Posted on 07/20/2010 5:47:29 AM PDT by MichCapCon
With the expected appointment of an interim Senator in West Virginia, Democrats in Washington are hoping to push through an extension on unemployment benefits. Under current law, benefits run out after 99 weeks (up from a previous record high of 65 weeks in 1975).
There's valid argument that a compassionate society with a dynamic economy should provide unemployment benefits, and a legitimate debate regarding how much and how long. But recently, some have gone beyond this and argued not only that these benefits are necessary, but that they actually stimulate the economy.
Most notably, White House Economist Lawrence Summers claims that not extending the unemployment benefit beyond almost two years would cost the U.S. economy $10 billion and 100,000 jobs.
Some center-left economists have calculated that Michigan will miss out on $205.6 million in "economic stimulus." And columnist Jackie Headapohl writes on Mlive.com that, "Unemployment insurance puts money in the pockets of the families most likely to spend the money — which in turn expands the economy and creates jobs."
So is this accurate? Does government money in the form of unemployment benefits expand the economy?
(Excerpt) Read more at mackinac.org ...
Having been one of the unemployed for an extended period of time (but now - thankfuly - back to being gainfully employed), I myself had to rely deeply on my unemployment insurance.
And no...unemployment insurance does not in any way make up for the loss of one's income from a real job...but at least it helps one eat.
So....please...don't look down your nose(s) at those who...for whatever time it takes to get out of this depression and back to gainful employment...have to rely on unemployment insurance to subsist.
Remember: we remain in a depression. Your job...whatever it is...isn't safe either! You are not bullet-proof. I hope you're ready to live on your savings and the little extra unemployment insurance provides. Otherwise....well, you figure it out.
As to the old saw..."unemployment insurance encourages one to not go out and look for a job."....
First, this is usually put forward by those with jobs (at least to this point in time) who don't have to rely on unemployment insurance.
Second, the unemployment insurance check is not "welfare"; one had to have had a job in order for there to be any unemployment insurance to collect.
Third, it is far more damaging to hear "you're too old to be hired here" (OK...maybe that's not what you hear, but it is certainly true. But just try to prove it. "Age Discrimination" has got to be the silliest law on the books...other than the drinking age),or "we not hiring", or "you've got to be kidding!" or variations on these themes...than it is to have to collect unemployment insurance.
Now....with an ego-centric, socialist president without a clue as to how to help create meaningful, private sector, jobs....the hope of those without employment and no prospects for any, it is dim situation indeed.
No....unemployment does not really stimulate the present depression economy. But what it does do is assist those folks who, thru no fault of their own, were thrown out of work and need assistance to get by. Provide them a re-vitalized private sector in an upbeat, hiring mood...and you will see unemployment insurance tank.
Remember: you could (and may well) be next.
....just sayin'
We spent nearly an entire year living in our car, driving all over the country to find a job. You are clueless.
Heck no...I'm not sugggesting a perpetual unemployment extension. I am suggesting that there are plenty of other places the government 'could' cut if they really wanted to pay for these benefits, which they don't (want to). But that's neither here nor there
I am merely saying to those of you freepers that keep making blanket statements... things like 'the unemployment benefits disincentivize the unemployed from looking for work' that it's just not so. People, or rather...most people, on unemployment benefits 'right now' are not having a party..... and when the benefits have run out, the only other option for most, in order to survive is welfare, which only benefits people that have children. Single, childless, over 50 Americans will probably camp out under overpasses (it's gonna get awfully congested).
To go from working your entire life....and working your way up to making $50,000/year...to no job in less than two years, no income and ergo, no roof over your head, is no frickin party. The incentive is to keep that roof over your head and ergo, to look for and find a job. But since there are no jobs out there, at least for the over-50 crowd, the job search is just futile.
Just trying to get the message to some here who have made untrue and rather insulting statements about the currently unemployed and dependent on unemployment benefits. Have a little compassion, a little understanding and please don't blanket condemn your fellow freepers who happen to be caught up in this unfortunate situation. Okay?
With all due respect and deference....you (or should I say "conservatives" - tho you paint with a mighty broad brush) don't know what you're talking about.
I assume you're employed?? If so, try being with useful employment for over a year with little or no prospects at finding work....
"Not a dream job, but a job"....indeed!
Whatever makes you think that old folk can walk in all spiffed up for that "a job" when they are number one of 15...or are the 15th in line, hmmmmm?
Tell ya what....try it sometime...."walk a mile in the unemployed's shoes"....then spout.
Exactly and ditto! People like John D, unfortunately, don’t have a clue what it’s like out there, and it sounds like they really don’t care. But I suspect that he and others like him might get the chance to find out the hard way...and probably sooner than they think.
I’m just wondering how many of the folks here, like John D, who claim to be conservatives, also ‘claim’ to be Christians. They appear to be anything but charitable-minded Christians to me.
I could not have said it better myself; except to say that if it is tough for the "over 50s", then it is insurmountably tougher for the "over 60s" (of course, the over 60s are a subset of the "over 50s, aren't they??).
Absolutely superb comments tho.
And....IMHO....unemployment benefits should be extended until the private sector jobs lost (and continuing to be lost) during this depression are safely recovered.
Yeah...and I’ve been seeing freepers (or supposedly freepers) making idiotic and insulting statements like that for quite a while now. This time, I just had to “peep” up...haha!
