Obama will take care of them with Quest Cards and cell phones.

Maybe it's time to find a job or create income for yourself after 54 weeks.

Steve: You should mention that you, as a job creator, are not entitled to unemployment compensation.
Self employed people do not have this luxury, yet they carry the burden of providing luxuries to those who are too lazy to work.
If someone who is self employed becomes too ill to work with a chronic illness, they are stuck waiting up to five years for the Government to decide if they are really disabled. That small check for $368/week could go along way toward medical bills in the meantime. More risk + more worries= less respect from the system.

You said it very well.

I would have to live off of, if I could even sell, my inventory. Which is where I stick the profits of my company. You know those evil profits that are better spent by Obama than myself.

I don't have any debt with the company as of right now so I could use that as my own personal UI for about a year.

Putting a reasonable deadline on UI only makes sense, so many are milking the system especially if they live with someone who has full time income. It's surprising how motivating getting off your ass is when the gravy train runs out.

Oh and yea guys like me are sick of paying for your 63 week vacation. Especially when you vote for Obama, again, then complain when this ends.

THIS IS BEING CUT FEDERALLY BREN, TALK TO BARRY.

Some really insensitive comments here. A friend once said, "It's a recession when your neighbor loses his job, it's a depression when you lose yours." There are a lot of neighbors still unemployed, and those of us who remained employed through the worst of the economic crisis have cause to be grateful and perhaps a bit sympathetic, I believe.

Ben Hogan, the article lead-in does cite the loss of a federal subsidy. My question has to do with how the state will step in.

After all, that's the national "conservative" conversation isn't it? Turning more of this type of issue back to/on the states? Here's a good test case for Gov. Walker.

Bren- The money to fund Unemployment is not free, and is paid for by business owners, who have seen their state and federal UC contributions increase because of extensions granted. We, as business owners, have to pay for this. I paid UC for employees who collected benefits for longer than they were my employee.

Further, there are many jobs available. Just because you think something is beneath you does not mean I should have to pay for that choice.

Something else to consider. You are always complaining about the divide between the upper and middleclass widening. This is one of those examples. If business is having to pay for 99 weeks of UC, face paying more to the govt for Obamacare, have their taxes raised by 4.5%; the money is going to be taken from somewhere to pay for it. Because we are once agin facing a recession, business can not simply inflate their prices to cover the higher costs so where do you think it will come from? I guess that poor middle class employee will not get that raise, or bonus, or will get reduced benefits, or say goodbye to your pension or matching 401k funds. Keep taking more and more money from business, impose more regulations, and create more mandates. You are only shooting the middle class in the foot.

Bren, I think that I can speak for Craig and Steve as well as myself and others that none of us are happy when someone loses their job. However, when you do, the best thing you can do is get another one, even if is flipping burgers or pumping gas. Many of these jobs pay about the same as unemployment. Plus, it gives you an chance to work up to something better.

AND, you are putting into the system rather than taking out

Bren –

I would doubt that the state of Wisconsin will help these people in any manner; Gov. Walker already turned down the Federal Medicaid Benefits, while other (R) states and governors are falling all over themselves for these programs…

Secondly, both the EU and the EUC benefits are Federal programs, which did have a termination date attached to them… see links below.

Finally, I suspect that in a few months or so – Gov. Walker will return to Wisconsin from Florida, where he is currently getting $5,000 per head from the TP/GOP for a Subway sandwich to assist him in his “presidential” bid – and then we will have the 250,000 jobs he promised during his wholly disingenuous campaign.

That will give all these 10,500 currently unemployed people great jobs, with high pay and great benefits. [Gov. Walker always takes care of Wisconsin first!]

http://wisconsinbudgetproject.blogspot.com/2012/03/length-of-unemployment-benefits-to-drop.html

http://dwd.wisconsin.gov/uiben/extended_benefits.htm

$363/week does not exactly provide a life of luxury does it. There are people out of work for more than a year because their field has become a target for offshoring, become obsolete, etc. Even with grants and loans, returning to school is an expensive and risky proposition for the unemployed. Age discrimination is also becoming an issue. Walk a mile in another's shoes my friend.

Bren: I know a man in his mid fifties who lost his job. He interviewed for a position and when offered the job found out it was $10/hr. (His former position doing the same work was more than double that amount.)
When he told the new employer that his 45 minute commute would actually cost him money compared to unemployment, they advised him they would call and report him so he would lose his benefit. He was hoping to negotiate a little higher wage.
He accepted the job, but is still searching.

In Bren's world the horse and buggy employes would live off the government forever.

A low informed Obama voter is mad because there are no jobs, and unemployment is finally ending because a conservative gov. has created a low unemployment rate in this state.

Move to Illinois, their UI rate sucks, you can live off of Obama for an extra 9 weeks, and walk around with an Obama T-Shirt and receive thumbs up.

Unemployment compensation in Illinois is much higher also, especially if you have a whole litter of kids. No wonder that state produced Obama.

Geez Bren- Back in the day, i you got laid off, you found another job, whether it was in your field or not. Even if it was flipping burgers. It is up to individuals to exhaust all options before the government bails them out. At times, I worked two, three jobs to make ends meet. Its called personal reponsibility and that is what conservatives have been preaching. We are willing to give a hand-up, but not a hand-out.

But, but Brian. If I have a BS degree, it is beneath me to become a Walmart greeter. It is much more dignifying to collect Government handouts.

Craig, Brian, I think this is a complex argument. Another aspect to consider is wage devaluation. Yes it is a recession, but if people accept exploitative wages what hope is there to re-establish the correct value of that work?

Craig, your acquaintance is an excellent case in point, not only because of his personal circumstances (and I hope he finds a good-paying job soon) but for the workers who come after him. First to devalue the wage and then to threaten an applicant, who would feel secure working for an individual/company such as that?

