An SNL skit that America could really use, and soon

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/us/03unemployed.html

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/us/03unemployed.html?permid=81#comment81

Aaron
ABQ
August 2nd, 2010
6:57 pm
All the comments from people suggesting that support be extended are from people trapped in a form of denial.
Many of these high paying do-nothing cubical jobs are disappearing forever. She needs to fix her resume so she doesn't appear over-qualified and trade down for a lesser job.

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/us/03unemployed.html?permid=109#comment109

Bradley
Maui, Hawaii
August 2nd, 2010
7:13 pm
The article intends to address the ranks of the "99ers", but what it really addresses is personal financial responsibility. She earned the right to those unemployment insurance benefits, but she over extended herself with debt. The unemployment is meant to be a safety net, to take care of the rent and food, while you figure out what to do next. Anyone with that much debt, without any assets to offset them is in a fragile position, this is what this article really emphasized to me- Americans (Democrats & Republicans) believe it is alright to borrow beyond their means. What happens when we can't pay it back? What happens when we can't pay China back?

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/us/03unemployed.html?permid=177#comment177

CS
GA
August 2nd, 2010
7:46 pm

We should really get to basics here. If I cannot find the job I that like I will do any ethical job to maintain myself and my family including delivering pizza, construction, landscaping, whatever is necessary.

What happened with the work ethics of Americans?
What happened with the concept of taking responsibility?

Unless you are severely sick, there should be no reason for this woman not to work. The concept of unemployment benefits is ridiculus.

This woman has made the bad decision enrolling in an MBA that she could not afford, and has not taken responsibility for her own cost of living. In the process, she has put a lot of pressure on her family and friends.
We need to learn to be responsible for our decisions in particular financial decisions.

http://community.nytimes.com/comments/www.nytimes.com/2010/08/03/us/03unemployed.html?permid=41#comment41

41.
HIGHLIGHT (what's this?)
AnnS
MI
August 2nd, 2010
6:29 pm
I guarantee - I absolutely 100% guarantee - that the haters will flood this thread with their vacuous comments and "she should haves" without reading the article.

They will say "she should have upgraded her skills."

The article says she had gone back to school and gotten her BA in 2003 while working full-time.

The article says she was working on an MBA but couldn't afford to finish it after losing her job. (And no, student loans are a lousy option because she already has a huge amount that will be very difficult to pay back before retirement. And no, grants do not go to older adults for grad school. And no, Pell grants do not go to grad students.)

They will say "her kids should support her.'

The article says none of her three adult sons are in a position to help her. (And no, there is no law that makes adult children support their parents.)

They will say "She can go on welfare"

The article says (correctly) that welfare is not an option, because she does not have young children

They will say "she can go live in public housing or a homeless shelter.

The article says she contacted a local shelter but learned there was a waiting list. (And in fact the wait lists for subsidized housing are years long and closed to new applicants in virtually every state.)

They will say "she should have had enough money saved to live on for at least 1 year"

The article says she made $56,000 a year and has $92,000 in student loans. Granted she may have taken a package vacation or two to Mexico or other places but those are only a few hundred dollars. The real question is who, but a complete loon and nasty selfish individual, would think that anyone could say 1 -2 or more years living expenses out of a $56,000 in the 5 years ('03-08) where she made that much??!! Any saving she had pre-'03 would have went to getting that degree.

They will say "she should have started her own business." While the article doesn't address this, before bablling vacuous advice, consider:

(1) 50% of small businesses fail in 2-3 years and 70 % fail in 5 years; and

(2) more importantly it TAKES MONEY TO START any kind of business or self-employment. And when you are unemployed, money is the last thing that you have.

They will say "she should have done this", "she should have done that" "she should have cut back on the food - look at her weight" --- and they will even say "she should get rid of the cat" who is her only companion and whose food only costs $5 or so a month."

They will say all these things out of spite, vindictiveness and fear that if they admit it could happen to someone who did everything she should (more education, move for jobs etc), it could happen to them.

In fact, the group with the longest average length of unemployment ARE the over-45s with a BA or higher.

In fact, the percentage of the long-term unemployed who are over-45 with a BA or up is 42% higher than their numbers among the workforce or all unemployed.

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com...

They didn't get "out-dated' on their skills just because they are 49 instead of 42. They didn't become less educated just because they are 49 instead of 40. Their fault is in being over 40 or 45 years of age.

They are not turning down work because it is 'beneath them' or no applying for any job that would give them some money. They are hearing from employers "over-qualified", "not a good fit", or any of the other excuses used to cover the fact that

(a) employers do not want workers over 40 or 45 years of age if they can get a younger; and

(b) employers will not hire the person with a lot more education for jobs that require only a high school or associates degree because they figure that person will be gone the minute they find something that is more commensurate with their education.

And for all those who will post the comments about "she should have done a, b,c or whatever', well, you have a reason to be afraid and blame the victim to mask your reaf and pretend it can't happen to you. It can happen to you simply because no matter what you do, no matter how many degrees or certificates you get, you can NOT stop the fact that one day you too will be over-45. And when you are over-45, you are at higher risk of losing your job during a cutback than a younger worker, and once you are out, you are out forever.