Is Unemployment Programs Making it Hard for me to Hire?

[Rickster71]

I thought electricians were smarter than that.

No, I hear they mostly rely on their looks.

I should clarify, the guys I spoke to were owners / contractors, not employees. One was a fire sprinkler contractor.
Since then I've run into plumbing and HVAC Co. (owners) that said the same thing; potential workers want to exhaust their UI extensions first. It's a rarity that UI has been extended as long as it has this time around, so I guess guys want to use it up. Also, the guys I'm talking about aren't union.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Just don't let your wife catch you again...

Now you tell me.

 

[tcarcio]

This is one of the reasons America is going broke. Entitlements and cradle to grave benefits are some others. I have an idea, If you collect unemployment how about you work for the town or city. I am sure if some people thought they had to go and paint the town hall or rake leaves in the town park everyday they might find another job a little faster......Ya think..

 

[Alex2507]

This is one of the reasons America is going broke. Entitlements and cradle to grave benefits are some others. I have an idea, If you collect unemployment how about you work for the town or city. I am sure if some people thought they had to go and paint the town hall or rake leaves in the town park everyday they might find another job a little faster......Ya think..

... but then I wouldn't have time to hang out at the bar while I'm not looking for a job.
I thought this country did away with slavery.

 

[Adam]

I have an idea, If you collect unemployment how about you work for the town or city. I am sure if some people thought they had to go and paint the town hall or rake leaves in the town park everyday they might find another job a little faster......Ya think..

Yeah, but then there would be unemployed painters and groundskeepers.

J/K. Pretty good idea. Last year (I think), there were a lot of areas around town that had weeds growing really tall because the city couldn't afford to have them cleaned up.

 

[tcarcio]

Just think how beautifull Fall River would be......

 

[adwilk]

It would cost more tax dollars for the govt to (mis)manage a program like that than to just give money away. Sad, but true.

I'm a fan of smaller govt. Take the program away from the govt. Make it just like every other kind of insurance and workers can choose the coverage that best fits their lifestyle. Or, it can be a paid benefit from an employer to a private insurance company. Why does the government even NEED to be involved in this? Seriously?

 

[GO-NAD!]

It would cost more tax dollars for the govt to (mis)manage a program like that than to just give money away. Sad, but true.

I'm a fan of smaller govt. Take the program away from the govt. Make it just like every other kind of insurance and workers can choose the coverage that best fits their lifestyle. Or, it can be a paid benefit from an employer to a private insurance company. Why does the government even NEED to be involved in this? Seriously?

Because a private UI scheme would probably be even more expensive than it already is - just like your health care system. Would private insurance be more "efficient" than government? Efficient at raking in profits, yes. Efficient at taking care of the clients? Debatable.

I'm not trying to stir an argument - honest! All I'm saying is that we can never assume that any particular activity will be run more efficiently (or provide better service) by private industry, than by government.

 

[Rickster71]

... but then I wouldn't have time to hang out at Whole Foods, the German butcher, bakery, Starbucks and Pier One, while I'm not looking for a job.
I thought this country did away with slavery.

I fixed it for you.

 

[adwilk]

Because a private UI scheme would probably be even more expensive than it already is - just like your health care system. Would private insurance be more "efficient" than government? Efficient at raking in profits, yes. Efficient at taking care of the clients? Debatable.

I'm not trying to stir an argument - honest! All I'm saying is that we can never assume that any particular activity will be run more efficiently (or provide better service) by private industry, than by government.

Yeah, we all know what assuming does. I don't completely disagree with you either and there's never a silver bullet when it comes to these issues. Its just a matter of perspective. I guess I've just grown tired of how money is handled and it seems like the more government gets involved with where my money ends up, the less freedom I ultimately have as an American. I really wouldn't care if cost a little bit more If I knew that I spent my money where and how I wanted to. All of it just seems to be leading to less and less freedom. I don't like it.

 

[Adam]

All of it just seems to be leading to less and less freedom. I don't like it.

Less freedom? What are you talking about? Now there's even more people that are free to do whatever they want during the day...because you're paying them.

 

[Rickster71]

It would cost more tax dollars for the govt to (mis)manage a program like that than to just give money away. Sad, but true.

I'm a fan of smaller govt. Take the program away from the govt. Make it just like every other kind of insurance and workers can choose the coverage that best fits their lifestyle. Or, it can be a paid benefit from an employer to a private insurance company.

Very well said.

Why does the government even NEED to be involved in this? Seriously?

They want to be involved so that they can control the data presented to the public.
Every president lies about low unemployment numbers during an election year.

 

[Rickster71]

Because a private UI scheme would probably be even more expensive than it already is - just like your health care system. Would private insurance be more "efficient" than government? Efficient at raking in profits, yes. Efficient at taking care of the clients? Debatable.

