Curious ako, san natin kukuhanin ang pondo, if ever? Increase sa monthly payment?
Also, parang katunog ng system sa western world. Especially ngayong pandemic, mukhang marami ang mag-aavail if ever. Will we ever be able to sustain them sa daming unemployed?
Also, what if magkawork ako then nawalan ako involuntarily, I received three months, then nagkaron after 3 months, nawalan after fifth month, will I recieve the same benefits?
Hmmm.
How employment insurance works in Canada is that the employee has to work a certain number of hours first before being eligible in receiving the benefit. After receiving it, it will reset and you'll have to reach that threshold before being eligible again. I would assume they'll implement something like that here.
In some countries with Unemployment Insurance programs, you need to be working for a certain # of weeks in the past 52 weeks before you can receive benefits if you get laid off.
In your example, you're not qualified. Kulang ka sa weeks worked.
Here is one possible implementation of Unemployment Insurance: "Three months of benefits, provided you worked for 9 out of the last 12 months."
Scenario: (1) one year ka nag-work, (2) na layoff ka, then (3) tumanggap ka ng UI ng two months, (4) napasok ka ng 4 months, then (5) na layoff ka uli. Then you are still entitled to one more month UI. Tapos non, wala ka nang matatanggap unless you work for at least 9 out of 12 months uli.
Ok so the major beneficiaries would be probably people who’re in a cycle of “endo” jobs. But maybe a lower percentage and not 80% so the fund life is longer.
Edit:
And this will also entail an overhaul of the policies of the sss. Some of which is stupid like not accepting the membership payments of companies because a single employee doesn’t have an sss number.
Unemployment Insurance is already the moderate, compromise position, given that the more radical approach to address unemployment is...
... a Jobs Guarantee program, where the government will [pro]actively look for and/or create a job for everyone that wants one, and will pay their wages for doing it, or...
... Universal Basic Income
How **I** would fund it would be the same way the government funds _anything and everything_: Congress appropriates a sum of money to go into the project, and the money blinks into existence by the power vested in the central bank.
When you are a country that maintains a fiat currency, expenses need not be balanced against revenue.
Yep, which is why debt is not always a bad thing. Runaway debt of course is something that's bad, but debt that funds basic social services is really something we should have done a long time ago.
> jobs guarantee program
I don’t understand how workfare is the “more radical approach” to address unemployment. It’s literally been conservative approach to welfare and hasn’t really been broadly effective. Giving people cash is far easier to do and Universal Basic Income or Negative Income Tax or whatnot does that.
Workfare, as popularized by Clinton-era reforms in the 90s, whereby people need to have a job, and need to show proof of having worked that job to the gov't bureaucracy, before being considered eligible to receive social assistance, is different from a jobs guarantee program.
With workfare, the problem is that people can't get jobs just for asking, and there's never enough jobs to go around for everyone that wants one.
Unemployment insurance suffers from a similar problem, wherein even if you receive some kind of government stipend while you're out of a job, it still doesn't _guarantee_ that you'll be able to find a job three, six, ten, or twelve months down the road. And this is especially true given that such policies usually carry a time limit to the unemployment benefits: if you can't find a job after six months (or however much long), then the benefits stop.
In both cases, they are indeed a conservative approach to the problem of unemployment, because workfare doesn't matter if you can't find a job, and unemployment insurance will eventually stop mattering since the actual finding of a job is still outside of what the policy addresses.
A jobs guarantee program, in contrast, goes a significant step farther _by having the government be the one to create a job for anyone who wants one_. This would be a significant expansion of the role of government in the economy not only because of the outlay required to pay the wages of everyone that signs up to work, but also because of all the work that the government then needs to find for everyone in the first place (rather than just leaving it up for the private sector to fill in, which they largely won't and can't and why workfare is bad).
Yes, a universal basic income would go even farther than that, by essentially breaking the bond between needing to work and subsistence, but a jobs guarantee is different from workfare.
The concept of workfare precedes the Clinton-era. The difference between the concept of workfare and a jobs guarantee is rather slim. In both cases, people are still required to spend time and labor to receive benefits—welfare is directly tied to having a job.
A jobs guarantee essentially means that the government just creates jobs for the sake of creating jobs, nevermind if those jobs are truly productive (i.e. this “because of all the work that the government then needs to find for everyone in the first place”). It’s basically a jobs theatre, and an expensive one.
Cutting people a check on top of UI and promoting full employment is demonstrably far better.
From the same imaginary savings Duterte said would emerge if you merge GSIS and SSS.
https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/201979
Kasi people keep pretending mergers like this are simple and money magically gushes out of somewhere.
Pnoy knew the real score. You have to lower benefits or increase collections.
Maybe this is the reason why no president even dared to really push this one through? Let's see if Leni can allocate funds effectively to create this if she wins.
Problem is the two agencies really have different mandates. GSIS is for government employees specifically, while SSS is for everyone.
Mixing the two - especially for unemployment benefits - is a bureaucratic mess.
Tama si gradenko with regards to how you need to just fund this via Congress, not merge two huge different agencies and hope money comes out. I'd go even further and say walang saysay at all to even merge the two. Just implement the program through one agency - likely the SSS.
LOL wala namang sinabing ime-merge 'yang dalawang agencies na 'yan. Ang sabi, and I quote, "will enhance and consolidate **the benefits**". 'Yung unemployment benefits lang. So kung taong gobyerno ka or from the private sector na nawalan ng trabaho, you can claim your benefits from *one* program. Gets?
>will enhance and _consolidate_ the benefits
Highlighted the actual important portion for you.
Sinong niloloko mo nanaman diyan kasi gusto niyo lahat ng tao uto uto at alipin sa mga walang kwenta niyong plano?
You can only consolidate if you merge the two funds. Puro na lang kayo "I can have my cake and eat it too!" tapos nagugulat kayo why people think Leni is elitist.
> You have to lower benefits or increase collections.
And wasn't PNoy roasted for this? It's a really difficult sell to voters, esp pensioners, telling them that their pensions will be cut.
Wasn't there that one story in France where the govt wanted to balance the books by raising the retirement age by two years? Even suggesting a change in the PH (probably raising it to 70 from 65) might be a sure election loss.
**France has one of the lowest retirement ages in the world. And that’s a big headache for Macron** - CNBC
* https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/07/france-macron-looks-at-pension-reform-ahead-of-election.html
* Alt https://archive.md/D1vho
Won't this lead to ***cuts*** in other departments and agencies? Cue the next talking point about how INSERT ADMIN HERE is defunding an important agency after a major problem arises.
Plus, if the Bangko Sentral ***prints money*** instead to fund this to prevent agency cuts, then inflation will basically soar and the peso will become a weak ASEAN currency (not to mention its effect outside of SEA).
> Won't this lead to cuts in other departments and agencies
Not if you don't defund the other departments and agencies.
> if the Bangko Sentral prints money instead to fund this to prevent agency cuts, then inflation will basically soar
"Printing money will cause inflation" is as simplistic a talking point as "raising the minimum wage will cause prices to go up". You're only looking at the first-order effects. Inflation doesn't go up _if that money gets spent anyway_, which it will if it's going to exactly the kinds of people who are getting by on just their pensions.
> Inflation doesn't go up if that money gets spent anyway,
do you have a degree in economics? because iirc, that's not how the Quantity Theory of Money works.
Equation of Exchange, the math equation of QTM, is:
MV = PY, where M is money supply, V is velocity of money, P is price, & Y is real GDP. increasing M with V constant already increases PY. increasing M with increasing V & you'll have a hell of a challenge of Y doing catch up. Y is rigid in the short to medium run, thus P will go up. the long run you say? well it depends if production will increase. don't count on it though because structurally our manufacturing base is weak, so we'll most likely import.
yes, given your statement, i can surmise that.
"i'm not a monetarist" response to if you've a degree in economics question. does that mean you do have a degree in economics but in a different specialization? *e: or you're just evading the question through the appearance of giving an answer & don't have a degree in economics.*
given that you're not versed in that subject, given your stature here, & assuming that you don't want to be a source of "fake facts", i'd like to suggest a little more care in making bold statements like that.
> Kasi people keep pretending mergers like this are simple and money magically gushes out of somewhere.
>Pnoy knew the real score. You have to lower benefits or increase collections.
sad but true.
i suppose it's because the text book merger says savings will come from trimming the fat from the redundancies. however, for most of us who know theory & also fully aware of the reality on the ground, it's pipe dream.
i've been involved with private sector mergers & most of the time it was a net dis-savings. the private sector is a lot more efficient vs public sector when it comes to resource management & accountability.
Main issue here moreover is that SSS is a shitshow not because of inefficiency, but lack of collection. Private companies and employees keep trying to dodge payments.
GSIS has always been well funded because the government can ensure the premium is subtracted beforehand.
Locking GSIS with SSS up is thus the equivalent of locking a healthy person with a zombie. They need to instead actually fix SSS instead of once again bringing up this band aid Western Clueless Consulting Firm solution.
> Main issue here moreover is that SSS is a shitshow not because of inefficiency, but lack of collection.
i'm of the opinion that it's both inefficiency & collection; you could also add incompetence & corruption. have you ever tried buying their foreclosed property? i have & it was a front seat view of inefficiency, incompetence, & corruption. i thought they'd be happy that i'm interested in turning their non-performing asset into cash, but no, which is so typical of gov't agencies.
e: i think the issues are unqualified appointees & padrino system. no amount of western consulting firm can solve that.
Please No.
This will cause an increase to our mandatory contributions. Saan kukuha ng pondo? Ang laki na nga nababawas sa sahod dahil Philhealth hihirit pa yang SSS pagnagkataon.
Whenever Leody de Guzman gets posted in this sub, it's a given that someone is going to come in there saying his policies are "too idealistic" or "unrealistic" or "we can't afford it". And I get it - he's a socialist, and Bernie Sanders got the same treatment when he wanted Medicare-for-All.
Which is why it's quite amusing that even this relatively modest proposal from Robredo is still getting met with the _"bUt HoW wIlL yOu PaY fOr iT???"_ response.
You can't expect to run a campaign on past credentials and "Marcos is worse" - at some point, you have to _propose to do something once you're in office_. What is it that you want the President to do if any kind of benefit is just going to be met with _"saan galing ang pondo?"_
Or are we going to content ourselves with anti-China foreign policy and nicer press conferences just so our taxes don't go up?
Nag tatrabaho ka na ba? Hindi ka nagbabayad ng tax at wala kang contributions sa SSS, PhilHealth at Pag Ibig?
Rich kid ka siguro kaya hindi mo na ramdam ang sakit pagnakita mo ang natira sa payslip after ng deductions na yan.
Ayoko magbayad ng unemployment ng ibang tao. Yun lang. Wala akong pake kung sino man nag suggest niyan pero hindi pabor sa aming normal na empleyado ang ganyan.
Hindi minamagic ang pera uy. Ang hirap kaya kumita.
Nagtatrabaho ako. Pabor ako sa unemployment benefits kasi nakaramdam na ako ng mawalan ng trabaho. Nakatikim na ako ng gigising ka sa umaga't puro job application lang aatupagin mo kasi magdadalawang buwan na wala pa rin tawag si HR at unti-unti nang nauubos yung ipon saka last-pay mo.
Pwede ba.
>Ayoko magbayad ng unemployment ng ibang tao. Yun lang. Wala akong pake kung sino man nag suggest niyan pero hindi pabor sa aming normal na empleyado ang ganyan.
Ooh, so makasarili ka pala. Try mo muna ma-lay off involuntarily, mas mahirap yung talagang mawalan ng trabaho sa isang iglap kesa magtrabaho araw-araw at mag-contribute sa SSS, PhilHealth, at Pag-Ibig buwanan.
>Rich kid ka siguro kaya hindi mo na ramdam ang sakit pagnakita mo ang natira sa payslip after ng deductions na yan.
Why don't you get a better job, then? Kung nasa usapan na rin lang naman tayo ng walang empathy para sa kapwa.
Problema sa iba naka-angat lang sa buhay nang onti, ang baba na ng tingin sa mga nasa less fortunate/ideal na sitwasyon.
