On Slackers
Further down the Member Feed, Kenneth kindly goes to bat for those on unemployment insurance, defending their rightness in utilizing the program. He wraps up by saying that those who disparage the unemployed as slackers "might be a little too removed from the struggles of everyday blue-collar workers."
As it happens, I've been immersed in the blue-collar world my entire working life. Please consider: Of the two dozen or so of my acquaintances who have collected unemployment, every single one--not most, every single one--has gamed the system. They disgust me, but it's the system that corrupts. Most often the con involves working for cash while running out the string on benefits--the longer the string, the longer the run--then going "on the books" only after the government checks stop. Similarly, workers who are laid off in the Ohio winter (cement contractors, landscapers, carpenters) happily increase their salaries every Dec-thru-March by plowing snow or taking side jobs for cash while indulging in their annual can't-find-a-job ruse.
I can't speak from experience in the white collar world, but I suspect good people are corrupted there as well--even if only by being encouraged to reject a lesser job (even a blue collar one) for a time. If it looks bad on a resume, tough: It's a dignified option that earlier, more responsible generations would have resorted to with merely a shrug.
So is my sample, through some crazy statistical anomaly, atypical, or are the libertarians right on this one? I strongly suspect the latter.
[Update: cleaned up a grammatically awkward sentence; nothing else.]
- Comment (44)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jul '10
Re: On Slackers
I'm stunned, Scott. This makes me feel incredibly naive. Honestly, that's a whole different universe that I've never seen.
Dec '10
Re: On Slackers
Excellent post. My inclination is to trust that those who apply for the program need it. And I still believe that many do need it. But, I admit I know of several people who are gaming the system, one by running an ebay business in someone else's name, which really bothers me. At least in this case the online business only supplements his unemployment. I suspect that many who are gaming the system are only supplementing and wouldn't make it otherwise--but maybe that is my chosen naivete.
I dont suppose the government keeps numbers on the abuse rates of its own programs.
Sep '10
Re: On Slackers
I've had almost exactly the same experience, Scott.
May '10
Re: On Slackers
This heartens me, since it suggests the corruption isn't as severe in all segments of society. Maybe it's just more subtle elsewhere; we're all humans afterall.
And I suppose in the corporate world the "under the table" options are fewer.
Jul '10
Re: On Slackers
Scott Reusser
This heartens me, since it suggests the corruption isn't as severe in all segments of society. Maybe it's just more subtle elsewhere; we're all humans afterall.
And I suppose in the corporate world the "under the table" options are fewer. · Dec 9 at 12:08pm
Yes, the options in the corporate world would be far fewer. And in the construction trades, you can have a history of off-and-on employment that would spell doom on a white-collar resume.
Edited on Dec 9, 2010 at 12:14pmAug '10
Re: On Slackers
I do not know enough about the American system to really comment. That being said, I submit that I'm relatively happy with the way Canada's Employment Insurance works:
FAQ
Sep '10
Re: On Slackers
Yes, this is also my understanding, there is a lot of gaming the system. And there are no doubt many who aren't. I was on unemployment decades ago and I hated it.
Oct '10
Re: On Slackers
I am in favor of a non government funded unemployment insurance system such as Mistheocracy describes. I am not in favor of a government funded or subsidized system (e.g. Social Security) that is just another form of wealth redistribution.
As a society we have become entrapped in a system wherein other spheres of government have abdicated responsibility to "love their neighbor as themselves" or have had that responsibility usurped by various forms of civil government which now have demanded so much in taxes, that it becomes difficult for individuals to support others financially in addition to what they are contributing in taxes.
Edited on Dec 9, 2010 at 12:35pmSep '10
Re: On Slackers
Its worse - the big 3 automakers in Canada used to have a nudge nudge wink wink arrangement with the federal government to coordinate layoffs and EI payments so that they could lighten their workforces at taxpayer expense quite often.
Sep '10
Re: On Slackers
I used to know a landscaper who would be "unemployed" in the winter. That is when he would brag that he got his MBA, Maximum Benefit Amount (which in NJ is $600 a week).
Re: On Slackers
If this turns out to be typical (and I'm not sure how you'd be able to get dependable data that supports that it is -- or that it isn't), that's a good argument for reform of this particular entitlement. As it stands, the argument that unemployment benefits "cost too much" doesn't resonate with many people because it not only sounds heartless, but because unemployment insurance could possibly be considered government investment. The idea here would be that the government invests in an unemployed worker today in order to reap an employed worker's taxes tomorrow.
May '10
Re: On Slackers
As long as the taxpayers don't pay for other people's unemployment insurance.
Aug '10
Re: On Slackers
While this is true, it is also true that since 1990 the E.I. fund has not received any contributions from general tax revenue. All the funding is from workers' E.I. premium payments.
So while I agree that it is distasteful for employers to coordinate layoffs with the ebb and flow of the E.I. system, I don't necessarily agree that it's at "taxpayer expense" (except insofar that E.I. premiums are a form of tax). I'm also not convinced that it means those layoffs wouldn't have happened anyway, so why NOT coordinate the timing to reduce the amount of harm?
Also, the auto manufacturing towns are among some of the areas with the lowest levels of unemployment, so the duration of benefits is at the lower end.
(Say, Pseudo, wanna go halfsies with me on the cost of launching a Ricochet.ca satellite web site? I kid! I kid! ;-)
Edited on Dec 9, 2010 at 6:27pmJul '10
Re: On Slackers
They do, Michael. The tax paid by individual employees and their employers is very low and it caps out at a very low level of income - around $14,000, in most instances.
In normal economic times, you might be able to call this "insurance", but the fact is that in most recessions, the "premiums" paid in by all workers are soon exhausted and the balance of benefits are paid from general tax revenues (or by China).
May '10
Re: On Slackers
Kenneth
They do, Michael. The tax paid by individual employees and their employers is very low and it caps out at a very low level of income - around $14,000, in most instances.
In normal economic times, you might be able to call this "insurance", but the fact is that in most recessions, the "premiums" paid in by all workers are soon exhausted and the balance of benefits are paid from general tax revenues (or by China). · Dec 9 at 6:36pm
Well, then down with unemployment insurance.
Jul '10
Re: On Slackers
Unemployment insurance, along with public schools and social security, was the invention of Otto von Bismarck.
Damn those Krauts!
May '10
Re: On Slackers
Kenneth: Unemployment insurance, along with public schools and social security, was the invention of Otto von Bismarck.
Damn those Krauts!
Not everything that's German is efficient. Social security needlessly reduces the supply of financial capital, public schools continue to produce non-educational services because their taxpayer-ensured existence is not contingent upon solid performance against competitors, and unemployment insurance subsidizes unemployment. Was ist das?
Aug '10
Re: On Slackers
Kenneth: Unemployment insurance, along with public schools and social security, was the invention of Otto von Bismarck.
Damn those Krauts!
To be fair, Bismarck had a bit of sense setting the retirement age at 65 since, at the time, the average life expectancy in Germany was ... 65. If the retirement age was automatically adjusted to match average life expectancy it would be a heck of a lot more sustainable! ;-)
Aug '10
Re: On Slackers
Kenneth: Unemployment insurance, along with public schools and social security, was the invention of Otto von Bismarck.
Damn those Krauts!
Eh, but H.L. Mencken considered them to have the ideal state...
May '10
Re: On Slackers
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Kenneth: Unemployment insurance, along with public schools and social security, was the invention of Otto von Bismarck.
Damn those Krauts!
Eh, but H.L. Mencken considered them to have the ideal state... · Dec 9 at 6:52pm
Mencken was opposed to the welfare state.