I'm not trying to stir an argument - honest! All I'm saying is that we can never assume that any particular activity will be run more efficiently (or provide better service) by private industry, than by government.

Hopefully your government runs better than ours. People that deal with Local, State, and Federal government daily have quite a different opinion.

If you get a chance look into John Stossel and the books he's written. Or look at video below. (don't be put off by the 40 minute length, the first 10 minutes give enough info to get the drift.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Hopefully your government runs better than ours. People that deal with Local, State, and Federal government daily have quite a different opinion.

If you get a chance look into John Stossel and the books he's written. Or look at video below. (don't be put off by the 40 minute length, the first 10 minutes give enough info to get the drift.

Oh, don't get me wrong, we have lazy people who abuse UI (we call it EI) up here as well. No matter what human activity we can name, somebody will abuse it. It's just human nature.

I'll check out this John Stossel fellow.

It would cost more tax dollars for the govt to (mis)manage a program like that than to just give money away. Sad, but true.

I'm a fan of smaller govt. Take the program away from the govt. Make it just like every other kind of insurance and workers can choose the coverage that best fits their lifestyle. Or, it can be a paid benefit from an employer to a private insurance company. Why does the government even NEED to be involved in this? Seriously?

Are you aware that as a percentage of GDP, tax revenues in the USA are already the lowest in the OECD*? Do you really believe you're overtaxed? Seriously?

*Except for Mexico and Chile - I don't suppose you'd lump the US in with them, would you?

 

[adwilk]

Are you aware that as a percentage of GDP, tax revenues in the USA are already the lowest in the OECD? Do you really believe you're overtaxed?

Not overtaxed- that wasn't what I was driving at. But just cause taxpayers don't pick up the tab doesn't mean that funds aren't grossly mishandled. Look at our budget- its a joke.

I'd also point out that just because some of the money we never see as Americans aren't technically called "tax dollars", there's a lot of money we're forced to hand over to fund these government programs.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Not overtaxed- that wasn't what I was driving at. But just cause taxpayers don't pick up the tab doesn't mean that funds aren't grossly mishandled. Look at our budget- its a joke.

I'd also point out that just because some of the money we never see as Americans aren't technically called "tax dollars", there's a lot of money we're forced to hand over to fund these government programs.

No argument with what you are saying. Although Canada has higher taxes than the US, we are still on the low side, compared to most OECD countries. The only point I'm trying to make, is that we should be careful what we wish for. When it comes to dealing with bureaucracy, the absolute worst headaches I've experienced have been caused by private health insurance providers. (Contrary to what many Americans might believe, not all of our health expenses are covered by public health care.)

I believe in balance. I'm by no means doctrinaire about such things. If a private UI/EI scheme was demonstrably more efficient and fair to the clientele, I'd have no problem putting it in private hands.

 

[adwilk]

If a private UI/EI scheme was demonstrably more efficient and fair to the clientele, I'd have no problem putting it in private hands.

Some really good points. The grass can always be as green as you care for it to be when daydreaming.

I am curious though- on the topic of UI/EI. What exactly is "fair" about it now? Certainly if it existed in the private sector then there's opportunities for it to be a headache, but its a headache now. South Carolina's website states that it can take up to 18 weeks to start receiving benefits. Thats not very efficient and the clientele have ZERO options. Its whatever the state and federal government choose to jam down your throat.

I guess its a classic case of the government protecting its people from themselves. Most would be entirely too irresponsible to voluntarily pay premiums, etc. But that doesn't make it fair or good. People have become that way because of these programs IMO.

 

[Alex2507]

the first 10 minutes

The last 10 minutes are way more interesting ... not that I would ever pay ...
unless of course she needed the cash for school.

 

[GO-NAD!]

Some really good points. The grass can always be as green as you care for it to be when daydreaming.

I am curious though- on the topic of UI/EI. What exactly is "fair" about it now? Certainly if it existed in the private sector then there's opportunities for it to be a headache, but its a headache now. South Carolina's website states that it can take up to 18 weeks to start receiving benefits. Thats not very efficient and the clientele have ZERO options. Its whatever the state and federal government choose to jam down your throat.

I guess its a classic case of the government protecting its people from themselves. Most would be entirely too irresponsible to voluntarily pay premiums, etc. But that doesn't make it fair or good. People have become that way because of these programs IMO.

18 weeks!? There's no excuse for that. I've collected EI* once in my 30-working life so far, but if memory serves, it's about 4 - 6 week waiting period.

*That was for parental leave. A couple can collect for up to a year after having a baby. Any combination of up to 12 months, i.e. 10 months for her, 2 months for him. They can be simultaneous too. Your employer must keep your position, or an equivalent postion, available for you. I took 6 weeks, while my wife took the rest. By the time I received my first cheque, I was pretty much back at work. I had the pleasure of starting our daughter in day care. That wasn't fun, with all the tears and bawling. She didn't like it very much either...