My 'benefits' are about to run out, & despite all the resumes sent, phone calls made, & searching, I've only managed to snag ONE interview. My father put it very well, "We're not in a recession, IF you have a job".
SPONSORED BY:
- 1
- 2
Protecting the Jobless
Email To A Friend
Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.
SPONSORED BY
Congressional Democrats—and some Republicans—have supported an extension of benefits. The Bush administration has resisted, arguing that Congress has never before lengthened the benefits with such a low overall unemployment. True. When benefits were extended in early 2002, the unemployment rate was 5.7 percent. In 1991 the extension occurred at 7 percent, and in 1982 it was 10.1 percent. But so what?
What's wrong with this argument is that it ignores basic changes in U.S. labor markets. Over the past two decades, American businesses have gradually toughened their hiring and firing policies. In recessions, they resort more to permanent dismissals as opposed to temporary layoffs; in recoveries, they're more cautious in adding new workers. After both the 1990–91 and 2001 recessions, job creation didn't resume for many months; indeed, after the 2001 slump, payroll employment didn't reach its prerecession peak for more than three years.
It's harder to find a new job. Average spells of unemployment have slowly lengthened. The increase since 1960 has been about six weeks, estimates economist Gary Burtless of the Brookings Institution. "It's more likely you'll exhaust your benefits today than in the 1950s and '60s," he says. That's especially true in a slump, when the share of those unemployed for more than six months rises to a fifth or more.
Congress ought to send the president a stand-alone extension of unemployment benefits. It would be hard to veto. Compared with the $152 billion price tag on the economic stimulus program earlier this year, the cost is slight, and the added protections would go to innocent victims of the downturn.
But this may be a fantasy. It seems equally plausible that the extension would be added to an expensive extravaganza of other spending increases (construction projects, grants to states, energy subsidies) and tax breaks labeled "Stimulus II." The whole package would be a partisan sledgehammer designed to show that Democrats care about the economy and Republicans don't. It could then become easily mired in partisan politics, going nowhere and demonstrating again the long odds against common sense.
© 2008
- 1
- 2
Presented By
My Take
Each Newsweek reader is different—and now your Newsweek can be, too. Use this page to create a experience that's personalized for you and your interests. My Take: it makes Newsweek whatever you want it to be.
Discuss