Republicans To Unemployed: Why Won't You All Just Get Some Jobs Already?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

by Jillian Rayfield

Jim Bunning and Tom Coburn blocked the extension of unemployment benefits. Jon Kyl called supporting the unemployed a "necessary evil." There's even been talk from one Republican that Congress is creating a nation of "hobos."

So here's TPM's round-up of Republicans hating on the jobless for...well, for being jobless.

Pennsylvania Attorney General Tom Corbett, who is running for governor, said last week that unemployed people are purposely avoiding jobs so they can continue collecting benefits from the government: "The jobs are there. But if we keep extending unemployment, people are going to sit there and - I've literally had construction companies tell me, 'I can't get people to come back to work until...they say, I'll come back to work when unemployment runs out.'"

Rand Paul, the Republican nominee for senator of Kentucky, said in June that the unemployed need to stop being so picky when it comes to getting a job: "As bad as it sounds, ultimately we do have to sometimes accept a wage that's less than we had at our previous job in order to get back to work and allow the economy to get started again. Nobody likes that, but it may be one of the tough love things that has to happen."

Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) said in March that unemployment benefits don't "create new jobs. In fact, if anything, continuing to pay people unemployment compensation is a disincentive for them to seek new work." More recently, he's called unemployment benefits a "necessary evil," though added that "it's not a good thing for the economy. It's a bad thing for the economy but it's still the right thing to do for other reasons."

South Carolina Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer compared the unemployed to stray animals back in January, saying that unemployment insurance is a lot like helping out strays. One is "facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply," he said. "They will reproduce, especially ones that don't think too much further than that. And so what you've got to do is you've got to curtail that type of behavior. They don't know any better." Though he later backtracked, saying this probably "wasn't the best metaphor," he has since said that "flat-out lazy" people "would rather sit home and do nothing than do these jobs."

In June, Nevada Senate nominee Sharron Angle said that "what has happened is the system of entitlement has caused us to have a spoilage with our ability to go out and get a job." She added: "They keep extending these unemployment benefits to the point where people are afraid to go out and get a job because the job doesn't pay as much as the unemployment benefit does."

Former House Majority Leader (and former Dancing With The Stars contestant) Tom DeLay appeared on CNN in March to point to "studies that have been done that shows that people stay on unemployment compensation and they don't look for a job until two or three weeks before they know the benefits are going to run out." When host Candy Crowley pointed out that saying "people are unemployed because they want to be" is a "hard sell," DeLay responded: "Well, it is the truth."

Back in May, Sen. Judd Gregg (R-NH) said that Congress needs to think twice about continuing unemployment benefits "because you're out of the recession, you're starting to see growth and you're clearly going to dampen the capacity of that growth if you basically keep an economy that encourages people to, rather than go out and look for work, to stay on unemployment. Yes, it's important to do that up to a certain level, but at some point you've got to acknowledge that we're not Europe."

Rep. Dean Heller (R-NV) said in February that he thinks that though "there should be a federal safety net," extending unemployment benefits yet again raises the question: "Is the government now creating hobos?"

http://tpmdc.talking...obs-already.php

[^_^ 5,021]

There is something to be said for the argument that if wages go down (which is what not extending UI bennies will do), hiring might pick up.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Take what you can get. I agree!

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

To be fair to the Republican party, the majority are not anti UI benefits, which I think is how it often gets painted. They just want it from earmarked funds (I do see both sides point of view on this). Its actually just a very vocal minority who say cut it off entirely.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

Endless UI benefits ends in endless unemployment.

[rika60607 215]

Well, yes, but...

if the job that you can get is low paid and physically hard and potentially dangerous to your health... then considering the cost of heath care, it may be better to not work...

If I had varicose veins and the only job available is that of a waitress or a doorman (woman) - I'd be creating huge health problems for myself in the future, if I took it. If I had asthma and the only job available was at umm, chemical plant? You get the picture, I hope.

But if I hold off and not work - I could find a sitting job with clean air that is proper for my high and specific education

[^_^ 5,021]

Well, yes, but...

if the job that you can get is low paid and physically hard and potentially dangerous to your health... then considering the cost of heath care, it may be better to not work...

If I had varicose veins and the only job available is that of a waitress or a doorman (woman) - I'd be creating huge health problems for myself in the future, if I took it. If I had asthma and the only job available was at umm, chemical plant? You get the picture, I hope.

But if I hold off and not work - I could find a sitting job with clean air that is proper for my high and specific education

I don't disagree on your point about not taking a job that would harm a specific health condition you have.

