What should be done for the long term unemployed? (unemployment rate, interviews, Pelosi)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I have a number of friends and relatives who have been unemployed for over a year. These are middle aged people who up to 2008 were hard working professional college educated people who appeared to have a good life ahead of them. But in late 2008- early 2009 each of these people were laid off their jobs and ever since they have not been able to find anything.
These are people with good communications skills, an attractive professional appearance and highly intelligent. But for a variety of reasons they just can't seem to find a job. They live in a major metropolitan area where the economy is considered relatively average (Minneapolis area). They have got some interviews but someone else was hired or the job was put on hold.
So far these people have survived because of the generous unemployment insurance payments in Minnesota and the seemingly endless State and Federal Extensions of unemployment benefits. They have collected for over a year and still have some time left.
But eventually there is going to be an end to the benefits and their situation will likely be the same. If you can not find a job in 60 weeks, how will things be better in 80 weeks?
What is the responsibility of society and the taxpayers for these unemployed ex professionals. When should the government cut off the benefits for these people and what then?
This will be a good debate. Unfortunately, I do not have the answer. All these unemployed people need to be cut off for the sake of our country. My state just borrowed 332 million dollars at 4.9% APR because our unemployment fund has run dry. On the other hand, I do understand the job situation and I do not want anyone to become homeless and starve either. I am taking a neutral stance here.
I think at some point the benefits have to be cut off. The benefits are pretty generous compared to just a couple years ago, and it's a good investment to get people back to work. When I was laid off I did everything I can to find a job, including switching careers. It can be done, but in some fields people have to be a little more creative or just change to another viable field. Unfortunately a lot of mid-career professionals are too rigid in their ways.
I'm also puzzled why unemployment funds are running dry so fast. Employers have been paying into it for a long time now with low unemployment rates, did the underwriters of that insurance just get filthy rich with all that fund over the years?
I can only speak about California but the EDD (department who handles unemployment) is going to hire alot more people this summer. Since claims are lasting alot longer than before and more people are becoming unemployed daily, they need to hire more people.
From what I read, it can last well over a year now. I think that is insane! Back when I was 20, I was laid off and collected 6 months of unemployment. Now, times are way different than 4 years ago so I think 1 year is long enough. The issue is unemployment can pay you better than what many job postings are willing to pay if you had a good job. Take a massive cut from your prior job to get 10% more than unemployment? People worry about going backwards on their resumes and will good reason.
When I was laid off I did everything I can to find a job, including switching careers. It can be done, but in some fields people have to be a little more creative or just change to another viable field. Unfortunately a lot of mid-career professionals are too rigid in their ways.
That is not a solution to anything. All you did after you changed careers was take some other applicant's job, and leave him unemployed. If there are 100-million workers and only 90-million jobs, even if everybody changed careers and even went and got PhDs, there would still be ten million without work.
And the 90-million who have jobs would keep right on insisting that the other ten million are not deserving of dignity nor the basic necessities of life, and should be refused any income. The American Utopia.
I have a number of friends and relatives who have been unemployed for over a year. These are middle aged people who up to 2008 were hard working professional college educated people who appeared to have a good life ahead of them. But in late 2008- early 2009 each of these people were laid off their jobs and ever since they have not been able to find anything.
These are people with good communications skills, an attractive professional appearance and highly intelligent. But for a variety of reasons they just can't seem to find a job. They live in a major metropolitan area where the economy is considered relatively average (Minneapolis area). They have got some interviews but someone else was hired or the job was put on hold.
So far these people have survived because of the generous unemployment insurance payments in Minnesota and the seemingly endless State and Federal Extensions of unemployment benefits. They have collected for over a year and still have some time left.
But eventually there is going to be an end to the benefits and their situation will likely be the same. If you can not find a job in 60 weeks, how will things be better in 80 weeks?
What is the responsibility of society and the taxpayers for these unemployed ex professionals. When should the government cut off the benefits for these people and what then?
It is so simple.
The government should immediately reduce all tax rates, for all filers by at least 40% across-the-board, stop trying band-aid fixes such as stimulous bills which just further confuse the economy which adopts a "wait-and-see" attitude, and reduce regulator workload on the eonomy by 50%.
Government doesn't create jobs, and the private sector doesn't creaste jobs to put more people on the payroll. Businesses create jobs to make a profit, and must have a need for new employees and have a reasonable expectation that the demand for their product or service will be sufficient and enduring enough to require add'l employees.
Ths government is attempting to manage the economy the same way that McNamera and the whiz kids attempted to manage the war in Vietnam, and both were failures.
In short, get the hell out of the way, and take the parking brake off (reduce taxes substantially and across-the-board
But of course, none of this will happen for at least 3 years because the last thing the Triad of Gluttonous Government (Obama, Reid and Pelosi) is to relinquish any control whatsoever. In fact, the opposite is true - they want more power, more gluttony.
Nothing? What can you do? If they have the basic employable skills, then eventually most of them will get back on their feet. In the meantime, they will have to rely on family and whatever other local resources to keep them going. The society does not have any further responsibility beyond funding the basic unemployment benefits.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
