Are Jobless Benefits to Blame for High Unemployment?

[Fr3shjive]

I stole this poll from cnbc.com but I thought it'd be interesting to discuss on here.

[Fr3shjive]

Personally, for me, I've known several people who were/are unemployed who didnt work because they either werent offered enough at the jobs they applied for or they didnt have many expences so they just stayed out of work.

I was actually laid off in '08 and didnt work for 1 1/2 years while I attended school. If I didnt have those jobless benefits for such a long time I certainly would've been back to work much much sooner.

[ChaosControl]

No.

[Fr3shjive]

Personally, for me, I've known several people who were/are unemployed who didnt work because they either werent offered enough at the jobs they applied for or they didnt have many expences so they just stayed out of work.

I was actually laid off in '08 and didnt work for 1 1/2 years while I attended school. If I didnt have those jobless benefits for such a long time I certainly would've been back to work much much sooner.

On the other hand I know the economy is garbage but I do think that unemployment benefits are keeping many people who would normally be working out of the job market.

[Dr.3D]

Should have been a third option.

O Partially

[Brian Defferding]

They are only partly to blame. The biggest reason why it's high is because of the Federal Reserve's mortgage bubble and our government's spend-to-GDP ratio. But there is more than just those two as well, there is plenty of blame to go around.

[ravedown]

i personally know a couple dudes that are in no hurry to go back to work after being laid off, the unemployment benefits+ under the table cash are just too good to give up. government paycheck and no taxes ftw!

[Acala]

They are only partly to blame. The biggest reason why it's high is because of the Federal Reserve's mortgage bubble and our government's spend-to-GDP ratio.

^this

It's a depression. Collapse of the credit money supply. The market is shedding malinvestments.

I would say that minium wage laws that prevent wages from adjusting downward has more to do with unemployment than jobless benefits.

If government would get out of the way so assets could devalue and wages and prices could adjust, this thing would be over - except for the problem of debt, which will prove fatal no matter what.

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

Yes and NO.

The main culprit for the unemployment is the fact that the government is growing faster and bigger than the private sector, while depending on the private sector for money. All the fact that our economy is not fundamentally sound and needs a totally restructuring from the bottom up. I honestly don't see how unemployment can go down. In order for that to happen businesses have to be created and expanded, for that to happen capital is needed, for that to happen savings is needed, and the government is taking all the savings and all the money. Not to mention the government has created an environment where business are afraid to go in to risk by expanding and then going bankrupt.

But, at the same time jobs ARE available. I just read a report about some companies just cant find qualified individuals to hire. People need to realize that some of the sectors are gone and will never come back, so labor has to be re-allocated. The government is getting in the way of that by paying people not to work. Also, sometimes you have take a job that you don't want. For example, my girlfriend has been on unemployment for a year already, she has been one countless interviews with no luck. But she is trying to move laterally when she might just have to move down. For example, she actually got hired at a Dry Cleaners, she went for the first day, found out how much she was making, and quit. She figured, shit...this is less than what I'm making from my unemployment so I may as well keep looking for something better. She hasn't had a job offer since. So now, not only do some businesses have to complete with other businesses, but they have to compete with the government.

Unemployment benefits need to stop, but at the same time the government has to take the proper steps to reinvigorate our private sector.

TBPS
:cool:

[noxagol]

Partly. Unemployement benefits will have people passing jobs for less than they want to make for longer, because they can do that. If they didn't get the gubmint money, they would have to accept a job a lot sooner than they would with it.

[sevin]

Terrible poll. I won't vote because it's not a simple yes or no question.

Yes, unemployment is higher when jobless benefits are extended, but there are multiple reasons for high unemployment right now.

[Ekrub]

I've seen plenty of people around me complain about not being able to find a job while they are on unemployment, and then BOOM! Unemployment runs out, they have a job. Must be some wierd coincidence.

[Kregisen]

Everyone is correct......it's stupid to have a yes or no poll on this.

Unemployment benefits did not create the recession, and right now so many people and trying for so few jobs it isn't having a big affect, but yes, it destroys some incentive for people to go back to work.

And whoever said the minimum wage laws have more to do with unemployment, yes....if we got rid of minimum wage laws we'd probably have atleast another million jobs. It would certainly help at a time like this.


I'm against unemployment benefits entirely as it's not the government's role and thus is stealing from citizens.

[oyarde]

I think everything that has ran through congress recently is enough to prevent business from hiring even if they need to.There will be no changes in unemployment.

[michaelwise]

Is selling your stuff on the internet considered employment? I've been getting by, by selling some of my stuff on Craigslist.
http://fortmyers.craigslist.org/lee/fuo/1879772381.html

http://hosting11.imagecross.com/image-hosting-43/1141Coffee-Table10.JPG

[charrob]

No.

[michaelwise]

Is selling your stuff on the internet considered employment? I've been getting by, by selling some of my stuff on Craigslist.
http://fortmyers.craigslist.org/lee/fuo/1879772381.html

http://hosting11.imagecross.com/image-hosting-43/1141Coffee-Table10.JPGThe coolest coffee table in America, No?

[Vessol]

Partially. There are a lot of factors, the biggest being minimum wage laws.

There is often the more simple fact that you get more being unemployed than you do at many low income jobs.

[WaltM]

not entirely, but partially.

high wages are also to blame.

[WaltM]

The coolest coffee table in America, No?

coolest I've seen in a long time

good question, what counts as "employed"?

If you are a self sufficient farmer never paid in cash, is that employed?

Are retired people who live on their pensions unemployed?

[WaltM]

Terrible poll. I won't vote because it's not a simple yes or no question.

Yes, unemployment is higher when jobless benefits are extended, but there are multiple reasons for high unemployment right now.

keeping in mind, not all unemployment is bad.

[michaelwise]

coolest I've seen in a long time
I once thought it was the cross section of the tree of liberty. See the blood in it?

[Lovecraftian4Paul]

Not to blame, but it doesn't help the problem. We forget so easily that real unemployment isn't a mere 9.5%. There's at least 5% more not counted and not getting the benefits who are out of work because the work isn't htere.

[Live_Free_Or_Die]

taxation + regulation = increased costs = harder to compete for capital = less jobs

[squarepusher]

unemployment benefits hasn't changed in the pat few years, but unemployment has .

[RideTheDirt]

YouTube - ‪Why You Are Unemployed - Part 1‬‎ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6G1rq5LdA4&feature=player_embedded)
there ya go

[TheBlackPeterSchiff]

YouTube - ‪Why You Are Unemployed - Part 1‬‎ (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m6G1rq5LdA4&feature=player_embedded)
there ya go

epic

[michaelwise]

I call it "Legislative Saturation", Sort of like Debt Saturation. The system just can't handle any more rules and regulations, fines, fees, taxes, penalties, etc, etc, etc.

[newbitech]

no. When you start seeing hiring in the 700,000 - 800,000 a month range, then it will be time to blame something else besides the job market on an individual being unemployed. Until then, the job market it fooked because credit reached a ceiling. There is only so much credit to be taken out of the system to pay employees with..

That is what people don't seem to get about this little problem we have been in for the last 5 years now. When the unemployment rate was at 3%, how do you think companies were paying for that payroll? If you said borrowed money, you are absolutely correct. But wait, where did that borrowed money come from? If you said selling government bonds to China, again you are absolutely correct.

So whether you were collecting unemployment for the last 5 years, or working a real honest to goodness job, chances are you are getting your fiat from a loan that will be added to the national deficit and have to be repaid or inflated away. Have fun bitching at unemployed people collecting their fake money credit. I say, these are the ones smart enough to know that working for nothing is exactly the same as not working for nothing. So what are you people working for? Heh.. too bad...

[Golding]

Partly, yes. I'm related (sadly) to someone who has been unemployed and collecting benefits for well over a year now. Not for lack of jobs, but for lack of will to work. Though he declares that he is seeking employment, he really isn't. We're talking a lazy middle-classer who collects checks from the state on so many bogus arguments...

