A recent article in ThinkProgress explained that cutting off unemployment benefits didn’t actually encourage people to get jobs. Citing a load of statistics, it showed how the majority of the benficiaries of unemployment benefits don’t actually find jobs when their unemployment benefits are cut off:
So what does happen when people lose their benefits? A 2012 report from the Government Accountability Office found that their poverty rate spikes by 5 percent, a third turn to government programs, and 90 percent turn to family members or money from retirement or savings accounts.
Here’s the problem. This is not a single-pronged issue. You can’t pull just part of the civil government’s vast welfare state, and expect that to work out. Halfway systems and compromise solutions almost always take the worst of both worlds and marry them together. The solution is not less government involvement in welfare and charity. It’s either all or nothing. Either we have a nanny state entirely, or not at all.
Because think about the current situation. If states aren’t shelling out unemployment benefits, does that mean those states don’t take as much in taxes or federal aid? Nope. So the money is just being used in some other big government project.
The real solution here is to actually cut the federal and state budgets. A huge amount. The only way to really solve unemployment is to have more jobs. Not government jobs or government-created jobs. Those are just different names for welfare. Real jobs created by a real demand.
What would create that scenario? Lowering taxes across the board so that businesses and individuals have income to spend on expanding their businesses or buying services and goods.
The ThinkProgress article is right about one thing. We need to stop viewing the people on these programs as parasites. They aren’t ultimately the ones to blame. Our power-hungry representatives are to blame. We need to be cutting off welfare and charity to the civil government!