However, to not take a job you are physically/mentally capable of doing because you feel you're too good (too educated) for it is simply foolish and vain, assuming you've already suffered through a long bout of unemployment. In fact, if a person with a high level of education and training has been unemployed for a long time, it can be argued that his/her skillset is no longer in demand at the levels the individual was once accustomed to. When your reality changes, so must you.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Well, yes, but...

if the job that you can get is low paid and physically hard and potentially dangerous to your health... then considering the cost of heath care, it may be better to not work...

If I had varicose veins and the only job available is that of a waitress or a doorman (woman) - I'd be creating huge health problems for myself in the future, if I took it. If I had asthma and the only job available was at umm, chemical plant? You get the picture, I hope.

But if I hold off and not work - I could find a sitting job with clean air that is proper for my high and specific education

Finding temporary work is better than no work and leeching off the system for 2 years.

No one said you can't look for better opportunities while working some ####### job.

When there's a will there's a way.

Your last statement is the EXACT problem with the workforce today. Well, partially some employers to. The idea of "well i was educated and know this" and that's how you find a job is completely absurd. You only screw yourself over. The only industry that has that kind of security is nursing and possibly IT jobs still...

[^_^ 5,021]

Finding temporary work is better than no work and leeching off the system for 2 years.

No one said you can't look for better opportunities while working some ####### job.

When there's a will there's a way.

Your last statement is the EXACT problem with the workforce today. Well, partially some employers to. The idea of "well i was educated and know this" and that's how you find a job is completely absurd. You only screw yourself over. The only industry that has that kind of security is nursing and possibly IT jobs still...

My wifes uncle used to manage an IT organization in the early 90s. He got laid off back then, looked for similar work for 3 years, he didn't find anything so he took his US dollars and moved back to his parental home in Asia. He lived there, off his savings, for almost a decade until he ran out money. Now he's back in the States (he was smart enough to not renounce his US citizenship) driving a truck for UPS while his only kid is starting college. Had he been smart, he could have taken a similar job back then, and he'd be better off today (maybe).

[rika60607 215]

Well, me personally, I'd just pick up and go to the place where my specialty is in demand.

But some people have houses they can't sell and spouses who still have jobs and/or also looking for jobs. So, for a professional, it IS often better to wait a year and put effort in updating education/developing new contacts than to flip burgers ASAP.

Isn't this what unemployment insurance is for anyway?

[^_^ 5,021]

Well, me personally, I'd just pick up and go to the place where my specialty is in demand.

But some people have houses they can't sell and spouses who still have jobs and/or also looking for jobs. So, for a professional, it IS often better to wait a year and put effort in updating education/developing new contacts than to flip burgers ASAP.

Isn't this what unemployment insurance is for anyway?

I certainly wouldn't suggest flipping burgers immediately after you lose your job.

[rika60607 215]

Actually,

what is absurd is taking a job that is low pay, bad for your health, carries no health insurance, takes time away from a real job search and is unacceptable for your resume. If you are professional, either you find a proper job or you have to get re-educated. Flipping burgers is only for people who can afford to have low paid jobs.

How can one afford a low paid job? Someone who lives with parents and just needs some pocket money. Someone who is in excellent health, but lives in Section 8 and does not want to get out. You are not it? Don't take flipper jobs from people for whom those jobs can do good and who will be happy to have them.

...that's how you find a job is completely absurd. You only screw yourself over.

[^_^ 5,021]

Why are we pretending as if the only alternative to a nice full-time corporate gig is flipping burgers?

[Obama 2012 1,714]

Actually,

what is absurd is taking a job that is low pay, bad for your health, carries no health insurance, takes time away from a real job search and is unacceptable for your resume. If you are professional, either you find a proper job or you have to get re-educated. Flipping burgers is only for people who can afford to have low paid jobs.

How can one afford a low paid job? Someone who lives with parents and just needs some pocket money. Someone who is in excellent health, but lives in Section 8 and does not want to get out. You are not it? Don't take flipper jobs from people for whom those jobs can do good and who will be happy to have them.

So you're saying you're better than everyone else? That you are too good for those jobs..? Too low bottom feeding for you? I see... Well, at least that's how you're coming off. It's funny figuring their employers are helping pay for your unemployment...

As Legacy mentioned though, there are plenty of other options than flipping burgers.

[rika60607 215]

There are many options.

But when someone makes a generalization and says well, any job is better than leaching off the society etc... as most generalizations, this one is wrong. I suspect this is a knee jerk reaction either from the people who will never find themselves in that position due to family money, or from the people who simply aren't that bright and are doing equivalent of burger flipping in the corporate world anyway.

Why are we pretending as if the only alternative to a nice full-time corporate gig is flipping burgers?