View Single Post
Old 07-01-2010, 06:40 PM  
Joshua G
dumb libs love censorship
 
Industry Role:
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 8,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sly View Post
Serious question.

Instead of paying construction workers unemployment, why can't we pay them unemployment wage and have them out fixing some of the infrastructure problems that we have today? I read an article just this morning that said the Capitol Hill area needs over $250 million in repairs. That is pathetic. Our Capitol Hill should be in tip top shape at all times.

Instead of paying teachers unemployment, why can't we pay them an unemployment wage and put them in a scenario where they can continue teaching children? Our kids don't suddenly disappear. They still need to be taught.

Instead of paying healthcare workers unemployment, why can't we attach them to people that need health care workers but can't fully afford healthcare wages? There are many, many people like this.

Not only would this keep our nonworking people, working, but it would also help society as a whole. Get these people out contributing to the areas we need it most. I think it would also help slash some of the fraud issue. Hey, if I'm working the same job and only making half of the wages, I'm going to be pretty determined to get out there and find a regular full-time job.

Now a counter argument to this is "if they are working 40 hours a week, how are they going to apply for new better jobs?" Frankly, that's a pretty weak argument but I'll give it some merit anyway. We'll have these people work 25 hours a week instead of 40.

I would like to hear a good, concrete argument against this proposition. I've thought about it many times. I can't think of a concrete argument that isn't just whining.
its a good idea on paper, but if the government actually tried to do it there would be major problems.

for one, many unemployed people's skills dont match up well with public services that are needed. You can't have a system that just teachers & health care & construction workers have to work for money while fast food cooks dont. So putting "all" people to work, your talking about training people to do jobs they may not be physically or mentally suited for. If such people got injured doing a job, the government would be footing the bill. So the added costs of training & health insurance would make the unemployment system 3 times more expensive then it already is.

Then theres the problem where people get trained to do a job, maybe they do it well, but because the benefit is limited, they have to be fired & replaced with a new trainee. So the labor pool will be unreliable with high turnover. I don't think i would want to drive over a bridge built by people with questionable skillsets, doing the work temporarily, for low pay, & where good workers get fired solely because their benefit expired.

The system is far from perfect, but really the best answer to the unemployment problem is for government to encourage corporations to bring jobs that have been sent overseas back to america, to enforce immigration law & get the illegals outta here, & to encourage US consumers to buy american goods & services. None of these things are even close to happening.
Joshua G is offline   Share thread on Digg Share thread on Twitter Share thread on Reddit Share thread on Facebook Reply With Quote