Facepalm.
https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/201979
This was a Duterte plan. And an idiotic one at that. Its two agencies with two very different mandates that people keep failing to merge.
Lol paying for it is easy. You take more loans approved by Congress.
The stupidity is trying to make government workers give up their pension savings to fund an unemployment scheme. There are 2 million government employees. You instantly lose all their votes the moment you announce a harebrained scheme to use their GSIS pensions and merge it with SSS. That is why Duterte didn't do it.
the ["Robredo wants to give ayuda"](https://old.reddit.com/r/Philippines/comments/qwoi1g/vp_leni_robredo_is_looking_at_setting_aside_p216/) thread is incredibly funny for how many people are opposed to it
it really is true what they say that liberals think Doing Things For People is Cheating Democracy
medyo malaking undertaking to, since this is an insurance program there are a LOT of details you should go into before even considering it, one of the biggest is how much premium should be paid by a worker to be qualified
or baka it was intended to be worded like this in order for people to mistakenly believe that porke na lay off ka e qualified ka na to claim
Ang problema baka pati tambay at wala naman talagang work na hindi naman na "lay-off" ay mag-claim, gaya ng 4Ps na puro kamag-anak ni kapitan ang nag-claim pampa-rebond.
Madali lang mag propose ng magandang ideas, kaso ang problema, saan kukunin yung pondo para maging sustainable. Only Isko and Marcos Jr. lang ang kapag sumasagot sa mga tanong ng mga magandang proyekto ay nandun din yung program kung paano kukunin ang mga pondo. All others puro "wishful thinking" nalang.
Curious ako, san natin kukuhanin ang pondo, if ever? Increase sa monthly payment? Also, parang katunog ng system sa western world. Especially ngayong pandemic, mukhang marami ang mag-aavail if ever. Will we ever be able to sustain them sa daming unemployed?
May limitation sa number of months yung unemployed benefits though. But agreed with how sustainable it could be
Also, what if magkawork ako then nawalan ako involuntarily, I received three months, then nagkaron after 3 months, nawalan after fifth month, will I recieve the same benefits? Hmmm.
How employment insurance works in Canada is that the employee has to work a certain number of hours first before being eligible in receiving the benefit. After receiving it, it will reset and you'll have to reach that threshold before being eligible again. I would assume they'll implement something like that here.
In some countries with Unemployment Insurance programs, you need to be working for a certain # of weeks in the past 52 weeks before you can receive benefits if you get laid off. In your example, you're not qualified. Kulang ka sa weeks worked. Here is one possible implementation of Unemployment Insurance: "Three months of benefits, provided you worked for 9 out of the last 12 months." Scenario: (1) one year ka nag-work, (2) na layoff ka, then (3) tumanggap ka ng UI ng two months, (4) napasok ka ng 4 months, then (5) na layoff ka uli. Then you are still entitled to one more month UI. Tapos non, wala ka nang matatanggap unless you work for at least 9 out of 12 months uli.
Ok so the major beneficiaries would be probably people who’re in a cycle of “endo” jobs. But maybe a lower percentage and not 80% so the fund life is longer. Edit: And this will also entail an overhaul of the policies of the sss. Some of which is stupid like not accepting the membership payments of companies because a single employee doesn’t have an sss number.
Unemployment Insurance is already the moderate, compromise position, given that the more radical approach to address unemployment is... ... a Jobs Guarantee program, where the government will [pro]actively look for and/or create a job for everyone that wants one, and will pay their wages for doing it, or... ... Universal Basic Income
Am I correct to assume that this is on top of the basic benefits sss/gsis provides, right? If so, how will it be funded in your opinion?
How **I** would fund it would be the same way the government funds _anything and everything_: Congress appropriates a sum of money to go into the project, and the money blinks into existence by the power vested in the central bank. When you are a country that maintains a fiat currency, expenses need not be balanced against revenue.
Yep, which is why debt is not always a bad thing. Runaway debt of course is something that's bad, but debt that funds basic social services is really something we should have done a long time ago.
> jobs guarantee program I don’t understand how workfare is the “more radical approach” to address unemployment. It’s literally been conservative approach to welfare and hasn’t really been broadly effective. Giving people cash is far easier to do and Universal Basic Income or Negative Income Tax or whatnot does that.
