Posted on 01/12/2009 3:07:13 AM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Almost two-thirds of those who are out of work do not qualify for unemployment benefits. The law that created unemployment insurance was passed in response to the Great Depression of the 1930s.
But since then, much has changed in the labor force, including the large numbers of self-employed who are left out of the system.
Most people believe if they're laid off — downsized or simply out of a job — they will get unemployment insurance benefits. While each state has different guidelines on the amount paid and the length of time people can receive benefits, the federal system, created in 1935, simply does not cover the majority of today's workers.
"The largest group of people that do not qualify for unemployment insurance are the non-traditional employees," says Howard Rosen, a labor market expert with the Peterson Institute for International Economics. He says millions who are not full-time, permanent employees are out of luck.
A growing number of people who are consultants, self-employed, temporary employees, part-time employees — a whole plethora of different kinds of arrangements — are not currently eligible for assistance.
Among this group are Barbara and Gary Ratner. Gary Ratner completed a doctorate in biochemistry from Emory University. Barbara Ratner has been a self-employed architectural illustrator since 1990 when she was laid off from a company in Atlanta.
"And I actually never had to worry about work," Barbara Ratner says. "The phone just kept ringing. It was — it was like magic."
She had so much work when she was laid off, she didn't apply for unemployment benefits. Now, because she's self- employed, she doesn't qualify for them.
She says business began slowing down last spring and by December, she finished her last job.
"I'm beginning to identify with the frog in the pan of water where someone turned the heat up and it took me awhile to realize that yes, this isn't like it has been before — and I don't know where it's going," she says.
Dipping Into Retirement, Cutting Costs
At the cozy dining table in the home where they have lived for more than 20 years, Barbara Ratner showed off her office and handmade drawings.
She has created architectural drawings for some big projects, including Atlanta's Olympics, a financial center in Taiwan, retail shops in China — even the Los Angeles and Portland zoos. And she usually makes between $80,000 and $100,000 a year. But now that new construction has slowed dramatically, there's no demand for her drawings.
The Ratners have already pulled nearly $10,000 from their retirement account. They are cutting back where they can — eliminating a phone line and canceling memberships to civic groups. Gary Ratner decided to retire late last year. And because they're in their 60s and do not have a group health plan, the couple pays $1,500 a month for health insurance.
"I've actually been considering getting rid of medical insurance," Barbara Ratner says. "It's huge. And so if we wanted to gamble, we could just drop the health insurance."
The couple is using their retirement savings, and that worries them. They're looking for creative ways to get by. Barbara Ratner says she's seriously considering raising chickens in her backyard, like her parents did way back when.
"They lived through the Depression and my father always felt like his family basically did better than other families because they had a chicken coop and they had a big garden," she says. "And they lasted it out."
Gary Ratner is hoping to get a biochemistry fellowship, while his wife continues to look for work. And both hope that President-elect Barack Obama's economic plan will create new jobs and ultimately turn the economy around.
> She’s been making $80-100K all these years and he’s a biochemist and they don’t have savings to live on? Huh?
I have some sympathy for that. In that tax bracket (at least in NZ) you aren’t quite “wealthy” and you aren’t “average” — you are Upper Middle Class.
This is the group that gets socked with all the costs “because they can afford it”. They pay tax at the top bracket “because they can afford it”. If there are wealth surtaxes, they get them “they can easily afford it”. Whereas the lower-middle-class gets concessions and lower tax and allowances “because they’re needy” there are no such thing for this Upper Middle Class. These things are “targeted” at “need”, you see, and they “don’t need it”...
If the do get an unemployment benefit it will be the same as everybody else’s — maybe a couple hundred dollars per week. That doesn’t mean that their expenses have scaled proportionally tho — no siree! Things like mortgage payments, loans, and other ongoing obligations have a nasty habit of hanging around, and the creditors usually insist on payment “or else”.
The Upper Middle Class pays in good faith all while they are earning on the false assumption that the systems will be there for them should they ever need them.
It just ain’t so.
What? I cant claim to have run a consultant group for underwater basket weaving at the corner of 47th and 2nd, and get benefits?
The guy’s wife’s income nosedives and he retires?! This is even more galling than the fact that they haven’t saved money. GET A JOB instead of expecting the government to be Santa Claus.
He retired late last year, which I would assume is just a few months ago. Why would anyone retire in this economy unless they HAD to or were well settled? Also, he retired before qualifying for medicare and has a self-employed wife with no group plan available. Did he think a magic fairy was going to provide him with cheap insurance?
Our highest (graduated) tax rate is 38% IIRC. Georgia, along with most of the old Confederacy, is usually not known for high taxes (we don’t even have state income tax here in Texas).
This is a structural problem with how they decided to build their company / business. In the good times, they decided to not to create a company and make themselves employees of their own business. There are benefits to making that CHOICE. One such benefit is that you do not have to pay into the employment insurance fund. This leaves more money for them to enjoy.
However, there are CONSEQUENCES to that choice, namely, when times get lean, they have no company to lay them off and since they did not paid into the unemployment fund, they do not get to enjoy the benefit of unemployment insurance.
Yes, if you believe anything that Larry Sinclair has to say...
“Gary Ratner decided to retire late last year...
The couple is using their retirement savings,
and that worries them...”
- - -
Ours is 39% on everything over NZ$60,000. It was 33% but Auntie Helen brought in her “envy tax” as her first item of business 9 years ago. I doubt it will disappear with this government: taxes have a way of staying put once implemented.
This couple has been saving - “for their retirement” which will apparently be delayed. They seem to have been true entrepreneurs - paying for their own medical insurance and taking care of business.
That they are making plans to survive without “government welfare” speaks volumes. It is surprising that NPR even considers them human beings...they are both educated and at least one of them is clearly self-sufficient and creative.
There's their problem...BAD DECISION!
> he has an entitlement mentality and expects the government to support him for the next forty years.
Which, if he has been paying into the greedy gummint’s systems for all those years, is possibly a reasonable expectation for him to have.
Plain fact is, he *is* owed some level of support. I don’t like the idea of “social contracts” but that is part of the deal the gummint enters into when it taxes you for social services: you *are* entitled to collect if you need it. Just like everyone else.
Yes, this is exactly what's wrong with our society today. They're too self-absorbed to even realize how socialist they've become.
These people think Obama is going to come along and save them and "turn the economy around." All his plan will do is give the impression that things are better and only for a brief time. His economic plan is a house of cards...it will eventually do far more damage than it will good.
But these self-righteous, so-called intellectual liberals can't see beyond their noses to recognize that.
Can some one tell me what Gary did for a living?
All I see is that he held a degree.
The guy looks like a mooch to me
Here's an idea, if you can't get a job as an architectural illustrator, pick up the newspaper turn to the want ads and start pounding the pavement.
...Retirement account, isn’t that like a savings account???
And it doesn't sound like they did their homework before making that decision.
> Can some one tell me what Gary did for a living?
Not me. That part was quite unclear. I assume some sort of academic...?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.