Quantcast

Comments about ‘In our opinion: Extend unemployment benefits’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Jan. 2 2014 12:00 a.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

"...and a recognition that administration policies have failed." Being a socialist myself I do no intend to carry water for the administration, but your remark carries a bit of partisanship. The administration took the necessary monetarist steps to save the banking system in 2009. This it had to do, because to rescue capitalism you have to rescue the top first (sad but that's the system). Obama would have liked to do more New Deal type stimulus, more public works projects - many of which are desperately needed - but could never have gotten them through the congress. Obama did his job and rescued American capitalism. I should think you guys would be a bit more grateful.

SCfan
clearfield, UT

Yes, Yes, Yes, we obviously don't actually want people to have no money. The problem is that for more than a few, unemployment and its attendent benefits is one of the biggest growth industries in the U.S. today. Unemployment and food stamps go hand in hand. Do Obama and the Democrats really believe than if their stewardship since 2007 were evaluated, that the huge increase of citizens "Dependent" upon the government to live is a positive success story? Because, I've always agreed with the more conservative view that the success of government is not in how many get government assistance, but in how many Do Not need government assistance.

Tulip
West Jordan, UT

Perfectly articulated DN. Not only is the administration hindering growth, they're doing it knowing it's creating an entitlement society. The blueprint for rapid and steady job growth has already been written and they don't seem the least bit interested in following it. It's astonishing when you really think about what they've done and even more so when you think the American people didn't see it coming.

the old switcharoo
mesa, AZ

We could be building things with the money but republicans won't agree to public financed building projects. So we spend half a salary per person and get nothing for it. Not too bright.

Thid Barker
Victor, ID

Why work? Its so easy to let the government pay you not to work.

JDMAC
Salt Lake City, UT

Extend the unemployment "benefits" even further?
This would only make those receiving payments even more dependent.
Two things would really help:
1- Require some measure of public work before receiving publicly financed unemployment (with time off for seeking a employment).
2- Ease payees out of the program instead of cutting off all the benefit at once. Such as remove 1/3 of the original amount each month until it is gone.

Twin Lights
Louisville, KY

I agree that the benefits should be extended but we need a more predictable (less political) method of determining and extending benefits. There should be a longer federal time period and it should increase automatically based on certain employment rate benchmarks. The reality is there are folks who hit long-term unemployment in better times when there is no action by Congress.

That said, blaming the long-term unemployment rate on this administration is laughable. If they do something it won't help, if they do, it hurts. Please. We need to accept three facts.

First, we are emerging from the deepest recession any can recall other than the very old who can actually remember the Great Depression and digging out will not be quick (expecting it to be so is foolish).

Second, though imperfect, both this and the Bush Administration responded about as well as could be expected. Could things have been done better in hindsight? When is that not true?

Third, in our system government can influence the economy - it cannot and does not control it. Expecting it to be able to make sharp, immediate differences reveals a lack of understanding.

SCfan
clearfield, UT

old switcharoo

Uh, you may have missed the memo, but when Obama took office he and the Democrats plowed about 800 billion into "shovel ready jobs" to do just as you claim the Republicans did not want to do. What went wrong?

RichardB
Murray, UT

This is what happens when business and some government leaders flood our labor market. The taxpayer gets stuck paying for the surplus labor, or those who are replaced by them.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

I'm surprised to see you advocating socialism and entitlements.

Dr. James Rawson
Orem, UT

To Marxist: "Obama did his job and rescued American capitalism." The facts are obvious that this administration has done everything it can possibly do through taxation, illegal regulations from the EPA and other government agencies who make up their own laws and Presidential mandates; to destroy Capitalism or Free Enterprise. It would be wise to look at Obama's record and see exactly what he has done.....which is absolutely nothing to help this economy recover! He has placed more people on welfare than any other President in history and wants to keep them there with an additional "free lunch," without requiring any labor for it. And, the millions who have given up on finding employment, because of His anti-capitalism policies, are now dependent on the taxpayer handout and are willing to live on it. The economy is not recovering; placing the blame squarely on Obama and his administration's anti-growth, redistribution of wealth policies!

Flashback
Kearns, UT

Good, then you at the Deseret News can pay for the extended benefits. Not me.

airnaut
Everett, 00

Dr. James Rawson
Orem, UT

==========

Does BYU know about this?

btw - Sorry about your Father.

Christopher B
Ogden, UT

Yes, barack has been a failure and his policies have come painfully short of what he told us, like when he said he's keep unemployment below 8% if allowed his first spendathon of 800 billion. Or the time he told us he'd be a one term president if he didn't cut the deficit in half, only to see him increase it.

But those aside, its not baracks responsibility to make sure everyone has a job. Its my responsibility to make sure I have a job. I don't want barack taking money from others who have earned it, to give it to me if I'm not earning it. That's not right

marxist
Salt Lake City, UT

RE: JDMAC "1- Require some measure of public work before receiving publicly financed unemployment (with time off for seeking a employment)." This is what Obama would have preferred - public works projects.

Mike in Cedar City
Cedar City, Utah

"something lawmakers should agree to as an act of compassion and a recognition that administration policies have failed."

DMN, you just can't support anything, no matter how "compassionate" without taking a nasty ill advised swipe at the Obama Administration. There would not be so many out of work for so long if your number two boss, the Republican Party, had supported some kind of a jobs bill to help re-build infrastructure and put a lot of people back to work.

Ultra Bob
Cottonwood Heights, UT

The government should hire every available, employable, unemployed worker in America. Pay them at a wage according to the needs of providing life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness for themselves as an individual or as a family.

The entire cost of such a government program to be paid by a tax upon all American business operations and even foreign business operations in the USA. If business operators would hire all the workers, the tax would be zero.

Pro:

Eliminate poverty. Eliminate depressions, booms, and make the economy stable.

Con:

None.

Business is the engine that pumps the economic blood (money) that supports our entire society. Like any other engine it must be controlled by the operator. The owner/operator of the business engine is the society where it performs.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

We have a stalled economy. The problem is not supply but rather a lack of demand. Demand comes from spending. Spending comes, usually, from actually having money to spend. Cutting out a chunk of funds from the poor or middle class (in this case the unemployed) reduces purchasing power and further decreases demand. Jobs are only created if there's enough demand to make the added job worthwhile. As a result it's estimated that we'll take a .2% of GDP hit to the economy by not extending these unemployment benefits, and lose out on 100k jobs. Might not be much but well... making things worse is hardly a good idea right now.

You don't even necessarily have to extend it to 73 weeks anymore, you could just scale it back to 50 weeks rather than 27.

Fitness Freak
Salt Lake City, UT

Usually, the DN is advocating for amnesty for illegal trespassers. Today they are advocating for job security for actual LEGAL American citizens.

Which is it? The two subjects are in conflict.

Open Minded Mormon
Everett, 00

"Extending unemployment benefits is not an ideal answer to sluggish job growth, but it is the humane thing to do."

=====

And letting them expire is the polar opposite: INHUMANE.

Cold, Heartless, Stiff-necked, calloused,
trampling the poor, the needy, the sick...

The very reasons God allowed the Nephites to be destroyed,
as well as Sodom and Gommorrah.
[fyi -- it had nothing to do with Gay marriage.]

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments