Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Economic Policy Institute)   Conservative think tank agrees: Cutting unemployment benefits does not lead to increased employment   (epi.org ) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

974 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Aug 2014 at 11:10 AM (2 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



52 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2014-08-14 08:37:04 AM  
That's only conservatives that would rather have a job, it's the shiftless liberals need the incentive of starving before they'll find a job.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "I'd do anything for work if I was unemployed, work at McDonald's, sweep floors, whatever."  Just after saying how they should cut jobless benefits.  Not realizing that many of the unemployed feel the same way.
 
2014-08-14 08:43:01 AM  
In other words, this report will be buried with all the other "facts that don't agree with the narrative".
 
2014-08-14 08:43:20 AM  
But it does make poor people more miserable, right?  So we should still do it.
 
2014-08-14 09:03:37 AM  
But the point is to punish someone, not improve things. Sometimes, a guy just has to kick someone, and the rich are more likely to kick back.
 
2014-08-14 09:43:12 AM  
It's not about helping the unemployed. It's about not rewarding their laziness. That's what its ALWAYS been about.
 
2014-08-14 10:03:20 AM  
polizeros.com
 
2014-08-14 10:27:04 AM  

DamnYankees: It's not about helping the unemployed. It's about not rewarding their laziness. That's what its ALWAYS been about.


A reward is something that reinforces an action. If unemployment benefits were truly a reward, then we would see a decrease in unemployment when the reward was removed. It is not about rewarding laziness. It's about kicking people who cannot kick back. Own it.
 
2014-08-14 10:29:57 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-14 11:13:44 AM  
lindseygrahamnomore.files.wordpress.com

Nuff said
 
2014-08-14 11:15:52 AM  
ox·y·mo·ron
ˌäksəˈmôrˌän/
noun
a figure of speech in which apparently contradictory terms appear in conjunction (e.g.,faith unfaithful kept him falsely true ).

Conservative think tank
 
2014-08-14 11:18:20 AM  
Conservative think

Why are those words so close together? Did Rush eat a few words in the middle?
 
2014-08-14 11:22:04 AM  
next you're going to tell me that repealing obamacare won't lower the incidence of cancer
 
2014-08-14 11:22:15 AM  
Yet the 'talking point' will live in.
 
2014-08-14 11:26:53 AM  
An economy that relies on consumer spending should be able to function just as easily if that money goes to tax cuts for the rich, surely someone like Mitt Romney buys 50,000 LCDs for his house and buys clothing and shoes of all sizes and styles for himself, and forget about the refrigerators, each of Mitt Romney's homes has 130,000 refrigerators, some college dorm size some walk in and everything in between, each is stocked full with perishable food that needs to be replaced every few days.
 
2014-08-14 11:27:30 AM  
Should the Economic Policy Institute and the American Enterprise Institute now get added to the LOLCATGOPATA?

...oh, wait, the AEI are already on it; so, their fellow-traveller EPI just needs adding. Paging mrshowrules to the thread....
 
2014-08-14 11:28:32 AM  
People who exhausted their extended unemployment benefits stopped looking for jobs.

A requirement of unemployment benefits is proof that you are looking for a job, no?

So, they weren't really looking for a job, as evidenced by their disinterest after that mandate was gone.

The net gain here is hard to see. But helping people is not a bad thing.
 
2014-08-14 11:31:21 AM  

EvilEgg: That's only conservatives that would rather have a job, it's the shiftless liberals need the incentive of starving before they'll find a job.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "I'd do anything for work if I was unemployed, work at McDonald's, sweep floors, whatever."  Just after saying how they should cut jobless benefits.  Not realizing that many of the unemployed feel the same way.


I have a friend whose now ex-wife was staunchly conservative and complained how she couldn't find a job.  of course she refused to work a job that she felt was beneath her such as work at McDonald's, sweep floors, etc.  I have found in many situations, that advice about working anywhere is for others and not them.
 
2014-08-14 11:43:08 AM  
That was never the goal, this is all Southern Strategy shiat that carries on to this day.
 
2014-08-14 11:47:41 AM  
Why would paying people NOT to work ever lead to more employment?  If you just stop paying them, why would they suddenly want to work?  What would happen if you actually trained people that aren't working how to perform a needed job?
 
2014-08-14 11:50:02 AM  
Did they collaborate with the No shiat Sherlock Institute for the Study of the Blazingly Obvious!???

You took money out of the economy, which dinged demand.

//Stupid supply siders.
 
2014-08-14 11:50:51 AM  

Tricky Chicken: Why would paying people NOT to work ever lead to more employment?  If you just stop paying them, why would they suddenly want to work?  What would happen if you actually trained people that aren't working how to perform a needed job?


What would happen if anyone took you seriously?
 
