I'm out here in San Diego, at my sister's house, where my brother-in-law says, "I'll never hire another unemployed person".
The reason he gives is, he hired a girl as a dispatcher for one day a week (Saturday). She was on unemployment from a grocery store.
She was skillful, so he extended her to three days a week.
After 6 or 8 months, he was informed that her unemployment, which was ongoing, would thereafter be drawn from his account, which he must maintain for unemployment insurance.
He wrote to Sacramento, and they replied that "She is eligible." So he called and the lady said only that "This is Obama's new plan for unemployment."
The employee was subsequently fired for colluding with one of his drivers for taking cash payments under the table for work that should have paid to the company.
After this, she was still paid unemployment compensation out of his fund pool.
So the question is, knowing that Obama's new plan extended the length of compensation, did he also make this change, such that the new employer gets stuck paying compensation for unemployment previous to his hiring the person?
If this is not new, then BHO doesn't get the blame.
Has anybody heard such a crazy story before?