How to save money while unemployed

Top 10 ways to save money on reduced income

This week, 37,000 long-term unemployed in North Carolina will stop getting unemployment checks. Because the state’s unemployment dipped just below 10 percent, it doesn’t qualify for the extended benefits program to help the long-term (more than 79 weeks) of unemployed.  I am one of those individuals.

Many previously middle-class families will be facing tough choices about keeping their homes and even feeding their children because of the end of this program. I received the maximum weekly benefit – about $460 – for almost two years.  There’s no question that the loss of this benefit will hurt my family, but because of decisions we’ve made since I lost my job, it won’t devastate us.  I wanted to share suggestions and advice to those unemployed about how the loss of this income doesn’t mean you have to go into financial ruin.  Here are some tips on how to cut expenses that led us to save money during the last two years.

  1. Cut the cable cord.  When our one-year special deal with Time Warner ended, we cut cable and are saving about $60-80 a month. We bought a digital antenna and watch about 30 channels over the air, and stream Netflix videos, music, news & weather channels, and other movie channels through our previously-purchased Roku box (which cost less than $100).
  2. Cut the cell phone habit.  What irritates me is seeing people at the unemployment office checking their email on their 4Gs, Droids, and Blackberries.  This is one of the biggest expenses we cut after I lost my job. By ditching my smartphone, we saved another $70 a month by purchasing a cheap TracFone where you can buy prepaid minutes. When I want to check email I do it the old-fashioned way: I check my computer. Now that unemployment benefits ran out, I may just get rid of the cell phone entirely.
  3. Cancel all subscriptions to newspapers, magazines and mail-order services.  When I lost my job, I immediately canceled a 90-day supply of vitamins that cost more than $200.  While I kept the weekend newspaper subscription, I read most of the news online now. If you can, cancel all recurring monthly subscriptions for music services as well. You don’t need the iPod.
  4. Get rid of your trash hauler. Seriously.  We saved more than $200 a year by canceling our contract for our curbside removal.  Since we don’t generate a lot of household waste anyway (about a tall kitchen garbage bag’s worth), we dump the bag at our church dumpster or another nearby dumpster.
  5. Stop shopping at the higher-end grocery stores. We get most of our groceries at Wal-Mart, Aldie’s, Sam’s (when we purchase items in bulk), or Bottom Dollar Foods, which all have fresh foods.  Use coupons each time you shop for groceries along with your discount card. You can save about $200 a month by shopping at the discount grocery stores.
  6. Grow your own food.  Even better than the discount groceries: plant your own garden.  Some of the best veggies we’ve ever eaten have come from our own backyard: squash, zucchini, tomatoes, lettuce, and broccoli are some of the veggies we’ve grown.  Not only does a home garden cut down on your food bill, it’s better for you.
  7. Don’t fly. The only time I purchased an airline ticket this year was a flight to Texas to see my parents, and since I had a job interview there, the amount was tax deductible.  (I never heard back from the company but I got to see my parents).
  8. Postpone large purchases until you’re out of debt and can afford them.  We would love to buy a lawnmower for our yard, but have found a neighbor that gives us a discount to cut our yard twice a week.
  9. Don’t buy expensive health insurance plans. This is a tough one. I’ve been without health insurance for myself since my COBRA benefits expired eight months ago, but haven’t needed to go the doctor in that time. Our son is covered by a supplemental school health insurance policy and my wife gets her health insurance for free through the VA.  Another option for those who qualify: state high-risk pools or free health insurance programs for children are available for those families whose income is equal to or less than 200% of the federal income limits (still available until the Republicans cut them).

10.  Save money.  I was fortunate that I was able to save more than half of my severance pay in a CD. When it matured we paid off all our credit card debts.  Getting out of debt is the most important thing you can do to get control of your finances and take charge of what you spend. Because our credit scores were excellent, we were able to refinance the mortgage for our house and save another $260 a month in mortgage payments, and at a lower interest rate.

I read that in 2010, nearly one in eight families now include an unemployed person, the highest proportion since the Labor Department began keeping track in 1994. All these families have to deal with rising food and gas prices, sporadic income from part-time jobs, and keeping their children happy.  It can be done through some discipline, persistence, and new-found frugality in the way you spend, and the way you live.