2014-08-14 11:54:20 AM  

Tricky Chicken: Why would paying people NOT to work ever lead to more employment?  If you just stop paying them, why would they suddenly want to work?  What would happen if you actually trained people that aren't working how to perform a needed job?


We'd address a shortage of skilled laborers and be able to fill the 13 year high in job openings??
 
2014-08-14 12:00:33 PM  

Cletus C.: People who exhausted their extended unemployment benefits stopped looking for jobs.

A requirement of unemployment benefits is proof that you are looking for a job, no?

So, they weren't really looking for a job, as evidenced by their disinterest after that mandate was gone.

The net gain here is hard to see. But helping people is not a bad thing.



When you're unemployed for more than a couple of months, you reach a point at which you have already applied for all the jobs you are qualified or overqualified for. You can apply a lot faster than job openings are created.

Couple with that the fact employers are far less likely to hire someone who hasn't worked in a while... it's hard to do anything but go through the motions of looking for work. You know it's hopeless, and you've given up. But at least having to prove you're going through the motions keeps you going so that there's a chance, however small.
 
2014-08-14 12:03:06 PM  

janzee: Yet the 'talking point' will live in.

It's already packaged in there:
"the unemployed tended to remain so until their UI benefits were exhausted. But their next move wasn't into a job," but rather to give up looking for one.
IOW those shiftless bums were just in it for the free ride. Now that they are, presumably, starving to death, justice is served.

/what do you mean they still have food stamps
//OBAMAAAAA!!
 
2014-08-14 12:13:49 PM  
But a gook that runs is still VC, right?
 
2014-08-14 12:16:07 PM  

LiberalWeenie: Cletus C.: People who exhausted their extended unemployment benefits stopped looking for jobs.

A requirement of unemployment benefits is proof that you are looking for a job, no?

So, they weren't really looking for a job, as evidenced by their disinterest after that mandate was gone.

The net gain here is hard to see. But helping people is not a bad thing.


When you're unemployed for more than a couple of months, you reach a point at which you have already applied for all the jobs you are qualified or overqualified for. You can apply a lot faster than job openings are created.

Couple with that the fact employers are far less likely to hire someone who hasn't worked in a while... it's hard to do anything but go through the motions of looking for work. You know it's hopeless, and you've given up. But at least having to prove you're going through the motions keeps you going so that there's a chance, however small.


I'm sure there's some of that. And it's sad.
 
2014-08-14 12:21:01 PM  

DeaH: DamnYankees: It's not about helping the unemployed. It's about not rewarding their laziness. That's what its ALWAYS been about.

A reward is something that reinforces an action. If unemployment benefits were truly a reward, then we would see a decrease in unemployment when the reward was removed. It is not about rewarding laziness. It's about kicking people who cannot kick back. Own it.


I think you missed my point.
 
2014-08-14 12:22:58 PM  

meat0918: Tricky Chicken: Why would paying people NOT to work ever lead to more employment?  If you just stop paying them, why would they suddenly want to work?  What would happen if you actually trained people that aren't working how to perform a needed job?

We'd address a shortage of skilled laborers and be able to fill the 13 year high in job openings??


Why don't we provide training as well as assistance?  Wasn't that a major part of the Clinton reforms?

CPennypacker: What would happen if anyone took you seriously?


Things would improve dramatically. People would actually start thinking for themselves and not parrot what they were told to believe.
 
2014-08-14 12:32:34 PM  

Tricky Chicken: CPennypacker: What would happen if anyone took you seriously?

Things would improve dramatically. People would actually start thinking for themselves and not parrot what they were told to believe.


Dunning, meet Kruger.
 
2014-08-14 12:34:47 PM  

DamnYankees: DeaH: DamnYankees: It's not about helping the unemployed. It's about not rewarding their laziness. That's what its ALWAYS been about.

A reward is something that reinforces an action. If unemployment benefits were truly a reward, then we would see a decrease in unemployment when the reward was removed. It is not about rewarding laziness. It's about kicking people who cannot kick back. Own it.

I think you missed my point.


The payment of unemployment benefits isn't typically a behavior/reward conditioning structure.  There is no link between behavior and reward.  Actually, there is no behavioral connection between unemployment benefits and action.  In this case the unemployment benefits are merely an environmental condition.  Sort of like the temperature of the cage.  They are arbitrary and disconnected from behavior.  Similarly, there is no action required to recieve benefits.  For you to earn a salary, you must spend time doing work.  If you were to require a specified amount ot time from the unemployed to earn benefits then you may see your desired results.  If you did this as a job training class, there would be progress.
 
2014-08-14 12:41:21 PM  

macadamnut: Tricky Chicken: CPennypacker: What would happen if anyone took you seriously?

Things would improve dramatically. People would actually start thinking for themselves and not parrot what they were told to believe.

Dunning, meet Kruger.


