Why is Sen. Rick Scott so heartless toward jobless Floridians? | Editorial

MSG Francisco Ojeda - What does that have with the issue at hand? Either paying people on unemployment more than they made while employed has merit, or it does not. It is a stand alone issue, having nothing to do with Columbia/HCA.

So can you or anyone explain the merits of paying those unemployed [more than they made being employed **Clarification I edited this sentence some 40 minutes after initially posting] by the current crisis is a good thing? It is not intuitively obvious to the casual observer? There is no such ting as a free lunch. Who and how is it going to be paid back?

At face value I don't buy the delay in payment argument. What state doesn't already require someone seeking unemployment compensation to report their income? How long would it take a programmer to write that into the software that prints the checks? a day?

MSG Francisco Ojeda - I asked honest questions in hopes of a civil discussion. I did not impugn your character or offer any form of ad hominem attack. Not really sure just how I pissed in your Wheaties, but I assure you it was unintentional. I'd probably apologize if I knew just how I pissed you off.

A plan, ANY planned course of action, for any crisis has pros and cons. Those pros and cons are independent of who proposed the plan, unless one can establish an ulterior motive of the person proposing the plan.

_What is Senator Scott's ulterior motive?

_I made an error. I did not mean to imply make NO payment to help the unemployed. I meant to question the wisdom of paying them MORE to be unemployed than they made to be employed. There are repercussions to The US's expanding debt, and we RNC and DNC have given very little thought to those repercussions. Just because President Trump signed the stimulus bill doesn't mean all of a sudden I like it.

_I don't even know how to respond to your assertion that spending a few hours of a programmer's coding time to limit payments to what the unemployment applicant made is proof of my lack of compassion.

MSG Francisco Ojeda - The issue of the article and the context from which I offered my opinion is that I question the wisdom of paying individuals who are unemployed because of COVID19 MORE than they made when they were employed. I didn't make any assumption about their motive or whether or not they qualified for taxpayer assistance.

Why pay them $600 flat rate on top of their normal unemployment income? For sake of argument assume the unemployed person made $10 per hour, 40 hours a week. In Michigan, they are going to get $220 per week normal unemployment plus the additional $600 per week. The unemployed person's weekly gross income total is now $820 per week. The person who stood next to them on the job, who still has their job still only earns $400 per week, less than half of what their UNEMPLOYED former co-worker is paid

If I am getting this assistance from the taxpayer, and I have no obligation during the crisis to look for work, why would I look for a job, if finding a job probably means a substantial cut in my weekly income?

MSG Francisco Ojeda -
_How do the homeless cash in a check without an address and proof thereof?
_How do the homeless receive a direct deposit when they cannot open an account without proof of an address?
_How do the long term unemployed, who may have burned through their money (cannot have an account without money in it) receive a direct deposit or cash a check?

None of those were addressed in the article, and as far as I know none of those are addressed by either party in any bill related to COVID19 before the House or the Senate.

Bwahaha! Hoist by his own petard...and proclivities.

MSG Francisco Ojeda - Speak for yourself Franciso. You guys toss up candidates like Gillum, prop him up like he is the next Obama, walking right past the issues he has as the Mayor of Tallahassee.

I thought the whole idea behind this stimulus package was to boost the economy. This should help.