Stocks to Watch
MSN Money Insight
| Currency | US Dollar |
|---|---|
| British Pound to US Dollar | 1.651528 |
| Euro to US Dollar | 1.501502 |
| Japanese Yen to US Dollar | 0.011567 |
| Canadian Dollar to US Dollar | 0.944198 |
Deal reached to extend jobless benefits
Pending federal legislation would provide benefits for 20 additional weeks. The first-time homebuyer credit would also be extended.
The clock has been ticking for many unemployed Americans who are about to lose their jobless benefits.
But the U.S. Senate late today approved a bill to extend benefits for 20 more weeks in all 50 states. Workers in states with an unemployment rate of 8.5% or higher would get an extension of 20 weeks.
The measure will increase to 99 weeks, or nearly two years, the maximum length of time that a jobless worker can get benefits in some states.
The bill also includes an extension of the $8,000 first-time homebuyer credit.
As early as Thursday, the House is expected to approve the Senate version, which differs from the measure it passed six weeks ago, so the legislation can be signed into law by President Obama.
Nearly 2 million unemployed Americans are set to exhaust their benefits by the end of the year.
More than 9.36 million people were collecting some form of unemployment benefits, including 3.79 million collecting federal benefits, according to the most recent data.
Passage came after weeks of delay in which hundreds of thousands of Americans exhausted their government aid.
The House last month approved a bill that gives 13 weeks of extended benefits to the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and 27 states that have unemployment rates of at least 8.5%.
The Senate’s 98-0 vote disguised the partisan divisiveness of past weeks. After Democrats settled their internal differences a month ago, Republicans objected to acting until Democrats allowed votes on amendments opposing illegal immigration, the liberal organization Acorn and the financial rescue program.
The Democrats refused, saying Republicans were trying to score political points.
By this week, pressure to act was building from states with double-digit unemployment rates. One Republican senator, George Voinovich of Ohio, suggested impatience with his colleagues’ demands.
"This is serious business, and we ought to get on with it," Voinovich told The New York Times.
"We’ve got to keep these families together so they don’t fall through the cracks. I mean, this is what keeps them going so they get through this period."
The homebuyer credit was one of two unrelated provisions in the bill to extend and liberalize tax breaks that were in this year’s $787 billion economic stimulus package.
The homebuyer credit would be extended for five months. It includes the popular $8,000 credit for many first-time homebuyers, which was to expire Nov. 30.
It also creates a $6,500 credit for some homeowners who want to buy a new residence.
The other provision would allow businesses to deduct losses from their income in five profitable years instead of two; the stimulus law had limited the break to small businesses.
Charley Blaine contributed to this report.
Jarisbane the rich are already taxed. I am not a rich man but look at this:
2010 federal income tax will be about 39%
In NC state income tax is 7.75%
Nancy Pelosi Health tax 5.4%
Total taxes exceed 52%
Not including SS, property, sales, gasoline, and other taxes.
The "rich" will work from January first through sometime in July just to pay taxes! The more you make the more you pay. The more you pay into the tax system the less you get back.
Older5727
You make a good point the current government set up punishes those who they to make it on their own, and rewards those that take as many handouts as possible. Once you are in the system if becomes easier to get signed up for more. It should be easier for those that have used less to get help when they need it.
Everyday there are more regulations on business, some are good and necessary, but many use too broad a stroke and have effects on many unintended enterprises. There are too many rules for workers, and employers that is why so many operations move to other countries where the regulation is less. We don't need more rules, there needs to be better ethics of people trying to do the right thing. And we need to punish the crooks that take advantage of the system. If there was an effective punishment system for all of the crooks and society would also punish them then we could have less rules and more of an honor system.
Because there is really no protection from all the swindlers out there we have all become less trusting and more protective. It has, also, encouraged those that would otherwise operate in a moral and honorable way to sway and enter the gray area and then maybe turn completely to the dark side.
So if there are more rules they need to encourage correct behavior and not reward improper behavior or we will continue to get a deterioration of the moral fabric of the country.
I believe the unemployment system has been broken for years. I do not understand why we do not encourage people to take the entry level positions of a job and then subsidize them for the difference to the position they had. I realize that any individual who loses their job want to obtain a job that is equal or better to the one they lost, however, that is not always possible. Sometimes you just have to start over again. I have done this several times in my life. The last time I started my own business. Now I hussle to make a living every day. If I don't work, I don't eat or pay the bills. I realize that working for yourself is not for everyone. I also know that there are folks out there who are not actively seeking employment, why should they, they have their days free and can get by on what they get. I have a friend whos husband has been out of work, he decided to call the marriage quits and now his unemployment can be extended, what insentive is there in getting a new/better job when his child support will go up? I believe we have lost our values and morals as a country, instead of what can I do for myself or others it is what is everyone going to give me? Just my 2cents for what it is worth. Oh by the way, I am only in my 40s, with lots of time left to work. Can't retire till I'm 70 thanks to the government. So much for being a baby boomer!
I'm 43 years old and have also worked my entire adult life to support them and give them the things they need. After 3 years of having multiply being out-sourced to India my savings is gone. My house is in foreclosure and my car has been repocessed.
I have the greatest respect that you were able to endure and overcome your difficulties. I was raised in a military family, my father was 20 years in the Air Force and never accepted a handout from anyone and taught me the same.