"I paid into the program, so I should be able to get money from it."
"I could get a job that pays ____, or take care of the kids and be paid a comparable amount" (though not really all that comparable)

It's going to be a little bit of a wake-up call when he eventually does look for a job (when the checks run out), and people inquire about the glaring hole in his work experience.

Saddest part is that the wife is stuck. She actually works, and a divorce would result in him getting free checks from her. I'm not saying that everyone taking unemployment has that motivation, but anyone who thinks that the lazy aren't protected by the state is naive.

[michaelwise]

Partly, yes. I'm related (sadly) to someone who has been unemployed and collecting benefits for well over a year now. Not for lack of jobs, but for lack of will to work. Though he declares that he is seeking employment, he really isn't. We're talking a lazy middle-classer who collects checks from the state on so many bogus arguments...

"I paid into the program, so I should be able to get money from it."
"I could get a job that pays ____, or take care of the kids and be paid a comparable amount" (though not really all that comparable)

It's going to be a little bit of a wake-up call when he eventually does look for a job (when the checks run out), and people inquire about the glaring hole in his work experience.

Saddest part is that the wife is stuck. She actually works, and a divorce would result in him getting free checks from her. I'm not saying that everyone taking unemployment has that motivation, but anyone who thinks that the lazy aren't protected by the state is naive.I've been unemployed since 03/06 willfully, I quit. Listen to what the previous poster said;



So whether you were collecting unemployment for the last 5 years, or working a real honest to goodness job, chances are you are getting your fiat from a loan that will be added to the national deficit and have to be repaid or inflated away. Have fun bitching at unemployed people collecting their fake money credit. I say, these are the ones smart enough to know that working for nothing is exactly the same as not working for nothing. So what are you people working for? Heh.. too bad...

Only for me, I ain't been collecting anything from the government. I've been living off of savings. I knew I would never get ahead while working as a machinist even while living with my mother, if I didn't do something radical. I campaigned for Ron Paul to try to fix things. That didn't work out so well so I just bided my time till the real estate crash settled hard in Florida. Last November I negotiated a great price on a foreclosed property and bought a 2006, 1900sf place for 10 cents on the dollar. Paid cash 32K. If I kept working a shlub job, that purchase would have never happened. I wouldn't of had time to work the system to prepare for the economic collapse by getting a paid off house of my own. And yes I did know the RE collapse in Florida was going to be devastating because I did my research.

No one has a chance in this economy to get ahead anymore unless you are bright enough to think of some pretty creative ways of doing it. And I agree, it doesn't pay to work the average job just like Golding indicated. Cut your overhead any way you can and if you have a chance to take free money from the system, take it. The system will soon have a complete and total collapse anyway. Stop feeding the beast. For some, work as little as possible and get ready any way you can.

[michaelwise]

Bump

[libertarian4321]

In a few cases, yes, but in most cases, no.

There are a small percentage of people who can afford to live on unemployment long term and call it "funemployment"- those with significant cash reserves.

However, for most people, unemployment checks just don't cover the bills. Remember, they are always just a fraction of what your previous salary was, and in most states top out at around $400.

Not many people can afford to just "hang out" on $400 a week or less. Certainly the vast majority of Americans, who have few liquid assets, can not.

[Natalie]

This reminds me of something my brother posted on his facebook. He said something like, "When you pay people not to work, and tax them when they do, don't be surprised when you get unemployment." I'm not sure if he stole that quote.

[aGameOfThrones]

This reminds me of something my brother posted on his facebook. He said something like, "When you pay people not to work, and tax them when they do, don't be surprised when you get unemployment." I'm not sure if he stole that quote.

Yeah he did. Though, I don't remember who said it, I've heard it before.

[Vessol]

Yeah he did. Though, I don't remember who said it, I've heard it before.

Milton Freidman

[speciallyblend]

I voted No, the idea people are living it up on unemployment is kinda of laughable!!! there is just not alot of work out there. if folks want to call that living it up. Then i suggest folks leave their jobs and try to live it up on unemployment benefits;) i double dare you!!

[aGameOfThrones]

Milton Freidman
Thanks! I thought it was him, but wasn't sure.