Brian, I consider myself a social moderate and a fiscal conservative. I perceive no benefit in further punishing those who are already in dire circumstances. Please put some trust in the Dept. of Workforce Development, I understand that they are vigilant in identifying system abusers. I hope we return to the true conservative principle of empowering people, rather than beating them when they're down. The prevailing attitude doesn't sit well with me, not at all, not at all. I know too many people who have suffered in this recession. Hard working people, contributors to the economy.

► Yes it is a recession◄

Where? You keep saying we're in a recession. Please post the fact that we are.

@Bren

The correct value of work is determined by the market.

I agree.

Bren wrote: "Craig, Brian, I think this is a complex argument. Another aspect to consider is wage devaluation. Yes it is a recession, but if people accept exploitative wages what hope is there to re-establish the correct value of that work?"

Bren, it's not all that difficult. If you don't have a job, you go find one. If someone feels the job is beneath them, that is their problem. To paraphrase Stanislavski "There are no petty jobs, only petty workers." Neither my father or grandfather really wanted to be farmers, but it was a job they were good at, it needed to get done, and it paid the bills.

As far as "wage devaluation", are you suggesting we inflate the value of a job? If capable employees are a dime a dozen, why should an employer pay more than he needs to get the job done? On the other end of the spectrum, I remember almost 20 years ago when burger flippers were few and far between, all the fast food joints were offering a premium wage.

I have found the pay usually lines up pretty well with education, experience, and skills needed. A few years ago someone in my company was working on an old computer system known as an AS400. We had a two year plan to go to all Microsoft based equipment, and he refused to learn the new system. When we got rid of the AS400, we had no job for him. The last I heard he is still working in a convenience store, and getting paid appropriately for what he contributes to the company.

►Bren, proof we are in a recession please

As I wrote, this is a complex issue. I'll confess I'm more focused on finding solutions to help the millions of displaced workers caused by the recession than denigrating the unfortunate. But that's just me.

Anti, by no means do I suggest artificially inflating wages. "Wage deflation" refers to wages lowered from their previous point. For example, back in 2005 Jim Sensenbrenner spoke about illegal immigration's role in devaluing wages for electricians, as I recall he cited an example of a job that once paid $20/hour falling to $9/hour. Why pay someone $20/hour when you can pay $9, right? How many trained professionals will transition out of a field that doesn't pay a family-sustaining wage? And after that, who is coming into your house and doing important work that we used to be rather particular about, for $9/hour?

Bren:

We haven't suspended the requirements of the electrical code--we are just as particular about how the work is done. You just make the erroneous assumption that the $20/hour guys are better than the $9/hour guys.

If those $9/hour electricians do good enough work to pass the inspections, comply with the NEC, and they work at a speed comparable to the $20/hour guys, then the value of that kind of work is $9/hour.

Cow, my information came from attending a 2005 town hall meeting with Jim Sensenbrenner. His stance on illegal immigrations was that businesses hire illegals because of the wage issue. If someone accepts $9 when the industry standard is $20, I hope that person starts interviewing for a new job. Certainly a corporate entity wants to save costs wherever possible, but paying low wages does have its opportunity cost in high employee turnover as you know.

Stories like Kathy's and Pennyluhu's break my heart.

You indicated that the quality of work was going to suffer--did Sensennbrenner claim that the $9/hour guys were doing shoddy work?

Steve ® -

“A low informed Obama voter is mad because there are no jobs, and unemployment is finally ending because a conservative gov. has created a low unemployment rate in this state.”

6.7% is a “low unemployment rate”?

Only in the mind of a “business creator” and “inventor” of elephant feces would a 6.7% unemployment rate be considered low…

Bren -

$363.00 per week is the maximum benefits one can receive, based on the last 18-months of their employment; most of these unemployed are not getting anywhere near that amount.

Pretty sure he's heterosexual

Curious comment Bill; do you by any chance have a pension with the State?

Go Bill

see above

I guess Bill doesn't realize it's the Feds who are cutting off these workers "federal emergency insurance, which extends the benefit to 63 weeks from 54 weeks".

Obama sucks

Yes , he does

Heh. Pathetic. Obviously a low information, low motivation citizen.

EBT card run out? Move to Illinois, get an extra 9 weeks of Obama bucks

Young C, Change your diapers.

Post your address Bill and we'll all send you some money.

Vote Walker OUT 2014!!!!

I think we have more than enough. Almost 100M of them invaded Madison about 2 years ago.

Walker is creating jobs and Bill don't like it. He prefers the Obama way, waiting for the gravy train.

I think Bill was torn between babbling about ALEC like Bren or lying like Johnny. I guess he decided to just make a statement and haul a$$ out of here.

The Anti-Alinsky -

We have plenty of them already, Craig, Steve, McBride, Young Conservative, red, atthec44, CowDung, Luke, [Mathew and Mark too!] Brian Dey, Ben Hogan, and of course, The Anti-Alinsky, who provides the "man cave" that all these intellectual cretins live in...

Once again John passes up on substance and falls back on insults.

The Anti-Alinsky –

“We need more people with Bill’s eloquence.”

I Thought I was merely doing a public service by simply enumerating a small cabal, of many, folks on the Patch. Who share “Bill’s eloquence.”

I have no idea why any of these eloquent folks could possibly perceive this as an “insult.”

That $34 Million is already spent on some silly trolley in Milwaukee.

choo choo

The Patch would get more readers if only they would put up more articles that quote Tom Barrett. Those of us who live in the suburbs and rural areas crave such entertainment. Why should the urban areas get to have all the fun?

lets see him create some of those 250,000 jobs ass.

Um, did you read the article? Unemployment is down in Wisconsin, that is why the extension on benefits is eliminated, is it sinking in yet?
If not you should apply for disability because you are unemployable.

Craig -

"Um, did you read the article? Unemployment is down in Wisconsin, that is why the extension on benefits is eliminated, is it sinking in yet?"

Unemployment in Wisconsin hit 6.7% in November of 2012 and it hasn't moved since.