Now...if they’ll extend the damn benefits, the first thing I’m going to do is to put some of that restored income to good work. I’m going to make a donation to Free Republic! That’s my way of helping the recovery AND getting back at the damned DemocRats. A ‘twofer’! LOL!
You never answered the question. At what point does Unemployment Insurance cease to be insurance and become just another welfare payment administered by different agency?
And by whose morality is your just deserts scheme based? Is theft by majority legislature not stealing? Your inference that I am greedy because I do not like being robbed by government majority is specious. It is still theft, and whether someone benefited and that it served some supposed social good, does not make it any less evil than common thievery at the point of a gun.
So on the road to haven or hell, I believe that you have taken a wrong turn in an attempt to turn thievery by legislature from sin into a virtue. Just deserts indeed.
And as far as age discrimination goes...those elitist politicians that want to raise the social security age to 70 need to get a grip on reality. Not everyone will be able to work until that age, whether due to health issues or just age-related lack of energy, even assuming that they ARE able to find a job past the age of 65. And unless politicians address the problem and enact penalties against age discrimination, it will continue and only get worse.
I’ve seen Republicans propose that idiotic idea and I cringe every time I see or hear it, even though it would not effect me. I feel for someone like my mom, for instance, who would have been struggling to work at the age of 64 due to her health. So far, I have been blessed with good health (hope I didn’t just jinx myself) and should have no problem working to the age of 70, assuming (big assumption) that I could find a job up to that age.
And yes, the GOP has more than its’ share of out-of-touch elitists. The latest one I went off on was Sharon Angle. I wish it were not so, but the GOP has changed drastically since the Reagan (God bless him) years.
We can be fiscally responsible without being coldly utilitarian and downright uncompassionate. After all, we’re the party of “Christian charity”...not the DemocRats. It seems to me that ‘some’ here need a reminder of that....or maybe a refresher course on how to be a caring conservative.
Proper etiquette? Why would I want to show proper etiquette to someone like you? I haven’t see you exactly bend over backwards to be courteous to me. Besides, I knew you’d stick around and read my posts. (Call me psychic)
You represent the narrow-minded, holier than thou, coldly uncompassionate hard right that the lefties are always pointing to and using as pr/ad material to sway voters to their side. You’re the poster boy for the “”compassionate conservative”” cliche that the left uses against us..... quite successfully, I might add.
Congratulations. You must be very proud.
Well....at least you admit it. Thanks for that. I was definitely for welfare reform. I knew one hispanic witch (a friend's ex-wife) who had never gotten off her flabby rear end to work and had been on welfare for decades. Thanks to the GOP she finally had to get out and work like the rest of us. But that was back when the economy was normal and there actually WERE jobs, before the Obamanation curse befell us.
Like I said, I've worked since I was 16 and even throughout most of the hard times in Texas I was always able to find work. What you refuse to understand or acknowledge is....this is different. This is the worst I've ever seen. I have tons of experience, skills and knowledge but I can't even get called for an interview 99% of the time. The last interview I went on asked how much I made previously. The lady that was showing me the ropes of the job said to be sure not to fudge on the application. So I put down what I had made previously. The job I was applying for paid $10 less an hour, or just slightly more than what unemployment benefits paid. If I had lied and said I made the same as the job was paying, I still wouldn't have gotten the job, since that company always does a thorough check of the info you've given them. The company didn't want to hire someone that would be making only about half what they normally made and for good reason. They figured I'd leave if or when I found something paying more. And there's the rub you people that keep saying take a lessor paying job aren't capable of 'getting'. And as far as your "Red Lobster is ALWAYS hiring" bs....yeah, they probably are. But when is the last time you went to Red Lobster and encountered a server that was over 50?
Point being...you're deliberately out of touch with the harsh reality of the current job market. I'm going to go out on a limb here and make a prediction. You're 57 and currently working for a liberal company. I predict that within the next year you will be "let go". I also predict that you'll find yourself in the same damn situation that many of us are in and have been in. I predict that you will be unable to find other employment and will be forced to rely on (gasp!) unemployment benefits. When that happens...I trust that you'll remember this cyber-conversation and the words you have spoken. I think it'll come back to haunt you.
Have a nice life.
Unlike yourself, I don’t have the time to sit around here all day answering fool’s questions.
2 years ago, I would have said 99 months is outrageous. Then I lived it. As long as it takes for the jobs to come back, I guess. If it was hard for this family to find work, a highly skilled family, I shudder to think what it is like for those not as educated and skilled as we. I no longer believe that those who have run dry on unemployment are lazy bums. They’re trying to survive. I’d rather see some of that stimulus money (I know.. it’s not, but it should) go to pay those who HAD jobs and QUALIFIED for unemployment stay afloat, than given to Korea or some commiecrat.
You may rationalize your avarice all you like, it doesn’t change the fact that you are evil. You are the one wishing what were once hard-working families to starve. These aren’t people who have been on the dole for years. These are people that were worker bees.. just like you and I.
We peel back the layers and reveal that you are a socialist. From each according to his means, to each according to his needs, for as long as it takes.
Yes, I’m evil for demanding that those who are on hard times work harder. It is not my responsibility to ease the burdens of the unemployed and is is not your place to demand that I do. Your attempt to paint me as evil is just like every other democRAT who sees conservatives as evil.
Maybe DU would be a better place to make your assertions.
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.