Long-term jobless 'could face compulsory manual labour'

[Son of Liberty]

+1

You don't earn or accrue unemployment rights. It is a scheme for government to tax business in the name of social justice.

I think any unemployment benefits received should be repaid dollar for dollar as soon as you start working again. Payroll deduction would be acceptable. That way there is some skin in the game to get a job quickly, because you know you are going to have to restorethe temporary loan the government gave you.

It's the difference between a hand up and a hand out.

So now I would owe my the government MORE money, ontop of what they already take?
Where does the money go that I pay back, to the busniesses and folks that may have taken my job from me?

What happens to you when there are no jobs to be had? Or any job you can get barely feeds the kids, and you want to take more of it to give to whomever.

 

[Joe Williams]

Slavery returns to Britain.

That statement is simply an outrageous distortion. This isn't slavery. This is people being required to work for the money they are taking from the taxpayers.

They don't have to do the work if they don't want to. Of course, they won't get any money, either.

 

[jbombelli]

That statement is simply an outrageous distortion. This isn't slavery. This is people being required to work for the money they are taking from the taxpayers.

They don't have to do the work if they don't want to. Of course, they won't get any money, either.

Shhhh...

Some people, even around HERE, think that unemployment and/or welfare should have no limits. Once you work for a year, they think you're entitled to unemployment compensation for the rest of your life if that's how long it takes to find a job.

That seems like a good deal. How do *I* get in on it?

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

So now I would owe my the government MORE money, ontop of what they already take?
Where does the money go that I pay back, to the busniesses and folks that may have taken my job from me?

What happens to you when there are no jobs to be had? Or any job you can get barely feeds the kids, and you want to take more of it to give to whomever.

Come on, you didn't think they just poofed some free cash out of the air if you're on unemployment did you?

Unemployment benefits are paid by taxpayers. That's me and the other 48% of people that pay taxes. If you're on unemployment it's not you.

Why should I and everyone else give you free money to live on? Did we birth you? Did we raise you? Did we tell you to get the education you got, and to do the job you chose? Did we make you not save for a rainy day? Did we tell you to have kids or how many? Why should the producer and working class pay for the non-working class?

The ONLY way unemployment benefits are fair (there's that four-letter F word) are to treat it like a loan. If you receive benefits, they should be returned. Not with interest, but paid back nonetheless.

What's wrong with paying back money you received for doing nothing?

 

[miguel]

Remember the CCC, baby!

Paint that wall white today and the next group paints it tan the next day. Repeat.

Civilian Conservation Corps - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[dross]

Come on, you didn't think they just poofed some free cash out of the air if you're on unemployment did you?

Unemployment benefits are paid by taxpayers. That's me and the other 48% of people that pay taxes. If you're on unemployment it's not you.

Why should I and everyone else give you free money to live on? Did we birth you? Did we raise you? Did we tell you to get the education you got, and to do the job you chose? Did we make you not save for a rainy day? Did we tell you to have kids or how many? Why should the producer and working class pay for the non-working class?

The ONLY way unemployment benefits are fair (there's that four-letter F word) are to treat it like a loan. If you receive benefits, they should be returned. Not with interest, but paid back nonetheless.

What's wrong with paying back money you received for doing nothing?

I'm good with that. Let's get the government out of it. Let me pay for unemployment insurance out of my own pocket if I want it. Let charity take care of people who find themselves unemployed. Foreclose on their house if they can't make the payment.

I'm good with all those things.

Right now, however, unemployment insurance isn't a choice. As I've explained above, it's part of my total compensation my employer is forced to pay on my behalf. As long as they are using force to run their programs, I have no problem with the people who exploit every flaw in the coercive system to benefit themselves. They have force, we have guile.

Get the government out of business, and this particular problem goes away.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

I'm good with that. Let's get the government out of it. Let me pay for unemployment insurance out of my own pocket if I want it. Let charity take care of people who find themselves unemployed. Foreclose on their house if they can't make the payment.

I'm good with all those things.

Right now, however, unemployment insurance isn't a choice. As I've explained above, it's part of my total compensation my employer is forced to pay on my behalf. As long as they are using force to run their programs, I have no problem with the people who exploit every flaw in the coercive system to benefit themselves. They have force, we have guile.

Get the government out of business, and this particular problem goes away.

I agree that government has no business redistributing wealth from the working class to the non-working class.

You've explained your position that it's part of your compensation. I disagree. It's not a line item on your wage statement. If unemployment insurance payments went away tomorrow it is unlikely any wage earners would see a raise. It's a employer's cost of hiring you.