Now, with the sequestration cuts, it is only going to rise and rise and rise...

Amazing how when you take "capacity" out of the labor force, the rate goes down. This is how Obama artificially kept the rate low (to get re-elected). He just proclaimed the labor force miraculously shrunk. So now it is Walkers fault he is using the same numbers? Not! Anyway, I was never in favor of year-long unemployment benefits in the first place. But try going back to the "old" days of 26 weeks, or whatever it was. Yeah, right. It is unfair that business has to continue shouldering the burden of "temporary" unemployment extensions.

@David,

Where can I find a cave to live in?

Luke: Don't ask David, ask someone who sells houses.

Well said. Our media at all levels distorts facts and statistics. As the Russians used to have to do with Izvestia and Pravda, we must read between the lines.

red

2:26 pm on Wednesday, January 30, 2013

..."media at all levels distorts facts and statistics. As the Russians used to have to do with Izvestia and Pravda, we must read between the lines."

Of course, we can always rely upon the TP/GOP cabal posting on the Patch to get us all the latest "fair and balanced" FACTS...

Greg -

"Unemployment benefits are given to people who lose their job at no fault of their own" Plus Wisconsin has 18 reasons why you can quit you job and get the benefits.
The "no fault of their own" is a joke, the DWD never rejects claims."

Please cite a link to these 18 reasons... Prove it.

Also, please prove that "the DWD never rejects claims"...

John, the company I work for goes through unemployment claims all the time from people that quit. Typically they are new hires that put in just enough time to say they tried, then are gone. Granted, the job is not the easiest, but I have talked with convenience store people and found out they go through quite a few as well. Everyone in my company even remotely tied into HR has come to the same conclusion as Greg. By this point it would be easier to find person in the last ten years that WAS turned down for unemployment.

As far as websites:
http://www.ehow.com/how_4679591_still-qualify-unemployment-insurance-benefits.html
http://unemploymenthandbook.com/unemployment-articles/all-about-unemployment/180-can-you-get-unemployment-if-you-quit
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/If_you_quit_your_job_can_you_collect_unemployment_benefits
http://takethisjobnshoveitblog.com/2010/08/30/can-i-quit-my-job-and-still-get-unemployment-benefits/

The Anti–Alinsky –

While I am certainly aware of situation(s) where an employee may terminate his/her employment – FOR GOOD CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EMPLOYING UNIT – these case(s) remain remarkable rare, and are usually very difficult to prove; then too, the employer may, appeal the initial administrative judge’s decision to a higher level, and that decision too may be appealed to still another court. The claimant does NOT receive any unemployment benefits during this process, and must usually higher a labor law attorney, if this process goes beyond the initial determination.

http://takethisjobnshoveitblog.com/2010/08/30/can-i-quit-my-job-and-still-get-unemployment-benefits/

[This is always an uphill battle to prove by the claimant; if you, as an employer, find yourself losing a substantial number of these cases, you really need to get your place in order, fast!]

Also, please prove that "the DWD never rejects claims"...

I personally know many folks who are and were denied their UC Claim; the notion that no one is denied is simply a flagrant lie...

Lastly, there is the underground communication that always occurs among employers – albeit flagrantly against the law – where a person who self-terminates and wins unemployment compensation, is essentially blackballed from future employment.

The number(s) of these people who win their cases are indeed miniscule, and the retribution by employers is indeed dronish.

John (if that is your real name), Greg was making a blanket statement, likely based on personal experience. From my personal experience, a claimant loosing an appeal is the rarity.

The clause "Good cause attributable to the employer" is just too broad. I could turn around and quit, claim I was sexually harassed, and find a couple of co-workers to back me up. I even had one employee tell me he was going to quit and collect unemployment because he could get $350/month to do nothing. And yes, we lost the appeal on that one.

One of the reasons appeals go for claimants that quit is because they feel they have made a hostile workplace for themselves. They quit, claim unemployment and determine they can't return because their boss now "hates them".

Maybe this will help explain it for you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alIBxXS70vI

BTW-if you are interested in that "underground communication that always occurs among employers", you can find it at JohnWilsonIfThatIsHisRealName/PeopleNotToHire/TheIlluminatiWillRuleTheWorld.org

The Anti-Alinsky –

I am pleased to see that you are the nanny for McBride and now Greg’s blanket – I really do not know if either of them “know” what they mean; I am overjoyed that you “know.”

Regarding your “personal experience” as opposed to real evidence – not a YouTube, YouTube – you and your cabal fall flat on your prodigious derrieres. I receive emails every week alerting me to potential “troublesome employees” from other employers, and sometimes telephone calls…

The clause, GOOD CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EMPLOYING UNIT, is in labor law has been upheld for quite some time now; if you want to attack the law, go ahead. I would suggest that a far more fruitful endeavor would be to clean up your employment practices/place and move forward.

Furthermore, with the burden of proof being completely on the Claimant – other employees within the company do not want to testify for fear of termination – it is a tremendous burden to prove your case, particularily because your proof usually ends up being company records… Courts rule on EVIDENCE presented at the hearing, not some potential retaliation the employer may engage in at some future date.

My experience has been that if you treat ALL your employees with respect, fairness, do your due diligence in background checks, interviews, in-house tests, clearly communicate the duties and obligations to the potential new employee; you simply do not find yourself in UC hearings and all this garbage.

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote: “I am pleased to see that you are the nanny for McBride and now Greg’s blanket…”
Sorry Johnny, but neither Bob or Greg need me for a nanny. They have managed to put your silly arguments to rest often enough. I was using the quote as a segue to my point.

Johnny also wrote: “…I receive emails every week alerting me to potential “troublesome employees” from other employers, and sometimes telephone calls…”
No employer in their right mind is going to send out an “troublesome employee” alert. The possibility for slander or libel is too great.

