For those wanting to extend unemployment benefits

[WhipperSnapper]

"upper classes receiving more wealth than they deserve" LOL what???? You don't deserve anything, nor do they, which is why they receiving more and you receiving less is perfectly fair.

Why do you assume that the market necessarily results in a "just" outcome? Is it possible that some people receive too little compensation for their labor and that some people receive too much? Is it possible that the blue collar laborer who works his ass off in unpleasant conditions for $10/hour might not be receiving as much income as he deserves whereas someone who received a job based on family connections and barely does much of anything for $100,000/year might be receiving less than he deserves? What about CEOs who received millions per year while driving their companies into the ground?

 

[WhipperSnapper]

We rather sit on our asses on unemployment because we are much too good for these jobs yet we cry the blues when that damned illegal does it at a price we are willing to pay.

Having the illegals do it costs more than what they receive in compensation because of invisible back-end costs. We also have to pay for the costs of the illegals' housing, health care, education for children, and any criminal justice costs they consume. So, in a sense society is helping to subsidize those low wages to an extent by adding to their compensation with those benefits. Also, children born in this country end up being anchor babies and have American citizenship and drive up the nation's population long-term, inflicting all sorts of costs on Americans. It could also be argued that having Americans go unemployed also imposes a cost on society. So, the wages the illegals receive are thus not as cheap as what it looks. We would be better off just hiring Americans and paying them the rate the American market requires. (We're going to help poor Americans by providing welfare, housing, health care, and education regardless, so we might as well save some money on those costs by having them be employed even if that means having higher front-end costs.)

 

[Mursilis]

I know one guy (who happens to be a rampant conservative) that abuses the hell out of unemployment and has been using it the last year or so to fund a business he's starting up. I personally hope they cut it off completely.

:thumbsup:

 

[nick1985]

I say we get real progressive. Lets extend unemployment to 20 years.

 

[PingSpike]

Unemployment has always been abused like this, even during the so called boom times. It was still a good safety net for many though.

The question is, how long do we want to pretend these people have jobs?

 

[Vette73]

I did not have a problem with extending unemploymenet. But what I wanted was for them to tie the extension with lowwer amounts. Like take 20% off, then 40%, and so forth till you hit $0. That way it was still helping but was also showing the person time is running out.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I say we get real progressive. Lets extend unemployment to 20 years.

I have an even better idea! Let's fix the economy and the job market so that it is no longer that difficult to find a solid lower-middle class job and for bachelors degree holders to find solid middle class jobs.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

I did not have a problem with extending unemploymenet. But what I wanted was for them to tie the extension with lowwer amounts. Like take 20% off, then 40%, and so forth till you hit $0. That way it was still helping but was also showing the person time is running out.

Isn't that how the extended tiers (the stuff after 26 weeks) already works?

 

[charrison]

Nothing in the article tells what kind of people they are offering these jobs to? I would imagine some of these folks have skills beyond manual labor. There is nothing wrong with manual labor, but you don't know if they are living off the work of others or not.

If keep taking unemployment, rather than taking an offered job, you are living off the work of others.

 

[charrison]

Isn't that how the extended tiers (the stuff after 26 weeks) already works?

I dont think so.

 

[StageLeft]

I did not have a problem with extending unemploymenet. But what I wanted was for them to tie the extension with lowwer amounts. Like take 20% off, then 40%, and so forth till you hit $0. That way it was still helping but was also showing the person time is running out.

It should be based on a loan you have to pay back.

 

[ShawnD1]

It should be based on a loan you have to pay back.

This is a good idea.

Unemployment benefits could be extended for an indefinite period of time as long as it needs to be paid back. These people were working in the past, so it's reasonable to expect them to be working in the future.

 

[jackschmittusa]

Paid back?

I paid into the fund for over 40 years. What have I got coming with interest?

 

[ShawnD1]

Paid back?

I paid into the fund for over 40 years. What have I got coming with interest?

EVERYONE pays into it for 40 years. You are not a unique snowflake. You're entitled to the standard amount that the insurance rates were based on.

This is no different than any other kind of insurance. You can't pay into minimal car insurance then suddenly demand coverage against theft when it happens. Similarly, you can't pay into insurance designed to cover X number of unemployment months then suddenly demand coverage for twice that period of time. If you get any extended benefits, it should be a loan, and you should be happy that they're willing to lend you money when you really need it.

 

[StageLeft]

EVERYONE pays into it for 40 years. You are not a unique snowflake. You're entitled to the standard amount that the insurance rates were based on.

This is no different than any other kind of insurance. You can't pay into minimal car insurance then suddenly demand coverage against theft when it happens. Similarly, you can't pay into insurance designed to cover X number of unemployment months then suddenly demand coverage for twice that period of time. If you get any extended benefits, it should be a loan, and you should be happy that they're willing to lend you money when you really need it.

Everything about your response is spot on.

When you (or your employer) pay in it's based upon anticipated unemployment rates and has an expiry date on payments. When you go beyond that you are a in every conceivable way a recipient of state welfare-type money.

I wouldn't even demand it all be paid back but enough of it that by God you do not want to take that money out unless you seriously have to.

 

[Jhhnn]

Moralizing aside, I think the first thing posters need to recognize is that there aren't jobs for everybody who needs them, not at the present time. That'll probably be true for some while to come, probably years. We're experiencing a systemic failure of our economy, of the way we allocate work and reward. Our social safety net system of unemployment compensation simply wasn't designed to deal with it, nor are our headsets.

It's part and parcel of poorly regulated international capitalism, of the boom and bust cycles inherent in that. If it weren't for the economic stabilizers left over from the New Deal, we'd be living 1931 all over again. We may yet if we keep clinging to the way of thinking that put us here.

 

[Lanyap]

I guess you missed the second paragraph of the article. So some seasonal workers in an area for one type of hard labor job don't take the job. Come back and complain when we are talking mainstream middle class type jobs that people are turning down in significant numbers. They probably could have done the article on dishwashers too. They only make a few thousand less than seasonal landscape laborers. http://www.indeed.com/salary/Dishwasher.html

It is unclear whether this trend is affecting other seasonal industries. But the fact that some seasonal landscaping workers choose to stay home and collect a check from the state, rather than work outside for a full week and spend money for gas, taxes and other expenses, raises questions about whether extended unemployment benefits give the jobless an incentive to avoid work.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

It should be based on a loan you have to pay back.

I think the concept is that people have already paid for it in advance in the form of taxes and businesses pay unemployment insurance (though the revenue from that hasn't been able to keep up with the need lately).

 

[WhipperSnapper]

Moralizing aside, I think the first thing posters need to recognize is that there aren't jobs for everybody who needs them, not at the present time. That'll probably be true for some while to come, probably years. We're experiencing a systemic failure of our economy, of the way we allocate work and reward. Our social safety net system of unemployment compensation simply wasn't designed to deal with it, nor are our headsets.

It's part and parcel of poorly regulated international capitalism, of the boom and bust cycles inherent in that. If it weren't for the economic stabilizers left over from the New Deal, we'd be living 1931 all over again. We may yet if we keep clinging to the way of thinking that put us here.

You make a great point, and I agree. What we are seeing is a large structural change in our society. Our society is simply NOT going to have enough solid middle class jobs--jobs where people can afford to buy a 1500 foot house, have health insurance, a car, and raise a family of four. So far we have no idea how to either create the large number of solid middle class jobs we need or how to deal with a situation where we are going to have widespread and massive poverty.

As I see it, because of past prosperity our society hasn't been forced to evolve like other nations have. The standard of living is going to have to get worse before people will be ready to abandon dated ideas that much of the public holds dogmatically and contemplate seriously addressing our society's problems.

 

[umbrella39]

There are no doubt people that need help, but there is some portion that just abuse the system.

There will always be those that scam and those that feel that certain jobs are beneath them. It really shouldn't come as any surprise that some people would happily collect unemployment of $387 a week sitting at home instead of working 40 hours a week of manual labor for close to that same amount of money. Now would someone making $1000 a week turn down similar paying work to sit at home making $600+ less, probably not.

 

[darrontrask]

Right now I have 2 positions available at my plant. These have been posted at the local UI branch for 2 weeks. Our local unemlpoyment rates are ~ 9% yet i have gotten 4 replies non of which will return my calls.
My brother has been laid off for almost 2 years won't even look for a job because he feels after working sporadically for 15 years he is entitled to retire now on taxpayer money.
I HAD a friend that hasnt worked in the same period of time. He wakes up gets high and starts drinking after breakfast. His wife hasn't worked since I met him but everytime they extend benefits she gets to collect some more. Although the convience store directly across the street is hiring, she makes too much sitting on her ass to work.

Maybe we need to change the way UI is structured. Maybe instead of subsidizing their entire existence, they get compensated through UI for wages they aren't earning compared to their previous salary for a set amount of time.

I have heard time and time again "why should I work for ??$ when I make more for sitting home." These are the same people that relied on welfare when they were working, so maybe as a society we need to change this attitude and make people more proud of providing for themselves and family instead of the entitlement attitude that is so prevalent.

 

[halik]

For every 1 asshole that games the system, you'll have 100 that got laid off because of the shitty economy and can't find a replacement job. And white collar worker taking a burger flipping job is not an efficient outcome macro-wise, so gov't should on same level be subsidizing the efficient allocation of labor.

 

[Hacp]

Just an example of the abuse of the system. I was at the store yesterday and I bought a shitload of stuff for 15 dollars. I tried to buy only 1 or 1.5 dollar items to save money. This lady ahead of me bought the same amount of stuff as I did, but she had a food stamp card and was able to spend 100 dollars on the food items. I ended up spending 15 dollars. Same amount of food. Probably same calorie content. Except this lady was paying with taxpayer money and decided to get all the name brand expensive items while I was spending my own hard earned money from my minimum wage part time work so I was smart with my money.

 

[Hacp]

For every 1 asshole that games the system, you'll have 100 that got laid off because of the shitty economy and can't find a replacement job. And white collar worker taking a burger flipping job is not an efficient outcome macro-wise, so gov't should on same level be subsidizing the efficient allocation of labor.

Why is it not efficient? Would it be more efficient to have the white collar worker produce a service rather than stay at home watching TV and partying it up with his unemployed friends?

 

[Red Dawn]

Just an example of the abuse of the system. I was at the store yesterday and I bought a shitload of stuff for 15 dollars. I tried to buy only 1 or 1.5 dollar items to save money. This lady ahead of me bought the same amount of stuff as I did, but she had a food stamp card and was able to spend 100 dollars on the food items. I ended up spending 15 dollars. Same amount of food. Probably same calorie content. Except this lady was paying with taxpayer money and decided to get all the name brand expensive items while I was spending my own hard earned money from my minimum wage part time work so I was smart with my money.

Cool story bro, it's bullshit but cool none the less.