Unemployed to Congress: Don’t use me as bargaining chip


 I refuse to be a bargaining chip for Republican congressmen wanting to help the rich.

As everyone knows, some two million Americans face the end of unemployment checks this holiday season. Republican congressmen say the country can’t afford adding an estimated $65 billion to the deficit. Yet these same congressmen want to add an estimated $700 billion to the deficit over the next 10 years to extend the Bush tax cuts for the wealthiest Americans. Now, Washington rumor has it that a deal is in the offing, with Republicans willing to give an unemployment extension to the long-term jobless if they can get their tax cuts for the wealthy.  They’ve made it clear they don’t care about the 97 percent of Americans making below $250,000 a year; their priority is getting the tax cuts for their rich friends (particularly the millionaires and billionaires who helped spark the Great Recession).

This proposal is not only immoral, but it is madness.  To link tax cuts for the rich to the unemployment checks for the jobless shows how insensitive, brazen, and indifferent our political leaders are to the plight of the jobless. One Republican representative from Arizona – John Shadegg – says he thinks unemployed workers hold off spending their checks! (“The truth is,” he said, “the unemployed will spend as little of that money as they possibly can”).  What? The truth is that the unemployed, having no other source of income, will spend that money immediately on food, gas, and other necessities.  Economists have found that $1 in unemployment benefits generates $1.61 in economic activity.  A dollar in tax cuts—not just to the rich, but to everyone—generates about 32 cents.  The rich in this country are getting richer at the expense of the working class, and few seem to care.

I am tired of reading comments from the right-wing labeling the unemployed “lazy” who want to live off the government.   We’re not. We want a job. Unemployment insurance is not an entitlement program or government handout; it is insurance employers and employees pay into to provide minimal assistance to the unemployed who lost their jobs through no fault of their own. We search diligently for jobs every day: we network, write letters, fill out long applications asking for our social security numbers, driver’s licenses, high school addresses, and credit history; send resumes to numerous recruiters in our field; register for countless job sites that send us daily spam;  scan countless job boards and send out emails only to hear nothing back from jobs we are well qualified for. Our job is to look for jobs that are not there, or jobs that go to someone’s nephew or other internal employee.

When I was laid off in early 2009, I thought it would take about four to six months to find a job, even in this economy.  I’m luckier than some of my unemployed friends – I have managed to land several interviews – but each time the position is put on hold, offered to an internal candidate, or to someone with less experience.  I’ve applied for more than 500 jobs in 21 months, with few job interviews locally.  Ninety-nine weeks may seem like a long time to find a job, but, as news reports bear out, jobs that vanished in the Great Recession have not returned. The private sector added about 159,000 jobs in October – half as many as needed to reduce the unemployment rate of 9.6 percent, which is expected to hover around 9 percent for all of next year.

When my unemployment check ends at the end of this year, I may have no choice but to work at a car dealership and apply for food stamps, while trying to hang on to our home.  Meanwhile, the crooks on Wall Street who caused the recession are now making more money than they did before the bailout, and they want more tax breaks. Where is the bailout for the middle class?


99ers featured on 60 Minutes

   If you didn’t see the story on 60 Minutes October 24, be sure to read or view the story online at;contentBody

   60 Minutes correspondent Scott Pelley traveled to California’s Silicon Valley to find unemployed professionals whose unemployment benefits will end this fall.   At the end of November, more than 1.5 million unemployed workers will cease getting about $350 per month in average unemployment income.  The U.S. unemployment rate is officially at 9.5 percent, but Pelley noted that the real unemployment figure is closer to 17 percent.  That figure will be even higher once the “99ers” — those who have exhausted their 99 weeks maximum unemployment benefits — will not be counted among the unemployed.

    One 54-year-old financial analyst was laid off from a real estate firm. She  she spent her savings, lost her home and finally found herself sitting in a truck with her dog and all of her belongings.  Another over-50 engineering manager out of work for two years says he finally got a job offer — with Target as a floor sales worker paying  9.25 an hour.  “He’s taking the job at Target and he’s glad to get it,” Pelley said.

   If you look at the unemployed professionals Pelley featured in the story, they all shared one thing in common besides being unemployed — they were all over 45 years old. As Pelley said, they are too young to retire and “maybe too old to rehire.”  Did I hear that right? “Too old to rehire?”  How do you spell AGE DISCRIMINATION?  Most of these out-of-work professionals were not laid off because they couldn’t perform, they were let go because they were too expensive and the employer needed to save money on compensation and medical insurance.  In fact, a new survey shows that there is a direct link between age and the amount of time someone is unemployed ( ).