Johnny also wrote; “GOOD CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EMPLOYING UNIT, is in labor law has been upheld for quite some time now…”
I am not arguing the concept, just the broad use of it as it is being used today.

Johnny als wrote: “My experience has been that if you treat ALL your employees with respect, …, in-house tests, …”
IN HOUSE TESTS?
This from a self admitted, twice weekly pot smoker. Does it not even occur that this is the epitome of hypocritical, making your “employees” take a test that you yourself would fail?

Finally, Johnny wrote: “the burden of proof being completely on the Claimant…”
I am going to put this one in the B.S. with your Eagle Scout award and Mensa membership. This just shows you have never had employees, let alone any that quit and applied for unemployment.

Do you even have a job?

The Anti-Alinsky –

There is an intervening response to your last post floating around the Bermuda Triangle (i.e., the Patch) – Sarah does not answer her email, Skype, phone, whispers from GOD – so the portion of your last tortured and incoherent post will hopefully be addressed here.

“Finally, Johnny wrote: “the burden of proof being completely on the Claimant…” I am going to put this one in the B.S. with your Eagle Scout award and Mensa membership.”

Yes, AA, the entire burden of proof in a “self-termination” employment case falls on the Claimant.

Now if your company wants to assist the Claimant that is up to your company; otherwise, the law is clear: the burden of proof is on the Claimant to prove that he/she terminated employment with GOOD CAUSE ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EMPLOYING UNIT (Namely, the employer.) You choose to call that B.S...

Perhaps you also have some infamous YouTube sites to support such an outlandish assertion.

The Anti-Alinsky –

(Prior intervening response)

Your beliefs are of no consequence.

However, you losing appeals on “self-terminating” employees speak volumes on the quality and legal compliance of your business practices. [Most of the issues, legal and otherwise, occur because of the hubris of business owner’s; they really do believe that they can do anything they want with impunity.] They, not the labor laws, are their own worst enemy.

ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE EMPLOYING UNIT is not a “broad use’ concept. It is actions or lack of actions by the employer that provide reasonable grounds for an employee to terminate their employment. You just do not appreciate it because it places reasonable legal restraints on your behavior in the employee-employer relationship. I get that, you want complete control.

Our in-house tests, have nothing to do with drugs, they are standardized pre-employment reasoning, Mathematics and personality assessment tests.

I am sympathetic to your confusion regarding the last very irrational “My experience…” half of your psychotic rant. However, as previously written, your rant has no basis in reality… the same as most of your highly emotional rants.

John Wilson (if that is your real name),
Nope your wrong again. The burden of proof SHOULD be on the claimant, but it's not. You are trying to pass as an expert on unemployment compensation claims, but do you have any experience at all, other than maybe applying for them? At least I prefaced my conclusions "in my experience". Since I have spent more time than I wanted already searching for any sort of data showing successful appeals. Finding none, I had to fall back on my experience. Since you have none on the business end, I guess my conclusions are correct....AGAIN!!!

Maybe this will give you a better understanding:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qGT2l-1K9_g

The Anti-Alinsky –

Your Lack of any verifiable proof to support your very outlandish series of assertion(s) is even more outlandish.

Please share the following with your .5 person HR department as they may want to stop paying people for “self-termination” and that .5 person may even want to create a set of viable, legal employee-employer relationship policies.

Test for Constructive Discharge

“A constructive discharge occurs when an employer makes working conditions so intolerable that an employee feels forced to resign. At-will employees can generally be fired for no reason so long as it is nondiscriminatory or not against public policy. To prove a constructive discharge, the employee must establish that working conditions are so difficult or unpleasant that a reasonable person would feel compelled to resign because of a (1) discriminatory reason or (2) reason contrary to a well-defined public policy. Employees subject to just-cause provisions also can establish a constructive discharge if they can show the employer purposefully created an intolerable working environment so they would quit and avoid just-cause provisions. In other words, the constructive discharge doctrine recognizes that employers might refrain from directly terminating an employee and instead engage in conduct designed to force him to resign.”

Engage in some basic logic courses, and cease with your compulsion for visual only learning.

You are rapidly becoming a very sad, little man...

The Anti-Alinsky –

Should you require a verifiable source for my last post – WARNING: It is not a VIDEO! – you may access:

http://axley.com/articles/constructive-discharge-042109

Yes John (if that is your real name), the claimant SHOULD be the one with the burden of proof. But again, I have been directly involved in two of the claims against us, worked on two others, and helped write a policy that will hopefully close some of the excuses our ex-employees use. One of those claimant called to tell me he decided to go on unemployment rather than showing up for work. Despite the fact I documented the incident immediately, the hearing officer awarded the unemployment to him.

Johnny, did you happen to notice that Saul Glazer is an employment lawyer. Did you really think he was going to come out and say that in reality all you have to do is quit your job to collect unemployment?

So what's your experience with unemployment, besides collecting it?

The Anti-Alinsky –

Your puerile anecdotal tales of UC hearing(s) woe aside, you lost your UC cases – IF they ever really happened – merely because you do not have viable legal policies that cover the employee-employer relationship, and is enforced uniformly. It really is that simple.

“But again, I have been directly involved in two of the claims against us, worked on two others, and helped write a policy that will hopefully close some of the excuses our ex-employees use.”

That, in itself, is a significant part of your problem; that such a neophyte as you would be involved in writing company employment policy, given, “I have been directly involved in two of the claims against us, worked on two others, and helped write a policy…” I will suggest, from the tenor and tone of your diatribe, that you probably lost all four of these cases.

Yes. AA, I did notice that Saul Glazer is an employment lawyer.

Did you happen to notice that our discussion was about EMPLOYMENT LAW?

I understand that your company has a Patent lawyer, attempting to assist your .5 HR person with, what I consider a massive employee-employer relationship at your company.

Good luck with that and your hubris…

The Anti-Alinsky –

Gov. Walker’s extreme right wing “austerity programs" appear to be just another in a long serious of misinformed, misguided and maladapted actions perpetuated by, stupidity, hubris, ancient ideology, and monolithic incompetence.