[speciallyblend]

In a few cases, yes, but in most cases, no.

There are a small percentage of people who can afford to live on unemployment long term and call it "funemployment"- those with significant cash reserves.

However, for most people, unemployment checks just don't cover the bills. Remember, they are always just a fraction of what your previous salary was, and in most states top out at around $400.

Not many people can afford to just "hang out" on $400 a week or less. Certainly the vast majority of Americans, who have few liquid assets, can not.

Thread Winner^^^^^^^^^^^ i think this post hits it the nail on the head the most!!

[squarepusher]

well, lets look at it this way. If jobless benefits didn't exist, than employees would be making more money.

[Koz]

I have two clients who are unemployed and are taking unemployment that I know of.

When it looked like the unempoyment payments weren't going to be extended she told me "Well, looks like I'll have to go find a job."

The other one is a bricklayer and he said "This is great, I'm working for cash under the table and still getting unemployment."

These are my only examples, but it appears that most people are gaming the system. End the payments and unemployment will go down, maybe not to 5%, but it will go down.

[newbitech]

In a few cases, yes, but in most cases, no.

There are a small percentage of people who can afford to live on unemployment long term and call it "funemployment"- those with significant cash reserves.

However, for most people, unemployment checks just don't cover the bills. Remember, they are always just a fraction of what your previous salary was, and in most states top out at around $400.

Not many people can afford to just "hang out" on $400 a week or less. Certainly the vast majority of Americans, who have few liquid assets, can not.

Its 275 in FL, make that 300 with the extra 25 a week. That's 7.50 an hour before taxes. Yeah, I don't see the vast majority of people deciding to take an extended vacation because of the awesome benefits, at least here in FL.

You'd need to be doing something else to support anything outside of shacking up with 4 other people and eating Raman and riding a bike. The evidence doesn't support jobless benefits being to blame for high unemployment. There may be some anecdotal evidence suggesting benefits are to blame, but the reality is, we don't even bother to count those people who don't collect those benefits in our stats.

Of course if there were no tiers extending to 99 weeks, then the amount of people we count as unemployed would be much much lower. Someone not collecting benefits and out of work is just as out of work as someone collecting benefits and applying for 3 jobs a day for months.

I'd put the broken credit system up against government handouts any day as the blame for joblessness. Of course both of these are still symptoms of the larger problem. I still say no, and I am glad there are still rational people out there who understand that there is no shame in taking back a small percentage in what the thief has stolen, and will steal in the future.

[newbitech]

I have two clients who are unemployed and are taking unemployment that I know of.

When it looked like the unempoyment payments weren't going to be extended she told me "Well, looks like I'll have to go find a job."

The other one is a bricklayer and he said "This is great, I'm working for cash under the table and still getting unemployment."

These are my only examples, but it appears that most people are gaming the system. End the payments and unemployment will go down, maybe not to 5%, but it will go down.

A lot of people are gaming the system. That is what the system was designed for. You'll get different views from different parts of the country because of the different amounts that get paid out.

I think you are wrong, ending unemployment won't make unemployment go down. You are using the headline number here which is why you think 5% is even close to being a realistic goal.

If unemployment is truly ended, you will need to do much more than just cut off people at the end of the line. You will also want to cut the payroll tax so that employers can actually keep their capital to hire those people who'll be in need of any pittance type of "pay" they can scrounge from what is left of slave labor market in the USA.

Oh and if you think 15-1 apps to jobs was bad in 2008-2009, wait till those 7 million people who are counted on full benefits hit that market. Not to mention that if they ever do find a job, they'll still be getting paid with the same borrowed money that funds UI, so in the end, it's still your grandkids paying for all the debt that is going to have to be created to get these people off the doll and on the payroll. It's the same shit either way you slice it. Don't believe the rumors that companies are sitting on hoards of cash. They might have the fiat, but you also need to look at their debt. Oh, and these are the large bailed out corps with the "cash". Forget the businesses that actually contribute the most to hiring. The small business is crushed in this country, utterly decimated. It will be a longgggg time before the headline number comes anywhere close to 5% if ever.