[T]he former speaker suggested that benefits were being abused by people who were more interested in living off the government dime than in finding actual work.
“It is fundamentally wrong to give people money for 99 weeks for doing nothing,” he said.
Most studies of unemployment insurance have showed that lethargy is not a side effect of providing help to the unemployed. The money that is being distributed simply doesn’t cover the salary lost from not having a job.
The Newster sticks his foot in his mouth again. Since when do the jobless get accused of being lazy. On the one hand there is much weeping, wailing and gnashing of teeth over joblessness and unemployment. Then there is the Newster who suggests that people are abusing being unemployed. Help me understand this.
No, actually it won’t be long before the statement reads ‘It is fundamentally wrong to give people money for 99 YEARS for doing nothing’, as the socialized support programs expand in this nation. Just spreading the wealth I guess. (I’m referring to those generations of NON-working welfare recipients.)
The jobless are just pawns in the Republicans attempt to defeat Obama. They’ll wail about joblessness and pity the poor people who are suffering – during their campaign spiels. But Newt let slip the real feeling about the jobless – con-artists and do-nothings.
And the Wealthy are just pawns of the Democrats. It’s the tax laws not the wealthy, but heaven forbid we chastise the government. No, we’ll make everyone believe it is the wealthy who are the problem since the wealthy and Republicans are one in the same, and then no one will vote to support the wealthy. So says the wealthy Democrat leaders!
I can’t even count the number of acquaintances and aquaintances-of-acquaintances who are openly taking a two year break to sharpen their video game and poker-playing skills while they can get by on the dole.
Newt isn’t the first to bring this up. Do some people take advantage of our nation’s social safety net? Of course. But the past few years conservatives have been pushing it suggesting that the payment of unemployment benefits causes significant higher unemployment.
The most outrageous was by Arthur Laffer himself. He wrote a column published by the Wall Street Journal a couple of years ago that included a graph. The graph showed that the unemployment rate and the total unemployment insurance payments increased at the same time. His conclusion was that unemployment benefit payments cause unemployment. See, the graph shows the correlation. Never in his column did he consider whether maybe the causal effect is actually the other way around.
But once they find a dead horse, they beat it until it’s unrecognizable. They’ve convinced themselves that people who dedicate their lives to educating our youth are evil greedy people.
@Slowpoke Rodriguez
You are a devil. 👿
Good point.
I do not think someone on unemployment is lazy, but people who are receiving an income, be it disability, severance, or unemployment are certainly more selective on the employment that they will accept – they will wait out until they get an employment offer that is close to what they want – ie, they will not take on part time work, or a low paying temporary job.
And, one does not have to file for benefits – if one thinks of unemployment insurance as a handout, one does not have to file and accept it.
They wont take on part time work because it casts them out of unemployment, often for less money.
I know very few people who have ever turned down a job because of unemployment. You don’t get that much money. Most people make like $17k a year on unemployment. Who can live on that?
The MOST unemployment will pay is 52% of your pre-separation wages — for people earning up to 45% of the state’s average weekly wage and then the replacement rate drops off for higher earners. The max was $365 a week or so the last time I checked.
The idea behind unemployment is that people, through no fault of their own, can lose their jobs. It also acts as an economic floor when you think about whole towns that lost their single major employer — groceries, banks, hospitals and the like would go bust a lot quicker.
@Moon-howler
I know people who live on less. A woman down the street from me lives on just over $900 a month. Of course she doesn’t own a late model car, one or more computers, heats her house with a wood burning stove, does most of her shopping at the Dollar Store and such places. But she makes it.
And yes, there are a lot of people who blame the unemployed for being unemployed–most of them seem to have (R) after their name.