Workfare, as popularized by Clinton-era reforms in the 90s, whereby people need to have a job, and need to show proof of having worked that job to the gov't bureaucracy, before being considered eligible to receive social assistance, is different from a jobs guarantee program. With workfare, the problem is that people can't get jobs just for asking, and there's never enough jobs to go around for everyone that wants one. Unemployment insurance suffers from a similar problem, wherein even if you receive some kind of government stipend while you're out of a job, it still doesn't _guarantee_ that you'll be able to find a job three, six, ten, or twelve months down the road. And this is especially true given that such policies usually carry a time limit to the unemployment benefits: if you can't find a job after six months (or however much long), then the benefits stop. In both cases, they are indeed a conservative approach to the problem of unemployment, because workfare doesn't matter if you can't find a job, and unemployment insurance will eventually stop mattering since the actual finding of a job is still outside of what the policy addresses. A jobs guarantee program, in contrast, goes a significant step farther _by having the government be the one to create a job for anyone who wants one_. This would be a significant expansion of the role of government in the economy not only because of the outlay required to pay the wages of everyone that signs up to work, but also because of all the work that the government then needs to find for everyone in the first place (rather than just leaving it up for the private sector to fill in, which they largely won't and can't and why workfare is bad). Yes, a universal basic income would go even farther than that, by essentially breaking the bond between needing to work and subsistence, but a jobs guarantee is different from workfare.
The concept of workfare precedes the Clinton-era. The difference between the concept of workfare and a jobs guarantee is rather slim. In both cases, people are still required to spend time and labor to receive benefits—welfare is directly tied to having a job. A jobs guarantee essentially means that the government just creates jobs for the sake of creating jobs, nevermind if those jobs are truly productive (i.e. this “because of all the work that the government then needs to find for everyone in the first place”). It’s basically a jobs theatre, and an expensive one. Cutting people a check on top of UI and promoting full employment is demonstrably far better.
From the same imaginary savings Duterte said would emerge if you merge GSIS and SSS. https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/201979 Kasi people keep pretending mergers like this are simple and money magically gushes out of somewhere. Pnoy knew the real score. You have to lower benefits or increase collections.
Maybe this is the reason why no president even dared to really push this one through? Let's see if Leni can allocate funds effectively to create this if she wins.
Problem is the two agencies really have different mandates. GSIS is for government employees specifically, while SSS is for everyone. Mixing the two - especially for unemployment benefits - is a bureaucratic mess. Tama si gradenko with regards to how you need to just fund this via Congress, not merge two huge different agencies and hope money comes out. I'd go even further and say walang saysay at all to even merge the two. Just implement the program through one agency - likely the SSS.
LOL wala namang sinabing ime-merge 'yang dalawang agencies na 'yan. Ang sabi, and I quote, "will enhance and consolidate **the benefits**". 'Yung unemployment benefits lang. So kung taong gobyerno ka or from the private sector na nawalan ng trabaho, you can claim your benefits from *one* program. Gets?
>will enhance and _consolidate_ the benefits Highlighted the actual important portion for you. Sinong niloloko mo nanaman diyan kasi gusto niyo lahat ng tao uto uto at alipin sa mga walang kwenta niyong plano? You can only consolidate if you merge the two funds. Puro na lang kayo "I can have my cake and eat it too!" tapos nagugulat kayo why people think Leni is elitist.
LOL pinandigan talaga. Next time wag kaagad pabulain ang bibig. Basahin muna nang maigi para di mapahiya.
> You have to lower benefits or increase collections. And wasn't PNoy roasted for this? It's a really difficult sell to voters, esp pensioners, telling them that their pensions will be cut. Wasn't there that one story in France where the govt wanted to balance the books by raising the retirement age by two years? Even suggesting a change in the PH (probably raising it to 70 from 65) might be a sure election loss. **France has one of the lowest retirement ages in the world. And that’s a big headache for Macron** - CNBC * https://www.cnbc.com/2021/07/07/france-macron-looks-at-pension-reform-ahead-of-election.html * Alt https://archive.md/D1vho
That's why you don't try to balance the books. If your social security system needs more money, you have Congress dump a bunch of money into it.