Note Wisconsin’s unemployment rose from 6.7 to 7.0 in January 2013.

Gov. Walker probably has not noticed, as he is too busy touring the 50-states, getting money from his TP backers for his forthcoming “presidential” bid.

It is ever so comforting to see that you and your company are following his lead and are adding to the unemployed ranks as well. You’re doing a fine job AA…

http://www.jsonline.com/business/wisconsins-unemployment-rate-ratcheted-up-to-7-in-january-4t95m2q-198269511
.html

John Wilson (if that is your real name), you need to read more than just the headlines. Below are some of the highlights you missed because you were too excited about the PRELIMINARY data!!!

“…the state added an estimated 12,400 private-sector jobs in January but lost an estimated 10,600 government jobs in the month…

“It's common for the state's monthly employment reports to show contradictory trends, …because the agency relies each month on "unreliable methodology" to calculate the preliminary data…”

“Economists as well as the state agency freely admit that the data is prone to major revisions… because the government bases its monthly findings on sparse sample sizes, which create a wide margin of error…”

“To underline its point, the agency also released revised data for last year …Those revisions found that the preliminary estimates for total non-farm jobs last year undercounted non-farm job creation by 67,100, the agency said.”

Remember last spring when the preliminary estimate showed we had a job loss since Walker took office, then it turned out it was a gain of 23,000? Maybe you should wait again until we get all the facts!!!

John Wilson (if that is your real name),
Remember two months ago when you claimed to smack me down with your “facts” just before I pummeled you with data and logic. Let me refresh your memory:
http://muskego.patch.com/articles/sunday-poll-jan-20#comments_list
======================
John Wilson wrote: "Anti, Anti, Anti, I just smacked you down on this YESTERDAY... Need more..."
Seriously Johnny! I made a faux pas in transposing the number: 4,800 instead of 4,500 (which is a net difference of 14,400 jobs), while I corrected you when you made an full out attempt at misrepresenting number. Let me summarize your errors:
1) 250,000 minus 86,000 = 164,000 NOT the 245,500 that you initially tried to claim to get to Governor Walker's GOAL!!!
2) 250,000 minus 86,000 still equals 164,000 NOT the 212,489 you tried to claim later.
3) 250,000 minus 86,000 still equals 164,000 NOT the 208,489 you now try to claim below.
At least your numbers are moving in the right direction. By my calculations, three more posts will get you there.
And we are still better off than the 121,000 jobs LOST under Diamond Jim Doyle!!!
========================
So, add the 67,100 under-estimated jobs to the 86,000 we knew were created, Governor Walker has 96,900 new jobs to go!!!

Maybe this link will help you. It’s not a YouTube video, but if you read beyond the headline you might start to understand it.
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/schncol17-0094mis-198546381.html

The Anti-Alinsky – (P-1)

You begin by citing a plethora of your errors, even omitting some obvious ones…

[Is that what you mean by... "I pummeled you with data and logic." (?)

1) Your inability to read and comprehend the JS
2) Your transposition error of 4,500 to 4,800
3) Your error in multiplying that incorrectly transposed number and arriving at some spurious number
4) Then you incorrectly cite “YOUR data 250,000 – 86,000 = 164,000” as MINE!
5) “212,489 JOBS WERE STILL NEEDED TO MAKE WALKER’S PROMISE OF 250,000 NEW JOBS COME TO FRUITION, PLUS 10,000 NEW businesses” MINE!
6) You still have not cited any PROOF that 86,000 jobs you claimed previously were CREATED; you just gleefully added 67,100 to those imaginary jobs. [TP/GOP WISHFUL THINKING…]

I believe my link for the total number of jobs created [41,511, Updated: Friday, January 18th, 2013 ] was:

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/promises/walk-o-meter/promise/526/create-250000-new-jobs/

On March 28, BLS will release the QCEW data for the last three months of 2012, which will provide an even more accurate picture of the jobs picture over the past year.

John (if that is your real name),
I included the link to the blog in case you needed to go back and reread the postings. I remembered them, but I have an unfair advantage by not smoking pot twice a week.

That post was in response to your constantly changing job numbers. While we still have a ways to go to get to the 250,000 GOAL, we are headed in the right direction.

The Anti-Alinsky –

(P-2) is some were in the Bermuda Triangle; it only got REJECTED 3-times, so whenever Sarah awakes…

My numbers are consistent and my data are accurate:

2011: 27,811 jobs created in Wisconsin.
2012: 13,700 jobs created in Wisconsin.
41,511: jobs created in Wisconsin under Walker’s administration in 2-years!

“That post was in response to your constantly changing job numbers. While we still have a ways to go to get to the 250,000 GOAL, we are headed in the right direction.”

“… we are headed in the right direction.” Of course we are; if you want to make the entire state unemployed…

You do have an “unfair advantage” because everything you think or feel is a universal reality to you…

You still haven't give any proof of the 86,000 jobs you claim were created...

The Anti-Alinsky – (P-2)

http://watchdog.org/75094/workforce-development-calls-bull-on-bls-wisconsin-employment-numbers/

“Wisconsin, it seems, still is a long way from hitting the ambitious job-creation goals Walker promised in his 2010 bid for the governor’s mansion. At the time, he pledged to do what it took to help create 250,000 jobs. Taken together, Walker remains about $187,000 jobs from his goal.”

I do not see 67,100 jobs here:

http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.wi.htm

I do not see 67,100 jobs here either:

http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/LASST55000003

Aha, here they are:

http://www.jsonline.com/business/wisconsins-unemployment-rate-ratcheted-up-to-7-in-january-4t95m2q-198269511.html

“Wisconsin's unemployment rate rose sharply in January to 7.0% from 6.7% in December, according to preliminary estimates released Thursday by the state Department of Workforce Development.”

