PEN-L
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
[PEN-L:33620] RE: taxing dividends
Nomi writes:
>> So much for involuntary unemployment.
>
>Can you explain the details of this part a bit more?
Sorry for my cryptic economics terminology. What I mean
is that ultimately, though they won't really say it because it
doesn't make sense when exposed to the light of reason,
Repubs believe that most unemployment is "voluntary" --
that people would find work if only they would look harder,
rely less of guvmint hand-outs, be less choosy about
what jobs are acceptable. (Like maybe if your WorldCom
friend didn't insist on health insurance....) As some right-
wing Chicago guy put it in an article I used to assign my
students -- if I lose my $70,000/year job and, rather than
take a job washing dishes for minimum wage, choose to
continue searching, then I am really voluntarily unemployed.
There are jobs, I could get one, but I choose to turn up my
nose.
The standard right-wing schtick is that the unemployed are
encouraged by social programs, left-wing rhetoric, labor
unions and (of course) unemployment compensation, to
hold out for good-paying jobs when lower-paying jobs are
available. This makes wages "sticky downward" and prolongs
recessions.
So according to this morning's NYT, Bush's plan will
include a proposal to give unemployed workers $3000
(instead of simply extending their unemployment benefits)
which they can either live on (yeah right) or they can keep
after they get off their duffs and find a job.
Ellen
>
>Finally, while I'm on this rant, the plan is also said to contain
>> funds for "re-employment" rather than "unemployment" insurance.
>> The idea is that the unemployed would receive a lump-sum payment
>> which they could use to seek work or retrain. If they find work right
>> away, they keep the money. This, supposedly, eliminates the
>> "incentive to remain unemployed" of the current UI system.
>
>
>I just spoke with a laid off WorldCom worker. She hasn't found a job in 6
>months and is supporting two kids and a husband who is on a donor list
>for a liver transplant, though they have no health insurance. Her car was
>repossessed and job interviews have not been forthcoming. Nothing
>voluntary about her unemployment. I can't imagine it's as hard for Bush
>to get up each day as it is for her.
>
>Nomi
>
>
- Thread context:
- [PEN-L:33623] the tax burden [US],
Ian Murray Tue 07 Jan 2003, 20:57 GMT
- [PEN-L:33622] Re: Climate catastrophe,
Eugene Coyle Tue 07 Jan 2003, 20:26 GMT
- [PEN-L:33619] [Fwd: GE Documentary],
e. ahmet tonak Tue 07 Jan 2003, 18:51 GMT
- [PEN-L:33617] Re: RE: taxing dividends,
Nomiprins Tue 07 Jan 2003, 18:14 GMT
- [PEN-L:33614] Lula & Brazil,
Mohammad Maljoo Tue 07 Jan 2003, 17:03 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]