job ,they prefer to just sit home and sleep all day and collect unemployment.
    Filed chapter 7 on 9/17 341 on 10/20
    Chapter 7 Trustee's Report of No Distribution on 10/21
    Discharged and Case Closed on 12/21/2010

    Comment


    • #3
      whopppppeee...just heard it passed!!!!!!! YES!!


      8/4/2008 MAKE SURE AND VISIT Tobee's Blogs! http://www.bkforum.com/blog.php?32727-tobee43 and all are welcome to bk forum's Florida State Questions and Answers on BK http://www.bkforum.com/group.php?groupid=9

      Comment


      • #4
        In my state, hubby has to fill out info as to name and address or company website data of company's he applied to along with dates. Since March of 2010 he has applied to 587 positions and nada

        Originally posted by scorpion35 View Post
        i am glad they are extending the UB cause theres lots of people out there that can't find a job
        but every person receiving unemployment benefits should have to prove that they are ACTIVILY out there looking for a job before they get their checks every month
        why?cause i am almost sure theres lots of fraud,people are not looking for a job ,they prefer to just sit home and sleep all day and collect unemployment.
        Chapter 7 filed 11/4/10 ---- 341 Meeting 12/1/10 ---- Discharge 1/31/2011.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by scorpion35 View Post
          i am glad they are extending the UB cause theres lots of people out there that can't find a job
          but every person receiving unemployment benefits should have to prove that they are ACTIVILY out there looking for a job before they get their checks every month
          why?cause i am almost sure theres lots of fraud,people are not looking for a job ,they prefer to just sit home and sleep all day and collect unemployment.
          scorpion, I am totally ok with this, as I see that box that says if it is checked, you have to prove you are looking for a job. I belong to a ton of job boards, apply at various companies, even go on caljobs with EDD. I'm not sure they have enough personnel to check in on everyone, but if they decide to do random audits, that is cool with me as well.

          I know there will always be those that fraud the system, but to me this is much different than welfare. People on unemployment have actually worked and they are getting what, a 1/4 of their income on unemployment? I'm sure most people do not want to live in pure poverty at this level, but would rather work and have the necessities of life that most people take for granted.

          I have applied for jobs against 200-300 people (one of the jobs I won out on, they showed me the resumes and it was 200 and something people I had to go up against). In that case I won out, but many cases, I may have been #2, #3, #20. So the game starts all over again with the next company that chooses to interview me (this may repeat many times before I get the #1 spot). That is of course after the hundred companies you have to send your resume to before one of them actually requests more info or a job interview.

          If we applied to one company that had dozens of jobs and scored #2 or #3 on the first one, then great, we would automatically be #1 or #2 in the next one, but the process starts all over for each job. You have to compete against hundreds of people each and every time. This is really bad odds.

          Comment


          • #6
            That is the problem in a nutshell. My hubby interviewed with GE and the first thing they did was congratulate him that he was chosen to interview over the 1200 resumes that came in for that one position. The interviewed him 4 times and then the position got pulled for budget reasons and now he has applied again and we start the process all over again.


            Originally posted by helpme2010 View Post
            scorpion, I am totally ok with this, as I see that box that says if it is checked, you have to prove you are looking for a job. I belong to a ton of job boards, apply at various companies, even go on caljobs with EDD. I'm not sure they have enough personnel to check in on everyone, but if they decide to do random audits, that is cool with me as well.

            I know there will always be those that fraud the system, but to me this is much different than welfare. People on unemployment have actually worked and they are getting what, a 1/4 of their income on unemployment? I'm sure most people do not want to live in pure poverty at this level, but would rather work and have the necessities of life that most people take for granted.

            I have applied for jobs against 200-300 people (one of the jobs I won out on, they showed me the resumes and it was 200 and something people I had to go up against). In that case I won out, but many cases, I may have been #2, #3, #20. So the game starts all over again with the next company that chooses to interview me (this may repeat many times before I get the #1 spot). That is of course after the hundred companies you have to send your resume to before one of them actually requests more info or a job interview.