It is important to note that these numbers come from DWD! [Read the entire article and you will see that they were off 67,100 jobs during the year – which you, of course, added to your count!]

BLS releases its numbers on March 28…

My personal preference for dealing with any data is to deal with the raw data. All data is subject to inadequate sampling, bias and manipulation. While Walker prefers the LAUS over QCEW, CPS and CES, those are incorporated in various statistical models used by BLS and they current show WI with a 7.0 unemployment rate, with a national rate of 7.7.

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote:
“I do not see 67,100 jobs here:
…
Aha, here they are:
http://www.jsonline.com/business/wisconsins-unemployment-rate-ratcheted-up-to-7-in-january-4t95m2q-198269511.html …”

========
John, that’s the same link you used above. You know, the one where you just read the headline and missed the important points in the article. Here they are again, although I’m not sure why I post them, you seem capable of only reading the first sentence of any article or post:

“…the state added an estimated 12,400 private-sector jobs in January but lost an estimated 10,600 government jobs in the month…

“It's common for the state's monthly employment reports to show contradictory trends, …because the agency relies each month on "unreliable methodology" to calculate the preliminary data…”

“Economists as well as the state agency freely admit that the data is prone to major revisions… because the government bases its monthly findings on sparse sample sizes, which create a wide margin of error…”

“To underline its point, the agency also released revised data for last year …Those revisions found that the preliminary estimates for total non-farm jobs last year undercounted non-farm job creation by 67,100, the agency said.”

Of course, your not the only one confused: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yL1TeI2x2H0

The Ant-Alinsky –

I referenced the link to specifically address the “67,100 jobs” and call “your attention” to them, because I know you are thick.

My computer reads the text to me.

Where did the 86,000 jobs come from and what is your source?

You are really confused if you think I am going to read your diversions and empty rhetoric... either reference your sources or we will all know that you present nothing verifiable…

John Wilson (if that is his real name) wrote:
"Where did the 86,000 jobs come from and what is your source?"

There were, and still are, a number of sources out there Johnny. Of course suppose I will have to do the work for you:
http://www.thewheelerreport.com/wheeler_docs/files/0116collegegop.pdf
http://www.wrn.com/2012/12/democrats-blast-walker-over-jobs-claim/
http://news.wpr.org/post/walkers-latest-jobs-numbers-discount-seasonal-hiring

Johnny also wrote: "...You are really confused if you think I am going to read your diversions and empty rhetoric..."

This from the king of empty rhetoric. At least I admitted I could not find relevant data concerning self-terminated employees that collected unemployment benefits, and that my conclusions were anecdotal based on my personal experience. You are still crossing your arms, making the pouty face and saying "no-no-no-no-no"!

The Anti-Alinsky –

AA provides the following sources to prove 86,000 jobs were created by Gov. Walker.

1) College Federation of Republicans, Paid for and Authorized by WI Federation of College Republicans, Patrick Garrett, Treasurer
2) Wisconsin Radio Network
3) Wisconsin Public Radio News

Ignoring for the moment the credibility of these sources (?) they state that Gov. Walker’s claim of 86,000 jobs is in dispute… not exactly proof.

Now IF we add the 86,000 disputed jobs to your additional 67,100 illusionary jobs, Walker has already created 153,100 new jobs!

Parenthetically, you could have called Reince Priebus ScrewUSA Maximus and received the same numbers; however, I do thank you for your prolific amount of research (?)

2011: 27,811 jobs created in Wisconsin.
2012: 13,700 jobs created in Wisconsin
41,511 jobs created in Wisconsin under Walker’s administration in 2-years.
208,489 will need to be created by January 12015 for, Walker to fulfill his promise.

http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/promises/walk-o-meter/promise/526/create-250000-new-jobs/

Again, these are factual numbers… not disputed.

Finally, please provide some credible, authoritative sources for the 86,000 jobs you claim Gov. Walker created or admit that you have no proof… I would also ask you to provide the number of new businesses – Gov. Walker promised 10,000 – which he has created thus far.

The Anti-Alinsky –

Just to keep you abreast of “We are headed in the right direction.”

“The largest over-the-month decrease in employment occurred in Louisiana (-12,500), followed by WISCONSIN (-6,000) and Missouri (-4,700).
[CAPS ARE MINE]

"Nine states reported statistically significant over-the-month unemployment rate changes in January, of which seven were increases and two were decreases. The significant increases occurred in Illinois and Mississippi (+0.4 percentage point each); Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and WISCONSIN (+0.3 point each); and New York (+0.2 point)."
[CAPS ARE MINE]

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/laus.nr0.htm

John (if that is your real name), maybe you should wait until final numbers come in before you get too excited. Because of the way BLS calculates preliminary data, they can be waaay off.

Once again I will link to Christian Schneider's OpED:
http://www.jsonline.com/news/opinion/schncol17-0094mis-198546381.html

Tried to read beyond the headline this time.

Get a job

Hey Steve the Job Creator, do you have a job for Kathy? She indicates she has restrictions, but for a clever and kindhearted guy like you this should be no problem.

I have restrictions , I have buldging disc in neck and back, so I cannot lift 25 or stand or sit for long ..anymore great idea...I would get a job but who would hire me ...with restrictions .

@Kathy: I am replying to your situation not to criticize, but to offer advice. If your health condition is expected to last longer than one year and it prevents you from working, you are required by law to apply for SS. The way the Government evaluates your claim is mainly focused on one point...can you manage to work any gainful activity (job) given your limitations? They may argue that you can be a cashier at a gas station and alternate sitting and standing as necessary.
See an attorney to assist you with filing the claim and to represent you. Federal Law allows the attorney to charge you a percentage of the back pay - I believe it is 20-25% or $4000- whichever is less. Collecting a benefit you paid for is not a handout. Your monthly benefit is directly calculated based on your earnings. Every year you had an income you will get a statement from SS about one month prior to your birthday. The amount of the benefits are on this statement.