I do agree that your position, a reasonable one I simply disagree with, justifies and rationalizes the collection of unemployment benefits in the event of unemployment. More and better the reason to eliminate it.

 

[dross]

I do agree that your position, a reasonable one I simply disagree with, justifies and rationalizes the collection of unemployment benefits in the event of unemployment. More and better the reason to eliminate it.

Hold it, now I'm confused. You seriously think it's possible to disagree with someone and still find their position reasonable?

Clearly you have a screw loose somewhere.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Hold it, now I'm confused. You seriously think it's possible to disagree with someone and still find their position reasonable?

Clearly you have a screw loose somewhere.

Truth be known I'm about 55% against your position. It's compelling, just not compelling enough. I'm not 100% for or against most things. I guess that's why I'm an on-staff statist.

It's a character flaw. I listen. I process. I decide. I execute. I learn. Rinse and repeat.

 

[ATOMonkey]

I don't think removing minimum wage would have much practical effect. In most places, the market has set a higher wage than the minimum wage. I agree with abolishing it on philosophical grounds, but I don't think it would have much practical effect.

Also, unemployment benefits, welfare, and other programs actually pay better or close enough to minimum wage to further pressure any effect it might have.

The premise, which may be faulty, is that there is work to be done. If there is no work to be done, then employing someone to lean on a shovel is the same thing as paying him to sit at home.

Now, if there is work to be done, why isn't it being done? Are labor costs too high? Maybe. I don't think we can discount the fact that more labor can be done at a lower cost to the employer.

Anywho... Just one man's rambling.

 

[radonc73]

While it is concidered a slippery slope by some why if the Gov/ us are paying these people like employees should they not expect work to be done by able bodied employees. I am not talking about people who are injured or have a medical condition that prevents them from working, I am talking about having those who receive unemployment benifits go pickup trash for 8 hours a week or repaint curbs, something worthwhile. Even if it is watching other unemployed peoples kids in a centeralized daycare for those who are out doing their 8 hours/ wk.
I know that ANY Gov. program has its fraud waste and abuse but so do most private companies.

 

[dross]

The premise, which may be faulty, is that there is work to be done. If there is no work to be done, then employing someone to lean on a shovel is the same thing as paying him to sit at home.

Now, if there is work to be done, why isn't it being done? Are labor costs too high? Maybe. I don't think we can discount the fact that more labor can be done at a lower cost to the employer.

Anywho... Just one man's rambling.

There is always work to be done. Is there someone willing to pay to get it done? Is there somene willing to do the work for the price someone else is willing to pay?

I have some work that needs to be done right now. I can't afford to pay for it at the moment. The price I'd have to pay is too high. I'd happily pay below minimum wage for it, but I won't be able to find anyone.

There isn't that much work to be done that requires skills that pay minimum wage or below.

Also, as I mentioned up thread other things compete for minimum wage labor, and certainly for any labor someone could get for below minimum wage. Begging, unemployment insurance, welfare, family helping, moving in with parents all compete with minimum wage.

 

[rambone]

While it is concidered a slippery slope by some why if the Gov/ us are paying these people like employees should they not expect work to be done by able bodied employees.

Why if the Government provides us all with health care should they not expect us to work for it? What if the Government destroys your job and pushes your country into a depression? Becoming a serf will seem like a viable option. This is how you enslave a populace.

​

Everybody has these pie in the sky ideas that people will be doing something useful and get training for the private sector. LOL! What government are you ruled by, people? It certainly doesn't seem likely in Britain and it doesn't seem likely if it were in the United States.

It seems like people suddenly can become a fan of Big Government as long as they feel somebody is being punished in the process. I'm not a fan of this idea, it still looks like Big Government to me, only now they are holding whips. Oh, and now you also have to use taxpayer money to pay people to hold the whips to keep the slaves working. Costs just went up.

I am not talking about people who are injured or have a medical condition that prevents them from working,

What makes this fair then? Who decides who has a medical condition, Government doctors? Is there any chance this will be selectively enforced to target unfavored demographics of people? HMM... ?

When did everybody gain so much faith in Government??

 

[Son of Liberty]

Come on, you didn't think they just poofed some free cash out of the air if you're on unemployment did you?

Unemployment benefits are paid by taxpayers. That's me and the other 48% of people that pay taxes. If you're on unemployment it's not you.

