If the dollar has little value, then donate a few.

Saturday, January 30, 2010

Two out of four options offered

Two options keep getting offered to keep unemployment benefits up and solvent. The two offered are:

1. Get a loan/go in debt to the federal government.

2. Increase taxes on job providers.

Some how the option to decrease benefits never seems to come up. Like it just does not exist. That it is a non option. What we are required to pay by the federal government is minuscule compared to what we do pay. So to say we can't cut benefits just is not so.

The other non mentioned option seems to be due to a lock in on the classic liberal thinking of the past. The backwards thinking that the only person who should be forced to pay for insurance is NOT the recipient of the service, but their employer.

If the option were similar to free market health insurance where the recipient pays for the benefit then people could shift their thinking away from:

"Who cares what happens to my employer. I get paid either way"


"What can I do to make sure my employer stays in business so I can keep a job"

Tough times call for tough smart measures. We need to get away from being hit with the old one, two punch of tax or borrow. It is not responsible.


  1. Problems funding unemployment insurance benefits will remain as long as individuals earn the same or more money drawing unemployment benefits than they would employed. It is human nature.
    Raising unemployment insurance premiums for employers is counter-productive.
    Perhaps quickly enacting a freeze allowing businesses to hire workers without guaranteeing them an unemployment benefit for two years but penalizing employers with the cost of the two years premium if they use that right to fire and rehire existing employees, might be the fastest way to take a burden off the fund ?


Here are the rules for comments. Know them. Live them.