Many of these older workers who lost their jobs registered their comments on the 60 Minutes website. Here are four of them:

    Has the 60 minutes team or anyone addressed the issue re: those whose jobs were eliminated – are they over 40? Seems like most of the folks in Scott’s story were over 40. The large company I worked for has been eliminating a LOT of positions over the past couple of years and it just so happens everyone so far is over the age of 40. Even w/ corporate legal documentation, age discrimination has got to be a factor in this equation. It reminds me of something discussed in the movie “the Rainmaker” – the insurance companies keep denying medical benefits and know that most of those insured just choose not to fight back because they believe it’s a losing battle and give up. Same applies for those over 40 – severance packages, while enticing, do pressure employees to take the package because they can’t afford legal action.

* I agree 100%. I worked for the same company for almost 15 years and was let go despite glowing reviews and accolades from co-workers in all those 15 years. NEVER any problems. I contacted the VP who just happens to be the owners son and my former supervisor. I took a pay cut and took a lesser position with the same company for a while until I learned that they were hiring younger people to do the jobs I could have done (I even went through the interviewing process for one but didn’t get it.) I’m convinced my age was a factor. Tenure and experience is no longer valued and as far as I am concerned, although age is part of the EOE schpeel, proving age discrimination is next to impossible.

* What I think needs to happen is for the government to setup ‘sting’ operations on corporations. They are blatantly violating the age discrimination laws, and it needs to stop. Hire out-of-work Americans over 40 and if necessary, have the government subsidize the company at least partially for medical benefits and any OJT retraining to allow them to become current again!

    *Many of the people in this story are probably victims of illegal age discrimination. Why wasn’t this angle included? Is CBS trying to defend the employers who keep excluding them?

As these comments show, there is a deeper issue behind the layoffs during the past three years. Despite job recruiters continuing to insist that age has nothing to do with why people don’t get hired, it is a major issue in the job market today. Now if only 60 Minutes could do a story about THAT!


Our economy has seen the largest sustained job loss since the 1930s
Why do reporters sound more like economists these days?  I just read a story in the Associated Press about how “applications for unemployment benefits fell last week for the fourth time in five weeks, a sign that layoffs are declining.”
Huh?  While this may be positive news for economists and Wall Street, it’s not good news for the average worker or the unemployed.  While the AP reporter, Christopher Rugaber, is correct that initial claims for jobless are the lowest level since July, he deceives you because he, like so many other reporters, frames the story from the viewpoint of Labor officials and economists.
A more accurate headline would read:  “Nearly 24,000 people are losing their jobs every week…no end in sight to job loss.”  That’s 96,000 people who lost their jobs in one month (September)!  More than 16 millions are now out of work through no fault of their own, and yet we read stories about these “positive developments” about jobs being shed “at a lower rate.”
It’s hard to make sense of incongruous headlines during the same week: “Job openings increase for second month” (10/7) and “Four straight months of job loss” (10/8).  What is going on here? 
What is going on is that some reporters are snookered into looking at new applications for unemployment claims as “a sign that layoffs are declining,” as Rugaber wrote. 
September’s unemployment report is not good news: Not only did the nation’s unemployment rate remained unchanged at 9.6 percent, but two independent surveys showed private sector employers cut 39,000 jobs that month. Another report indicated that employers are planning for more job cuts.  And both state and federal government is slashing more jobs than it has in nearly 28 years. Overall, the economy has lost more jobs for the longest period of time since the Great Depression of the 1930s.
It’s worse if you count the number of people who are underemployed or who have quit looking.  If you use the broader measure of unemployment, we have an unemployment rate of more than 17 percent (according to the 10/8/2010 Wall Street Journal). Employment is falling in all sectors of our economy, including the private sector and at large, medium and small businesses, with even large businesses (over 500 workers) losing 11,000 jobs in September. And that doesn’t include government jobs, with more states and municipalities laying off teachers, firefighters, and even librarians.  We are losing jobs every month since the recession began in late 2007, yet journalists tell us what economists and government officials want us to believe. 
For more real numbers that don’t fudge, see, a great site full of job search resources.