I can't believe I have found myself in this disgusting, degrading and deplorable situation. I have written to may state representatives and was contacted back telling me I should go to the local food banks to help. I just cried, I refuse to accept that, I was not raised in this manner.
ALL I WANT IS A JOB AND REGAIN MY "PERSONAL RESPECT"
any of the comments opposing the unemployment benefit written by folks searching for a job lately? let me tell you jobs out there are paying less than unemployment insurance. That is no way to sustain a family or contribute to the economy. That is more like third world country. Any job worth taking receives hundreds of applicants per day so even if you are putting out your best effort, it is still a long shot.
US Retired, I don't disagree with you at all. I believe in fending for yourself and have been doing just that since I was 15 and am now 62. I got an education and have had many good, well paying jobs.
In 1988 my husband had a severe heart attack and because we believe in fending for yourself, we did not apply for disability (I had a good job) he just worked toward returning to work and was able to do just that. Over the next 7 years he had a multitide of issues with heart attacks and surgeries and worked as much as he could. In 1995 his doctors said absolutely no more working, so we applied for SS disability. Well, guess what, because he had tried to work rather than trying to go on disasbility, he was one quarter short of the required number (they only look at 10 years) so he got nothing until he reached 62 and could get early SS. When I say nothing I mean nothing, no medicaid, no welfare, no food stamps, no help with medications, not even a tax credit because I was not head of household (I had a disabled husband rather than a disabled child).
In 1997 I lost my job of 11-1/2 years in what was a very depressed time in my industry. It took me 10 months to get another job and I had to move 686 miles to do it. That extra 20 weeks would have been very helpful to me while I was doing all I could to keep my husband insured, pay deductibles and co-insurance, keep food on the table, etc.
After using all our savings and my 401 K money I doubt that I will ever to be able to retire and just pray that a company continues to want me.
To those making this a political issue, this was during both democratic and republican administrations.
While I resent some people who are smarter than me and use the system; I do feel for some who have worked hard all their lives and are now in a very difficult position.
We have greatly increased productivity during the last decades, but the gains have mostly accumulated at the top layer of society. Since the rich already consume as much as they want (more or less), there is no corresponding increase in demand for that increased productive capacity.
Since we produce more with less people, there is less demand for workers. Thus higher unemployment; thus more competition for jobs; thus lower wages; thus even more wealth transferred to the rich; thus less demand; thus more layoffs; thus ...
Starting with Reagan, most productivity gains has been captured by the rich. The middle class has tried to keep up by reducing savings and going into debt. But you can only borrow so much before the inevitable day of reckoning arrives. It took 25 years for it to show up, but it's here, and we have to deal with it.
More Supply-Side tax-cuts will just make things worse. We can balance the federal budget next year AND turn around the economy next year. It's easy: tax the rich, cut taxes for the middle class, and massive infrastructure investment.
It's real simple, double the productivity, allow the top 1% to horde all the gains, then because only half the workers are needed, there is massive unemployment. Why is this so difficult to understand?
The path forward is clear:
tax the rich,
cut taxes for the
middle class,
balanced trade (lower US$),
massive
infrastructure spending.
The "increased savings" is really debt-reduction by the Middle-class. The Middle-class overextended the last two decades, and must now reduce their debt. Barring inflation, Middle-class families need to reduce their debt, so the demand reduction must be replaced by investment spending. Business won't invest as long as capacity utilization remain at the current low level (70%).
The federal government must pick up the slack with massive infrastructure investments like, smart grids, energy efficiency, renewable energy, communications infrastructure, as well as traditional roads and bridges.
Spending on infrastructure is an investment that can be payed back over time. Infrastructure spending results in higher growth, thus higher revenues. The higher growth will make today's deficits look puny compared to tomorrows much higher GDP.
In addition, with the ascendancy of the developing world, and the increased global population, we need to improve our energy efficiency and come up with new products that use less materials as well as less energy. If we don't, our standard of living will be reduced.
We also need to invest heavily into education to enhance labor
mobility into new technologies and techniques. Education is also an
important component of Research & Development for developing new
products.
The Republican idea of reducing the deficit by cutting entitlements (Medicare, Social Security, etc.) will just shrink the economy (even less real income). The only way is to grow the economy with massive infrastructure investments.
What they give out as unemployment does not constitute as much of a handout. And when they extend the length of time one is given unemployment it is usually much less then what would be a standard 'handout'. We are talking about people given less then what one can use to sustain paying a mortgage or rent. How do YOU suppose that won’t encourage people to get jobs? I am tired if reading ignorant comments about 'handouts'. Unemployment is gas money not enough to lay back and take a vacation.
StockScouter data provided by Gradient Analytics, Inc.
Quotes supplied by Interactive Data.
MSN Money's editorial goal is to provide a forum for personal finance and investment ideas. Our articles, columns, message board posts and other features should not be construed as investment advice, nor does their appearance imply an endorsement by Microsoft of any specific security or trading strategy. An investor's best course of action must be based on individual circumstances.
advertisement
advertisement
MSN Money Market News Video
advertisement
Readers' Choice
| Rating | Top 5 Articles |
|---|---|
| 4.28 | Credit card lenders go on a rampage |
| 4.06 | The dollar's down decade |
| 3.94 | What's to love about Starbucks |
| 3.92 | Arrogant Fed hasn't learned a thing |
| 3.81 | Stop acting rich, start getting rich |



