We have a large number of American citizens on unemployment benefits right now. I believe the number to be somewhere in the millions. That’s not good, unless your a politician.
Lets face it, Unemployment and Welfare are being abused and used, but that’s what our current Government leaders want. You see; what’s happening is- Fred loses his job, files for Unemployment and slowly looks for work. Unemployment kicks in and he’s receiving the equivalent of $10 an hour based of his previous wages. So Fred looks for a job that pays at least $10/hr and refuses to take anything less.
So lets take Unemployment out of the equation and see what happens. This time, Frank loses his job. He was making say $13.50 an hour, 35 hours a week. Frank must quickly find a job to pay bills and eat. He cant find a job at that pay rate, so Frank takes a job at Wal-mart making $9 an hour.
You see Frank is still contributing to society, even if he must cut back on his spending. And while he works at Wal-mart he can continue searching for a better job.
Fred takes the easy way out and lets the government hold his hand. in this manner Fred is taking money from other tax payers, depleting the governments funds-which are already in the red. Those funds could have been used to hire someone.
I think Unemployment, while not a horrible idea, is out of control and should be limited or rewritten. Maybe a balance between Frank and Fred, maybe minimum wage for all who qualify? Or maybe require those who do qualify to work for their local municipalities?
Lets say we give Fred $500 a week for unemployment, provided he looks for work, but also is required to, lets say, 3 days a week clean or mow the local city funded park or in other words work for that money?
This is just some quick thinking. But it would seem Unemployment is an incentive not to work, or not to find a new job quickly-which in turn hurts the economy. Multiply that by millions of unemployed and ouch.
What do you think?
Posts
3 comments:
But what if Fred, who lost his job making $13.50 an hour and doesn't get unemployment benefits, now can't pay his mortgage and other obligations (let alone eat) for a couple or three months until he is able to land a job (even at walmart). The bank forecloses on his house, the housing market continues to deteriorate, he files bankruptcy, etc., which all costs businesses and banks - which gets passed on to consumers - and banks get government bailouts from taxpayer money, etc., etc. If Unemployment benefits, which are partially funded by taxes the employer pays, helps Fred get through those few months of job hunting - maybe it's worth it. And not all people collecting unemployment and/or welfare do so just to sponge off the government. Just my own quick thoughts
This article and the comments are good food for thought and dialogue.
If we say Business owners need a reasonable share of unemployment cost. Then the keyword is REASONABLE, in order to prosper,have continued growth,thus adding to their need to hire. The current threat of increased taxes, health insurance changes, etc.creates a burden on the employer possibly threatening the number of employees he/she can afford.
Finding a way to continue unemployement for those truly seeking work, while filtering out those using the system has some merit. Requiring an unemployed person to put in a couple of days on a state,city,county,or govt. facility, raises the question in my mind of how much the government would pay an administrator to oversee these unemployed temp. workers. This newly appointed position might be deemed necessary in order for the program to work efficiently thus causing more spending and less savings for the taxpayers. Just thoughts to ponder.
Problem is - if we require/ask those collecting unemployment to "put in a couple of days", would we not then be taking work away from someone else (who may be well qualified and really want to do that work). Best idea for government and business id to create an economic environment in which there are plenty of jobs. Personally, I think that the stock market is to blame. Used to be that entrepeneurs/businessmen employed people because they needed help and because it was a way of giving back to the community and generating econimic growth. Now, growth and success is entirely measured by stock earnings. It isn't enough to consistently show profit - businesses have to consistently show growth to keep stockholders happy. The easiest way to show growth (for stockholders), in a down economy, is to make cuts - including to the workforce.
Post a Comment