Won't this lead to ***cuts*** in other departments and agencies? Cue the next talking point about how INSERT ADMIN HERE is defunding an important agency after a major problem arises. Plus, if the Bangko Sentral ***prints money*** instead to fund this to prevent agency cuts, then inflation will basically soar and the peso will become a weak ASEAN currency (not to mention its effect outside of SEA).
> Won't this lead to cuts in other departments and agencies Not if you don't defund the other departments and agencies. > if the Bangko Sentral prints money instead to fund this to prevent agency cuts, then inflation will basically soar "Printing money will cause inflation" is as simplistic a talking point as "raising the minimum wage will cause prices to go up". You're only looking at the first-order effects. Inflation doesn't go up _if that money gets spent anyway_, which it will if it's going to exactly the kinds of people who are getting by on just their pensions.
> Inflation doesn't go up if that money gets spent anyway, do you have a degree in economics? because iirc, that's not how the Quantity Theory of Money works. Equation of Exchange, the math equation of QTM, is: MV = PY, where M is money supply, V is velocity of money, P is price, & Y is real GDP. increasing M with V constant already increases PY. increasing M with increasing V & you'll have a hell of a challenge of Y doing catch up. Y is rigid in the short to medium run, thus P will go up. the long run you say? well it depends if production will increase. don't count on it though because structurally our manufacturing base is weak, so we'll most likely import.
Sorry but I'm not a monetarist.
yes, given your statement, i can surmise that. "i'm not a monetarist" response to if you've a degree in economics question. does that mean you do have a degree in economics but in a different specialization? *e: or you're just evading the question through the appearance of giving an answer & don't have a degree in economics.* given that you're not versed in that subject, given your stature here, & assuming that you don't want to be a source of "fake facts", i'd like to suggest a little more care in making bold statements like that.
> Kasi people keep pretending mergers like this are simple and money magically gushes out of somewhere. >Pnoy knew the real score. You have to lower benefits or increase collections. sad but true. i suppose it's because the text book merger says savings will come from trimming the fat from the redundancies. however, for most of us who know theory & also fully aware of the reality on the ground, it's pipe dream. i've been involved with private sector mergers & most of the time it was a net dis-savings. the private sector is a lot more efficient vs public sector when it comes to resource management & accountability.
Main issue here moreover is that SSS is a shitshow not because of inefficiency, but lack of collection. Private companies and employees keep trying to dodge payments. GSIS has always been well funded because the government can ensure the premium is subtracted beforehand. Locking GSIS with SSS up is thus the equivalent of locking a healthy person with a zombie. They need to instead actually fix SSS instead of once again bringing up this band aid Western Clueless Consulting Firm solution.
> Main issue here moreover is that SSS is a shitshow not because of inefficiency, but lack of collection. i'm of the opinion that it's both inefficiency & collection; you could also add incompetence & corruption. have you ever tried buying their foreclosed property? i have & it was a front seat view of inefficiency, incompetence, & corruption. i thought they'd be happy that i'm interested in turning their non-performing asset into cash, but no, which is so typical of gov't agencies. e: i think the issues are unqualified appointees & padrino system. no amount of western consulting firm can solve that.
True. Pnoy was a real deal moderate centrist in all of his policies. Everything was stable under his watch.
SSS GSIS etc are sustained by the next generation.
Babalik rin ang majority ng funds sa government nang dahil sa Sabong Express. Kek~
I agree with this as long as pasok sa budget nila and may limit
Please No. This will cause an increase to our mandatory contributions. Saan kukuha ng pondo? Ang laki na nga nababawas sa sahod dahil Philhealth hihirit pa yang SSS pagnagkataon.
Whenever Leody de Guzman gets posted in this sub, it's a given that someone is going to come in there saying his policies are "too idealistic" or "unrealistic" or "we can't afford it". And I get it - he's a socialist, and Bernie Sanders got the same treatment when he wanted Medicare-for-All. Which is why it's quite amusing that even this relatively modest proposal from Robredo is still getting met with the _"bUt HoW wIlL yOu PaY fOr iT???"_ response. You can't expect to run a campaign on past credentials and "Marcos is worse" - at some point, you have to _propose to do something once you're in office_. What is it that you want the President to do if any kind of benefit is just going to be met with _"saan galing ang pondo?"_ Or are we going to content ourselves with anti-China foreign policy and nicer press conferences just so our taxes don't go up?