Craig –

The mailing of SS estimated benefits was suspended in April 2011, as ONE means of reducing unnecessary costs. Although they may start this mailing of SS estimated benefits back up again in February of this year, it will probably not be for everyone.

By far the most elegant way to receive your SS estimated benefit statement is to go online at the SS.gov website, and create an account; it is available there for you to look at, inspect, and check for errors.

IF you cannot provide the required security data necessary to create an SS account, your next most viable option is to take whatever paperwork and information that you do have to your local SS office and they will assist you with setting up an account.

Thanks for the info John, it explains why I can't find mine from last year. Though my wife did get hers, January birthday.
Most people do not know to check their income annually in case there was an error.

Correct. If she can't work (any job) due to restrictions, and the disability is expected to last longer than a year- she should file for disability with Social Security. This can be done online. After evaluating medical records she may qualify. This can take 2- 5 years if it is a legitimate claim.
But without specifics, it is impossible to help her.

Actually, it is not illegal to draw unemployment while waiting to be declared disabled. There is a requirement that no double dipping is allowed, and after starting to receive SS, then the Unemployment must be paid back for months that had benefits from both plans.

Craig –

Actually, your 2nd sentence is very misleading as you seem to be conflating SS, SSDI and SSI. Unless you somehow tie it to SSDI or SSI, as your first sentence only references “…while waiting to be declared disabled.”

"Actually, it is not illegal to draw unemployment while waiting to be declared disabled.”

That part is TRUE. It is NOT ILLEGAL to draw UC while waiting to be declared disabled.”

“There is a requirement that no double dipping is allowed, and after starting to receive SS, then the Unemployment must be paid back for months that had benefits from both plans."

That portion of your statement is INCORRECT, IF you are addressing Social Security benefits.

In the state of Wisconsin you may double dip; you may collect Social Security or Railroad Retirement Benefits and UC at the same time, not have any reduction in either, and not have to pay any money back to anyone.

You may NOT collect SSDI and UC or SSI and UC.

There is no meaningful point to your statement, to either “double dipping” or “while waiting to be declared disabled”.

Wilson: The context is regarding disability benefits not retirement benefits.
The comment about waiting to be declared disabled is because the system can take 3-5 years.
So in this case one could collect unemployment compensation for a year, and be waiting for Social Security to have a hearing. The waiting period for a hearing is about 18 months at this point.

Penny- I would not give them any more information...all they want to do is judge you.

I see you are paying for the internet and own a computer. How about using it to make income?

Well Steve the Job Creator, do you have any constructive suggestions of how to do that? Penny might be able to do medical transcription work if she is certified to do so--if she's not it's a training course and it costs money which she doesn't have.

Steve the Job Creator, do you have a light book-keeping or other job for Penny that she could do from home? If so, please reach out to her through Patch. Thanks,

Steve: I am going to stick up for Pennyluhu on this one, she payed into SS while working. Part of that income they took from her was to pay for Disability Insurance, so if she qualified- she deserves it.
If you spent most of your life working and paying into a private disability insurance, and they denied you your contractual benefits- you would sue them and win in court.
Social Security works the same way except it is Government run, and they drag their feet hoping the claimants die or get better before they have to pay out. 3 years is the average time it takes for approval, this can bankrupt most people.
My advice is those who are healthy enough to qualify: Buy a DI plan to carry you at least a couple years.

What should concern us all is the payout of benefits to those who do not deserve it.
http://www.reagancoalition.com/articles/2013/20130129006-medicare-illegals.html

Steve ® -

I find It interesting that you KNOW that Pennyluhu is “paying for the internet and own a computer.”

Conservative cave dwelling cretins KNOW THINGS…

This cretin always KNOWS – assumptions, wishful thinking and conservative magical thinking – things, as YOU are PAYING for the INTERNET; you could not possibly be using someone else’s internet or a library internet. No, “you are paying for the internet”.

Additionally, incredibly mind-numbing cretin also KNOWS that “you own a computer.” You could not possibly be using a library computer or a friend’s computer.

That is my issue with the [logic?] of the incredibly inane and cognitively dysfunctional conservative cabal that post here on the Patch – it’s nice to see that all of them are imparting their incisive logic and astounding powers of deduction here today… the only clown missing from this clown bus is your phenomenally intellectually challenged leader, who refers to himself as “the great Boffa.”

Please cite your source for the completely asinine statement, “I see you are paying for the internet and own a computer.”

I wonder if Rees Roberts knows John Wilson...

Bren –

The conservative cabal – think, people possessing “human form” without any meaningful social, intellectual, moral or community conscience or development – that frequently post here on the Patch always KNOW THINGS, and have tremendously elegant solutions to all of mankind’s multitude of challenges.

PROBLEM

UNEMPLOYMENT: Lazy people who simply do not want to work

SOLUTION: Get a job

The depth and breathe of their knowledge and ability to thoroughly analyze any multi-faceted, complex and nuanced situation is nothing short of startling…

Wilson: You have known me to be a republican and quite obstinate.
But here is a good example of how we republicans are not heartless jerks.
It is true we do not want people milking the system when they are capable of making it on their own. This case may be credible, and that is why I offered some advice and support.
Sometimes, just sometimes we are not always assholes.
;-)

Craig -

Unfortunately, my friend, the jury is still out regarding the "always" portion of your statement. ;---)

John: touché.

Craig,
It may not be your fault, you were born an asshole.

"Whether you’re a liberal or a conservative, former Vice President Al Gore says your political ideology was predetermined before you were even born. According to Gore, the “scientists” have found ideology in our genes."

@Greg: You're damn right I was born an asshole, and I approve of that message.
Regarding Al Gore: He also maintains that diarrhea is hereditary, it runs in your jeans.

John you have some anger errors to deal with. Why? Maybe because the Obama economy sucks so bad and the Walker economy is on the up.