            If we applied to one company that had dozens of jobs and scored #2 or #3 on the first one, then great, we would automatically be #1 or #2 in the next one, but the process starts all over for each job. You have to compete against hundreds of people each and every time. This is really bad odds.
            Chapter 7 filed 11/4/10 ---- 341 Meeting 12/1/10 ---- Discharge 1/31/2011.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by scorpion35 View Post
              i am glad they are extending the UB cause theres lots of people out there that can't find a job
              but every person receiving unemployment benefits should have to prove that they are ACTIVILY out there looking for a job before they get their checks every month
              why?cause i am almost sure theres lots of fraud,people are not looking for a job ,they prefer to just sit home and sleep all day and collect unemployment.
              This may be age discrimination, but I think the ones who are close to retirement age should be scrutinized more closely. I still remember when my ex-mother in law was laid off years ago from work, in fact when we went over for a visit she told everyone she was now retired. She had no intention of going back to work. But she kept on receiving UB and going to the classes that were offered to help her integrate back into the workforce and applying for jobs that she knew she wouldn't get.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by helpme2010 View Post
                I can only imagine a 2 year stalemate between both houses
                That's the stuff that dreams are made of..........
                All information contained in this post is for informational and amusement purposes only.
                Bankruptcy is a process, not an event.......

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by helpmeout View Post
                  This may be age discrimination, but I think the ones who are close to retirement age should be scrutinized more closely. I still remember when my ex-mother in law was laid off years ago from work, in fact when we went over for a visit she told everyone she was now retired. She had no intention of going back to work. But she kept on receiving UB and going to the classes that were offered to help her integrate back into the workforce and applying for jobs that she knew she wouldn't get.
                  helpme...for some of us...your ex mother in laws age....we just simply can't be taught much more...shoot...i have an under grad degree from uc berkeley...2 masters and a national paralegal cert from boston u.... what are they going to give me classes on...LOL!!! now, don't get me wrong, i learn something every day...however, i'm not the best with doing laundry...so maybe i could use a class on that...(JUST KIDDING..NOT!)

                  my point is....some of us with education and so much life experience are having difficulties...as i had mentioned in another thread...one law firm actually said i was too old...they were ALL in their late 20's and early 30's and although i think i look pretty darn good and wear thigh high boots...(NO!!! LOL)...but i am objective and most people can't guess my age...this firm ASKED me....and then said i was TOO old.....

                  someone told me to lie about my age......NO...i will NOT lie about anything....lies are hard to remember the truth never is.

                  as i say....i'm learning everyday....i can rip a computer apart, stick some more ram in it....even....it's just no one wants us.
                  8/4/2008 MAKE SURE AND VISIT Tobee's Blogs! http://www.bkforum.com/blog.php?32727-tobee43 and all are welcome to bk forum's Florida State Questions and Answers on BK http://www.bkforum.com/group.php?groupid=9

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by tobee43 View Post
                    helpme...for some of us...your ex mother in laws age....we just simply can't be taught much more...shoot...i have an under grad degree from uc berkeley...2 masters and a national paralegal cert from boston u.... what are they going to give me classes on...LOL!!! now, don't get me wrong, i learn something every day...however, i'm not the best with doing laundry...so maybe i could use a class on that...(JUST KIDDING..NOT!)

                    my point is....some of us with education and so much life experience are having difficulties...as i had mentioned in another thread...one law firm actually said i was too old...they were ALL in their late 20's and early 30's and although i think i look pretty darn good and wear thigh high boots...(NO!!! LOL)...but i am objective and most people can't guess my age...this firm ASKED me....and then said i was TOO old.....

                    someone told me to lie about my age......NO...i will NOT lie about anything....lies are hard to remember the truth never is.

                    as i say....i'm learning everyday....i can rip a computer apart, stick some more ram in it....even....it's just no one wants us.
                    tobee, this brings me back to my sarcastic burger university idea again. I love the people that tell the unemployed, "oh you simply go train in a new field". Ok, so each time this happens, I simply go out and shell out $20,000 to $40,000 for another degree, a career training company, or whatever it is, then try to convince the new industry that I am qualified above the ones that are already senior in those industries with WORK EXPERIENCE in those industries, then pay for all this, and pay the bills.

                    I go back to eventually we are just going to be competing against robots and people will make the comment, "hey the robots work 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, no breaks, no complaints, we insert a new industry chip in them to make them ready for a new industry, no medical insurance...NOW COMPETE AGAINST THAT ROBOT!!!"

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      I really liked President Obama's speech today about this compromise. I felt he really provided solid answers to why he compromised and the logic behind it. Obama, Clinton, and Reagan in my opinion are excellent speakers (I wish I could give speeches this good).

                      Comment

                      Unconfigured Ad Widget

                      Collapse
                      Working...
                      X