Finite.Straight-forward, simple question: Should the number of weeks one can receive unemployment benefits be finite or infinite? If you answer the former, what would you consider a reasonable length of time before benefits are cut-off?
2 years?I say the whole solution set is missing the boat. We should be hiring these people to do work that is needed. Short term unemployment should last for say, 2 years. After that, you get an option to join some kind of government work program that fits the job with your experience and skills. Say you are a programmer that cannot find a job. The government hires you after 2 years to mentor kids in high school or in community colleges. Solutions like this could keep people in the workforce while they are in tight straights and help the nation out at the same time. We need to be more creative.
Mr. Zam,Straight-forward, simple question: Should the number of weeks one can receive unemployment benefits be finite or infinite? If you answer the former, what would you consider a reasonable length of time before benefits are cut-off?
Who are you to judge when someone is not trying? In California, you must fill in a card every two weeks showing who you contacted, what happened, etc. If you do not fill it in and return it, no money. Two years is a good enough time to let someone have a chance at keeping their house and location while looking for work. Do you want a person to sell everything they have and take a job in retail making 10 bucks an hour just so you can feel good? I was out of work for 11 months, it's not easy finding a job sometimes. Of course, I could have taken a job that was offered at zero base, no benefits and the promise of millions in commissions if I wanted to work my ass off in a sweatshop. No thanks. This reveals one of the biggest problems with some economic thought, that labor is a moveable feast just looking for the right crumbs. Keynes argued quite correctly that labor will not move in direct proportion to supply because people are very reluctant to take a lower paying job until every option is exhausted. Since I have paid into the system on every paycheck since my first one in 1971, I think I deserve the dough. It kept us in our house. Are you sitting on millions waiting to buy up depressed assets?Mr. Zam,
40 weeks and that is being generous. If someone can't find a job after 10 months, they aren't trying.
Mr. Wolley,Who are you to judge when someone is not trying? In California, you must fill in a card every two weeks showing who you contacted, what happened, etc. If you do not fill it in and return it, no money. Two years is a good enough time to let someone have a chance at keeping their house and location while looking for work. Do you want a person to sell everything they have and take a job in retail making 10 bucks an hour just so you can feel good? I was out of work for 11 months, it's not easy finding a job sometimes. Of course, I could have taken a job that was offered at zero base, no benefits and the promise of millions in commissions if I wanted to work my ass off in a sweatshop. No thanks. This reveals one of the biggest problems with some economic thought, that labor is a moveable feast just looking for the right crumbs. Keynes argued quite correctly that labor will not move in direct proportion to supply because people are very reluctant to take a lower paying job until every option is exhausted. Since I have paid into the system on every paycheck since my first one in 1971, I think I deserve the dough. It kept us in our house. Are you sitting on millions waiting to buy up depressed assets?
I like the 26 weeks.Straight-forward, simple question: Should the number of weeks one can receive unemployment benefits be finite or infinite? If you answer the former, what would you consider a reasonable length of time before benefits are cut-off?
I like the 26 weeks.
Then if certain economic numbers show it is a recession then make it a year.
Remember unemployment is allowing the unemployed person the time to not just find any job, it is allowing them to find a job in their career field that pays a similar amount of money to the one they lost.That seems reasonable. I believe in helping people out, but at some point they have to make an effort to help themselves. I'm 56 years old, and I've always had a job of some kind since I was 14. When I hear someone claim they can't find a job in over a year, it just doesn't sound right to me.
Remember also your job paid into unemployment so that if you became unemployed you would be able to retain your assets while you looked for comparable work. It is not an entitlement necessarily, you had to pay into it in order to draw out the benefit if needed.That seems reasonable. I believe in helping people out, but at some point they have to make an effort to help themselves. I'm 56 years old, and I've always had a job of some kind since I was 14. When I hear someone claim they can't find a job in over a year, it just doesn't sound right to me.
If the number of weeks that unemployment benefits can be received after one loses one's job is infinite, then a person can feasibly work a while, get laid off and then retire on unemployment.Straight-forward, simple question: Should the number of weeks one can receive unemployment benefits be finite or infinite? If you answer the former, what would you consider a reasonable length of time before benefits are cut-off?
Actually you have to submit online at least two places per week that you submitted your resume to. At least in Ohio. In order to receive unemployment.If the number of weeks that unemployment benefits can be received after one loses one's job is infinite, then a person can feasibly work a while, get laid off and then retire on unemployment.
Of course that infinite unemployment money thing is a non-sustainable arrangement. I believe that 3 months is a fair - longer than fair - amount of time to receive unemployment compensation and find a job to replace the one lost.
Remember also your job paid into unemployment so that if you became unemployed you would be able to retain your assets while you looked for comparable work. It is not an entitlement necessarily, you had to pay into it in order to draw out the benefit if needed.
Remember unemployment is allowing the unemployed person the time to not just find any job, it is allowing them to find a job in their career field that pays a similar amount of money to the one they lost.
If they were just trying to find any job, then yes, a year would be hard to believe.
I was unemployed from the Defense Department when the president made a 10% cut across the board and I was a contractor so we were first to go. Then I found a comparable job in 30 days. But the company that hired me said my start date would be 45 days later. The Friday before I was supposed to start the parent copany put up a hiring freeze on all of their subsidiaries and I never did work there. So then I was unemployed for 75 days and basically had to restart the job search. Strange things can happen.
No that's 75 days and I had to restart the job search. Basically 75 days wasted.Yes indeed. 75 days, however, is a long way from one year, or even 26 weeks.
The strawman argument that perfectly describes the way right wingers think, well done Jen. Unemployment for life, that is precious. The resounding error in right wing economic ideology is to extrapolate the individual to the macro economy. This is how you get logic supporting austerity at the national level. But somewhere along the way, cooler more rational heads realize that your spending is my income. If you don't have money, I can't sell you anything.If the number of weeks that unemployment benefits can be received after one loses one's job is infinite, then a person can feasibly work a while, get laid off and then retire on unemployment.
Of course that infinite unemployment money thing is a non-sustainable arrangement. I believe that 3 months is a fair - longer than fair - amount of time to receive unemployment compensation and find a job to replace the one lost.
The strawman argument that perfectly describes the way right wingers think, well done Jen. Unemployment for life, that is precious. The resounding error in right wing economic ideology is to extrapolate the individual to the macro economy. This is how you get logic supporting austerity at the national level. But somewhere along the way, cooler more rational heads realize that your spending is my income. If you don't have money, I can't sell you anything.
Three months to find a job. I can't wait for the GOP to run on this platform. Please convince your party of choice to adopt your advice.
Finite.Straight-forward, simple question: Should the number of weeks one can receive unemployment benefits be finite or infinite? If you answer the former, what would you consider a reasonable length of time before benefits are cut-off?