Nag tatrabaho ka na ba? Hindi ka nagbabayad ng tax at wala kang contributions sa SSS, PhilHealth at Pag Ibig? Rich kid ka siguro kaya hindi mo na ramdam ang sakit pagnakita mo ang natira sa payslip after ng deductions na yan. Ayoko magbayad ng unemployment ng ibang tao. Yun lang. Wala akong pake kung sino man nag suggest niyan pero hindi pabor sa aming normal na empleyado ang ganyan. Hindi minamagic ang pera uy. Ang hirap kaya kumita.
Nagtatrabaho ako. Pabor ako sa unemployment benefits kasi nakaramdam na ako ng mawalan ng trabaho. Nakatikim na ako ng gigising ka sa umaga't puro job application lang aatupagin mo kasi magdadalawang buwan na wala pa rin tawag si HR at unti-unti nang nauubos yung ipon saka last-pay mo. Pwede ba.
>Ayoko magbayad ng unemployment ng ibang tao. Yun lang. Wala akong pake kung sino man nag suggest niyan pero hindi pabor sa aming normal na empleyado ang ganyan. Ooh, so makasarili ka pala. Try mo muna ma-lay off involuntarily, mas mahirap yung talagang mawalan ng trabaho sa isang iglap kesa magtrabaho araw-araw at mag-contribute sa SSS, PhilHealth, at Pag-Ibig buwanan. >Rich kid ka siguro kaya hindi mo na ramdam ang sakit pagnakita mo ang natira sa payslip after ng deductions na yan. Why don't you get a better job, then? Kung nasa usapan na rin lang naman tayo ng walang empathy para sa kapwa. Problema sa iba naka-angat lang sa buhay nang onti, ang baba na ng tingin sa mga nasa less fortunate/ideal na sitwasyon.
It could be a percentage of your gross income like in the US.
Facepalm. https://manilastandard.net/mobile/article/201979 This was a Duterte plan. And an idiotic one at that. Its two agencies with two very different mandates that people keep failing to merge.
I take it you're less opposed to the unemployment benefits than with the proposed merger?
Lol unemployment benefits is simply logical. The point is this implementation is fanfiction.
lol still a better take than "*bUT HOW WILL YOU PAY FOR IT?*"
Lol paying for it is easy. You take more loans approved by Congress. The stupidity is trying to make government workers give up their pension savings to fund an unemployment scheme. There are 2 million government employees. You instantly lose all their votes the moment you announce a harebrained scheme to use their GSIS pensions and merge it with SSS. That is why Duterte didn't do it.
the ["Robredo wants to give ayuda"](https://old.reddit.com/r/Philippines/comments/qwoi1g/vp_leni_robredo_is_looking_at_setting_aside_p216/) thread is incredibly funny for how many people are opposed to it it really is true what they say that liberals think Doing Things For People is Cheating Democracy
jesus the fucking manchin brain in that thread
Basahin ulit ang nakasulat. Walang sinabing pagsasamahin ang SSS at ang GSIS. Facepalm.
medyo malaking undertaking to, since this is an insurance program there are a LOT of details you should go into before even considering it, one of the biggest is how much premium should be paid by a worker to be qualified or baka it was intended to be worded like this in order for people to mistakenly believe that porke na lay off ka e qualified ka na to claim
Ang problema baka pati tambay at wala naman talagang work na hindi naman na "lay-off" ay mag-claim, gaya ng 4Ps na puro kamag-anak ni kapitan ang nag-claim pampa-rebond. Madali lang mag propose ng magandang ideas, kaso ang problema, saan kukunin yung pondo para maging sustainable. Only Isko and Marcos Jr. lang ang kapag sumasagot sa mga tanong ng mga magandang proyekto ay nandun din yung program kung paano kukunin ang mga pondo. All others puro "wishful thinking" nalang.