Posted on 12/28/2013 5:51:29 AM PST by reaganaut1
WASHINGTON — An emergency federal program that acts as a lifeline for 1.3 million jobless workers will end on Saturday, drastically curtailing government support for the long-term unemployed and setting the stage for a major political fight in the new year.
The program, in place since the recession started in 2008, provides up to 47 weeks of supplemental unemployment insurance payments to jobless people looking for work. Its expiration is expected to have far-reaching ramifications for the economy, cutting job growth by about 300,000 positions next year and pushing hundreds of thousands of households below the poverty line.
An extension of the unemployment program did not make it into the two-year budget deal that was passed just before Congress left on its winter recess. When the federal program expires, just one in four unemployed Americans will receive jobless benefits — the smallest proportion in half a century.
...
Republican aides said they remained willing to negotiate. “Why didn’t they offer a plan that met the speaker’s requirements — fiscally responsible, with something to create jobs — or any plan, for that matter, before they left for the holidays?” asked Michael Steel, a spokesman for John A. Boehner of Ohio, the speaker of the House.
Some Democrats have suggested that continuing the program for three months, with the estimated $6 billion in spending offsets coming from agricultural subsidies in the farm bill.
But some conservatives have shown stauncher opposition.
“I do support unemployment benefits for the 26 weeks that they’re paid for,” said Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky on Fox News. “If you extend it beyond that, you do a disservice to these workers. When you allow people to be on unemployment insurance for 99 weeks, you’re causing them to become part of this perpetual unemployed group in our economy.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
cutting job growth by about 300,000 positions next year
Sorry these numbers don't make any sense...
By cutting off 1.3 million of the employment rolls, certainly some of these folks will get off the dead asses and take a job, any job...so how does that cut job growth ?
and pushing hundreds of thousands of households below the poverty line
Are not these folks already below the poverty level ?
I can't seem to find the part of the Constitution that requires the federal government to provide disability pensions for veterans either. Do you want to do away with those as well?
“I can’t seem to find the part of the constitution that requires the federal government to pay nearly two years of unemployment benefits.”
It’s probably right after the part that allows governments to take part of your earnings for future unemployment.
And if government action is preventing any employment opportunities, they need to be motivated to do whatever it takes to change the government in question.
Is that Photoshopped or legit?
With every department, agency and check printed, we have to ask the question, Why is the government involved in this area of Americans’ lives? We have to ask this of unemployment benefits too.
“I know of two industrial businesses that are looking for new workers which they will train yet the number of applicants are few. Easier staying home living on the unemployment check and EBT cards.”
Here in NJ those jobs aren’t offered to Americans; they are becoming the exclusive domain of “replacement Americans”. Legitimate companies use legal immigrants; others use illegals.
I have wondered if it could be beneficial for there to be a website that works similar to match.com. People with spare rooms could sign up to a site and people who are looking to try a new job across country could rent a room for a reasonable amount while testing a job.
Paying the non working for 2 years vs 6 months changes absolutely nothing in the equation. Make it 5 years-changes nothing.
Perhaps one reason there are so many illegals coming to grab low level jobs is that there is some credence to the axiom, “doing the jobs Americans won’t do?”
Not bashing the unemployed but keeping Americans enabled to not be in the workforce is/has contributed to this entire problem.
I am not sure I get your point. You advise people to move cross country for $14/hour jobs?
*With one exception which I believe is New Jersey, where both parties pay into the fund.
Sounds nice, but people are difficult to trust. I would not let a stranger in my house.
Of course, that wouldn't be politically expedient for the left.
As far as “lowering ones sight” try getting a menial job out here. For every one position open, there are thousands applying.
If you have an advanced degree in engineering, you are competing against others with even more experience, AND the added fillip of H1B visa candidates shoveled into the country and working for much much less. In fact, so much less, they can live five together in order to make ends meet.
It is always more comfortable to comment from a position of relative comfort and security on the failings of others actually experiencing the hell out here on the jobs front.
Where did you get “$14/hour jobs” from my post? Did you go really go through nearly 100,000 openings and average out the offered wages in that short a time?
Federal jobless benefits ought to be eliminated completely. Let STATES handle joblessness as they see fit.
Of course, federal laws and regulations that CONTRIBUTE to joblessness also need to be eliminated.
“Cutting unemployment benefits will SPUR job growth as the sit-at-home benefit recipients will be forced to get up, go out and actually start working again.”
Unemployment benefits are simply supplementary income for those who work under-the-table.
That exists:
https://www.airbnb.com/
Unfortunately, I live in NJ; we definitely pay into it. I had no idea other states didn’t have the same arrangement.
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.