Did you know you can make money using a computer and the Internet? I do. And that's what I use it for. So maybe you should reread my post and see the logic involved. Or continue your hate, which is so helpful.

"You were an assho-le yesterday, you're an ass-hole tonight,
and I've got a feeling, you'll be an asshole the rest of your life.

And I was talking to your mother, just the other night,
I told her I thought you were an asshole, she said "yes, I think you're right".

And a-ll your friends are assholes, 'cause you've known them your whole life,
and somebo-dy told me, you've got an asshole for a wife."

David Allen Coe, I-95 song.

Hershal: nice, though I do not think my wife would agree with one part.

Somebody actually did a study on this very subject (can't remember who), and found that the rate of drugs/alcohol for those on government aid was lower than the general population.

I have had to take unemployment a few years back. Thank goodness it was there. Why do you think that everyone should be tested for drugs and have their houses searched, Nobama? Do you think that anybody that loses their job is a druggie or lazy-ass? You know, there are privacy laws in this country-you know....FREEDOM and all that. Well at least that's what the right wing nutters are always SAYING they believe in. And as far as this economy stuff goes, you know damn well who is responsible for this economic crash...and it wasn't Obama.

John- You lost, get over it.

John,

What part of the law was unjust?
The part that made teachers pay for their benefits? That seems to be the way EVERYONE else does it.

Assuming Walker can squeak out a victory over the powerful Dale Schultz, who will he face in the general election?

I think THAT is the real problem Dems face. Who do you have to run?
Barrett? Please!!!!
Kind or Obey? Love to face a liberal tax and spender.
ANY Madison Liberal? Again, good luck.

The recall was the BEST thing that ever happened to Walker. He will be the Governor as long as he wants. The only thing Dems can hope for is Walker's ambition has him go somewhere else (higher office, Federal Appointment, etc).

While you are right that they can not speed up the process, I think it is helpful to have an attorney if you get to the point of a hearing before a Judge. Under SS law they can only take 25% according to their rules. ( it is worth noting the 25% is ONLY from the back pay )
To me it sounds as though Kathy is in dire straights, and needs help soon. She could file online at SS.Gov website, but any small error and it creates a delay. Attorneys also can help her word things appropriately so there is no mistake in the interpretation.
I really wanted to stress to Kathy that filing for disability with SS is not asking for a handout, it is something she paid for.

Craig:

Are there any 'free legal aid' type places that can help with this sort of thing on a 'pro bono' basis?

Craig –

Before you can file for SSDI or SSI online, you need to set up an account; she just might not be able to answer enough “security questions” to be able to accomplish that.

Further, it is my understanding that you can only file for what I would call a “preliminary evaluation result online”. What that really means is that they will tell you IF you meet the very most basic of standards to file.

SS will then send you a book, and a separate package of forms. Now, you may sit down and reconstruct your entire life, on paper, all the doctors you have ever seen, complete medical/mental/education history, along with names, addresses of all, including hospitals, tests, diagnosis, along with dates for all, and medications.

I have worked with several of my friends, and their attorneys on this “Mission Impossible” several times, and it is a feat not for the faint of heart. One of my friends – had diabetes, weighed 425 lbs., and had one foot amputated already – was approved in 6-months. This is most unusual, and probably only happened because his older sister was an attorney very familiar with the process and she devoted an inordinate amount of her time, pro bono.

Personally, I would not recommend that anyone attempt to go through this process without a savant on SSDI, and a good – oxymoron – attorney, very familiar with SS language, processes and procedures. Applying for SSDI or SSI is exactly what someone means, when they tell you, “Go to Hell!”

CowDung -

I'm not trying to step on your post to Craig.

Free Legal Service places are almost a thing of the past, as I've researched them for many people in the past. They are all short on funds and dying - this has nothing to do with Walker. You should also remember what they say about, "You get what you pay for."

That is a good question, though.

The Free Legal Services that I've been able to find are extremely limited in the areas that they are capable of helping you with, and you still have to meet some low income standard.

Given all of that, it still might be worth a shot for those really needy...

John and CowDung: The system is certainly messed up, and a long process. I doubt there are any pro bono attorneys out there to help people with this.
This is why I advised to hire an attorney who will take a percentage of past due benefits should one be approved for SSI. No win, no pay seems like a fair arrangement. Federal rules dictate the maximum amount the lawyer can charge, so you don't have to worry about getting ripped off.
All said, the alternative is to do nothing- which really IS NOT AN OPTION for most people.

Mistfit is a little slow at the draw.

Yes, Greg--@craig with a trademark is slow on the draw.

...........

Greg
2:37 pm on Friday, March 8, 2013

Mistfit is a little slow at the draw.

craig with a trademark?

OK, mistfit is really slow in all ways.

You got a good hook up Misfit? I'm looking for a better supply as of late my guy is selling me junk

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio

Misty my name doesn't have a trademark.
You get your Track Phone yet?

#hashmark Cut n' Paste™ (Trade Mark Pending)

I think Misty is a little behind on her reading....

Enough garbage, John Wilson. Just to remind fellow Patchers what one is dealing with when engaging John Wilson, what follows are some his famous quotes:

"Mormon cult"
"An “unborn child” is totally disingenuous and an obvious attempt to bestow attributes – typical emotional argument – upon a biological organism that they do not have. Your “unborn child” is, in fact, a fetus"
"As I see it, an ovum/fetus has no RIGHT TO LIFE"
"the RED, COMMUNIST MOAMMAR WALKER PARTY "
"the RED, COMMUNIST REPUBLICAN PARTY"
"In today’s America if Slavery was put to a popular vote, it would pass"

And of course his latest educated rant:
" your post is just another tremendous stinking pile of elephant feces from a White self-entitled TP/GOP fascist"

This individual tries hard to hide his beliefs, but as one can see by his above slip-ups when trying to appear rational, John Wilson's true character has some serious issues that need help . Do not engage him. Just let him be happy in his own fantasy (albeit warped) world.