Why should I and everyone else give you free money to live on? Did we birth you? Did we raise you? Did we tell you to get the education you got, and to do the job you chose? Did we make you not save for a rainy day? Did we tell you to have kids or how many? Why should the producer and working class pay for the non-working class?

The ONLY way unemployment benefits are fair (there's that four-letter F word) are to treat it like a loan. If you receive benefits, they should be returned. Not with interest, but paid back nonetheless.

What's wrong with paying back money you received for doing nothing?

Unemployment is paid by business owners, it is a myth that its paid by the tax payers.
However, assume in fact that it was paid by the tax payers, then that would make a certain portion of the money mine, correct?
Because while working and even while on unemployment, I would be paying taxes, so I am in fact paying myself.
I worked for sixteen years before I ever touched unemployment, using your logic, every cent I collect from unemployment should be my own money, not yours or anyone else's.


None of that matters though because none of you, unless you are a business owner pays into unemployment. Your employer does on your behalf.

If it did work the way you thought it did, the way it would be fair would be that every person's individual contribution would be keep track of, and that is what they would draw from. Their own contributions.l

 

[mrjarrell]

Unemployment is paid by business owners, it is a myth that its paid by the tax payers.
However, assume in fact that it was paid by the tax payers, then that would make a certain portion of the money mine, correct?
Because while working and even while on unemployment, I would be paying taxes, so I am in fact paying myself.
I worked for sixteen years before I ever touched unemployment, using your logic, every cent I collect from unemployment should be my own money, not yours or anyone else's.


None of that matters though because none of you, unless you are a business owner pays into unemployment. Your employer does on your behalf.

If it did work the way you thought it did, the way it would be fair would be that every person's individual contribution would be keep track of, and that is what they would draw from. Their own contributions.l

Actually, as of now the taxpayer IS covering unemployment benefits in Indiana. The Unemployment benefits had to be bailed out by "federal" dollars, because of shortfalls in the the states coffers.

 

[dross]

Unemployment is paid by business owners, it is a myth that its paid by the tax payers.
However, assume in fact that it was paid by the tax payers, then that would make a certain portion of the money mine, correct?
Because while working and even while on unemployment, I would be paying taxes, so I am in fact paying myself.
I worked for sixteen years before I ever touched unemployment, using your logic, every cent I collect from unemployment should be my own money, not yours or anyone else's.


None of that matters though because none of you, unless you are a business owner pays into unemployment. Your employer does on your behalf.

If it did work the way you thought it did, the way it would be fair would be that every person's individual contribution would be keep track of, and that is what they would draw from. Their own contributions.l

It's paid by the unemployment insurance that is part of the total compensation of the employee. The check is written by the employer, yes, but to say that he pays it is too simplistic.

All the costs of doing business are paid by the customer.

Unemployment has another wrinkle, which is that if the fund runs dry, which has pretty much happened in every state, the taxpayers make up the difference.

So, the final consumer and the taxpayer pay the cost, but in the internal distribution, it's part of the total cost of that employee, hence it is part of his compensation.

 

[Randall Flagg]

The Unemployment benefits had to be bailed out by "federal" dollars, because of shortfalls in the the states coffers.

Key word here is "federal dollars" aka, fake money printed from nothing and added to our overall debt.

so the question then becomes would i rather have my tax dollars paying for one of you to feed their kid, or go towards that 600 dollar hammer the pentagon just bought from their buddies company?

Not such a hard choice now is it?

 

[ATOMonkey]

There is always work to be done. Is there someone willing to pay to get it done? Is there somene willing to do the work for the price someone else is willing to pay?

I have some work that needs to be done right now. I can't afford to pay for it at the moment. The price I'd have to pay is too high. I'd happily pay below minimum wage for it, but I won't be able to find anyone.

There isn't that much work to be done that requires skills that pay minimum wage or below.

Also, as I mentioned up thread other things compete for minimum wage labor, and certainly for any labor someone could get for below minimum wage. Begging, unemployment insurance, welfare, family helping, moving in with parents all compete with minimum wage.

Well, there you go. End unemployment benefits and welfare, end the minimum wage, and we've solved unemployment.

 

[dross]

Well, there you go. End unemployment benefits and welfare, end the minimum wage, and we've solved unemployment.

And perhaps the illegal immigration issue, as well.

 

[CarmelHP]

Unemployment has another wrinkle, which is that if the fund runs dry, which has pretty much happened in every state, the taxpayers make up the difference.

Actually, the other wrinkle is that if the state borrower can not repay the federal subsidies, the feds can impose an employer tax, one much greater than now in place, to recoup the borrowing. Nice, ain't it?