Interesting, a tongue in cheek dismissal of an ad hominem attack is indicative of a Dunning Kreuger effect? Or are you posting an amusingly wrong use of the Dunning Kreuger effect as an example of the same? Clever.

You would have been more accurate if you had gone with the illusory superiority bias.
 
2014-08-14 12:52:53 PM  

Headso: An economy that relies on consumer spending should be able to function just as easily if that money goes to tax cuts for the rich, surely someone like Mitt Romney buys 50,000 LCDs for his house and buys clothing and shoes of all sizes and styles for himself, and forget about the refrigerators, each of Mitt Romney's homes has 130,000 refrigerators, some college dorm size some walk in and everything in between, each is stocked full with perishable food that needs to be replaced every few days.


If we had mandatory consumption laws, I'd be cool with more tax cuts.

"Dear Mister Buffet, you are hereby required to spend 8% of your total after tax income on gasoline. We suggest taking a caravan of H2 Hummers to Argentina a few thousand times. You have 30 days to be in compliance."
 
2014-08-14 12:53:15 PM  

EvilEgg: That's only conservatives that would rather have a job, it's the shiftless liberals need the incentive of starving before they'll find a job.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "I'd do anything for work if I was unemployed, work at McDonald's, sweep floors, whatever."  Just after saying how they should cut jobless benefits.  Not realizing that many of the unemployed feel the same way.


I'll be perfectly honest, I won't do anything for work. I'm not going to waste my time making $10/hr, when I can make more than that on unemployment and have time to work on a startup. Entrepreneur or shiftless bum? I guess that'll be decided based on whether or not it works out. Besides, I'm a web developer and someone will just offer me a job eventually.

/Oh look some just did yesterday
 
2014-08-14 12:59:29 PM  

DamnYankees: DeaH: DamnYankees: It's not about helping the unemployed. It's about not rewarding their laziness. That's what its ALWAYS been about.

A reward is something that reinforces an action. If unemployment benefits were truly a reward, then we would see a decrease in unemployment when the reward was removed. It is not about rewarding laziness. It's about kicking people who cannot kick back. Own it.

I think you missed my point.


Ah, sorry. You do not have to own it if it is not your point of view. I would just suggest not using the word "reward" in this context. It shoud be crystal clear that this is bullying, not behavior modification. There should be no fig leaf.
 
2014-08-14 01:16:36 PM  
I was unemployed once. I kind of enjoyed it, but when the benefits ran out, I had no choice but to find a job.

So:

anecdotal - Using a personal experience or an isolated example instead of a sound argument or compelling evidence.
 
2014-08-14 01:38:08 PM  
Yeah, but that's because the taxation-job creation inverse relationship was not followed.  Cutting taxes on the wealthy creates jobs.  Increasing taxes on the poor creates jobs.
 
2014-08-14 01:42:00 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Headso: An economy that relies on consumer spending should be able to function just as easily if that money goes to tax cuts for the rich, surely someone like Mitt Romney buys 50,000 LCDs for his house and buys clothing and shoes of all sizes and styles for himself, and forget about the refrigerators, each of Mitt Romney's homes has 130,000 refrigerators, some college dorm size some walk in and everything in between, each is stocked full with perishable food that needs to be replaced every few days.

If we had mandatory consumption laws, I'd be cool with more tax cuts.

"Dear Mister Buffet, you are hereby required to spend 8% of your total after tax income on gasoline. We suggest taking a caravan of H2 Hummers to Argentina a few thousand times. You have 30 days to be in compliance."


you could call it "The Brewster's Millions Act For Families, Children and American Prosperity"... how can you argue with a name like that
 
2014-08-14 01:44:37 PM  
I thought we were blaming Fartbama for not providing the jobs.
 
2014-08-14 03:14:14 PM  
Tricky Chicken:

The payment of unemployment benefits isn't typically a behavior/reward conditioning structure.  There is no link between behavior and reward.  Actually, there is no behavioral connection between unemployment benefits and action.  In this case the unemployment benefits are merely an environmental condition.  Sort of like the temperature of the cage.

Just being picky, but since Unemployment benefits disappear when employed, does that mean the rat is no longer in the cage, or does it mean the temperature has disappeared?  Or does it mean that the employed rat must maintain the cage temperature itself, and it is no longer an environmental condition?

This would be a good argument for the government to pay everybody a minimum wage, and if you want more than it takes to live a basic bare bones life, you got to work.  Then bare bones would be an environmental condition, not a reward or punishment.  I could use a few extra $$ every week.
 
2014-08-14 03:24:09 PM  

AmbassadorBooze: Tricky Chicken:

The payment of unemployment benefits isn't typically a behavior/reward conditioning structure.  There is no link between behavior and reward.  Actually, there is no behavioral connection between unemployment benefits and action.  In this case the unemployment benefits are merely an environmental condition.  Sort of like the temperature of the cage.

