Stopped reading right there...
The budget must be cut. One must find cuts.
1. If the government pays 100% of X, then it is a cut if the government pays only 50% of X. It is moving in the right direction. Are you saying you'd rather pay 100 billion in unemployment than 50 billion?
2. EBH would argue for zero unemployment. I don't think that's an unethical argument. One gets more of undesired behavior by subsidizing it. Paying someone not to work leads to more not working. EBH would say that it is unethical to rob a person of his initiative. I have no problem with that argument.
3. However, like welfare, I'm willing to take some cuts over zero cuts. If I can start the walk back in the right direction, then I'll take that walk. Gradually withdrawing someone from government assistance is better than not withdrawing him at all. Less payment is better than more payment.