Just being picky, but since Unemployment benefits disappear when employed, does that mean the rat is no longer in the cage, or does it mean the temperature has disappeared?  Or does it mean that the employed rat must maintain the cage temperature itself, and it is no longer an environmental condition?

This would be a good argument for the government to pay everybody a minimum wage, and if you want more than it takes to live a basic bare bones life, you got to work.  Then bare bones would be an environmental condition, not a reward or punishment.  I could use a few extra $$ every week.


The rat would no longer be a test subject.  Since the parameter we are looking at is no longer relavent.  Effectively at that point there is no rat, as there is no unemployed person.  A universal minimum subsistence income is an entirely different topic.
 
2014-08-14 04:22:59 PM  
Tricky Chicken:

The rat would no longer be a test subject.  Since the parameter we are looking at is no longer relavent.  Effectively at that point there is no rat, as there is no unemployed person.  A universal minimum subsistence income is an entirely different topic.

Ah,  thanks, that makes more sense.
 
2014-08-14 07:21:36 PM  

Tricky Chicken: meat0918: Tricky Chicken: Why would paying people NOT to work ever lead to more employment?  If you just stop paying them, why would they suddenly want to work?  What would happen if you actually trained people that aren't working how to perform a needed job?

We'd address a shortage of skilled laborers and be able to fill the 13 year high in job openings??

Why don't we provide training as well as assistance?  Wasn't that a major part of the Clinton reforms?

CPennypacker: What would happen if anyone took you seriously?

Things would improve dramatically. People would actually start thinking for themselves and not parrot what they were told to believe.


There is a training program, it's called WIA and it has been around since The New Deal. However, in some areas good luck getting anybody at the unemployment office to tell you about it or even know about it.

And for who ever said that people give up looking for jobs when their unemployment runs out because there isn't any reason for them to anymore, you are a complete idiot. They don't stop looking, they are just not being tracked anymore by the unemployment office. Common sense will tell you that they are still looking for work because if they aren't getting UI anymore they really need to find employment.
 
2014-08-14 08:40:17 PM  
Wow. An interesting an informative economics link!

Mods/admins - this deserves promotion to the elite business tab instead of being relegated to the troglodytic politics tab.
 
2014-08-14 09:00:14 PM  

Snarcoleptic_Hoosier: Headso: An economy that relies on consumer spending should be able to function just as easily if that money goes to tax cuts for the rich, surely someone like Mitt Romney buys 50,000 LCDs for his house and buys clothing and shoes of all sizes and styles for himself, and forget about the refrigerators, each of Mitt Romney's homes has 130,000 refrigerators, some college dorm size some walk in and everything in between, each is stocked full with perishable food that needs to be replaced every few days.

If we had mandatory consumption laws, I'd be cool with more tax cuts.

"Dear Mister Buffet, you are hereby required to spend 8% of your total after tax income on gasoline. We suggest taking a caravan of H2 Hummers to Argentina a few thousand times. You have 30 days to be in compliance."


"The Midas Plague" by Fred Pohl

I thought that story was entertaining but silly as a child, now I think it is entertaining but sad.

Society in a slow population growth age will need to do something about the Piketty equation but it won't be as elegant as demanding Mitt finance a caravan of hummers. It will be the same burn down the world in war and revolution reset that it has always been.
 
2014-08-14 09:42:48 PM  
Almost every time a conservative is quoted in a Fark headline, it turns out to be a left-wing web site telling us what the conservative said.
 
2014-08-14 11:37:19 PM  
Oh, sure.  Next you're going to tell me the wealth doesn't trickle down...
 
2014-08-15 02:25:02 AM  

macadamnut: But a gook that runs is still VC, right?


You been watching Apocalypse Now again?

/It's a way we had over here for living with ourselves. We cut 'em in half with a machine gun and give 'em a Band-Aid. It was a lie. And the more I saw them, the more I hated lies.
//love that movie!
 
2014-08-15 02:59:30 AM  

EvilEgg: That's only conservatives that would rather have a job, it's the shiftless liberals need the incentive of starving before they'll find a job.

I can't tell you how many times I've heard "I'd do anything for work if I was unemployed, work at McDonald's, sweep floors, whatever."  Just after saying how they should cut jobless benefits.  Not realizing that many of the unemployed feel the same way.


And applied.  And got told they were overqualified.
 
2014-08-15 07:23:32 AM  

rvesco: Almost every time a conservative is quoted in a Fark headline, it turns out to be a left-wing web site telling us what the conservative said.


But Fark has assured us that they are middle of the road and not left-wing.  There was even a meter for a while to prove it.  Ignore that almost every TPM and HuffPo article is guarranteed a politics green light.
 
2014-08-15 09:10:48 AM  

janzee: Yet the 'talking point' will live in.


farking boomerang kids.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report