Sunday, February 21, 2010

Long term unemployment is terrible

The New York Times has a pretty good article on long term unemployment. There are millions of people in America who simply can't find jobs, because they don't exist right now. As a result, they're going into debt, and facing extreme hardship.

Attempting to fix this should really be a no brainer for the Democrats. If people keep suffering, they won't get votes. Right now, a lot of the long term unemployed in America are receiving unemployment insurance benefits, but the article says that will stop for many of them in the coming months unless Congress approves an extension which Obama is asking for.

They really, really should do that. It will of course make them more popular. But also, if people stop receiving unemployment benefits, they will buy less. The economy is already suffering from depressed demand, as people cut back on spending since they lost so much of their housing wealth. Giving money to the unemployed is one of the easiest ways to boost demand, as they need it to live.

So if the Democrats are dumb enough not to approve the extension, then not only will the beneficiaries be annoyed with them, but the economy as a whole will be worse off, which also bodes ill for them.

The article follows one woman who has been unemployed for two years, Jean Eisen. She and her husband depleted their savings, and now have 15,000 in credit card debt. This is a good example of the insanity of the modern american credit system. It doesn't sound like they'll ever be able to pay that off. I'm sure there are a lot of people in the same situation.

Banks are currently listing that sort of debt as "assets". On their balance sheets, they presume that this sort of debt will be paid back. It looks to me like a lousy assumption, about as lousy as assuming that the subprime mortgages were going to be paid back.

Obviously, that credit system should be reformed (it probably won't be). But in the short term, it would make sense for the government to keep providing unemployment benefits to these people, so they don't have to go into debt.

You can look at the lifestyle, choices or lack of skills like Jean Eisen, and think that it's her "fault" that she's in the situation she's in. Maybe she could learn how to cook pinto beans, of which she has ten bags. They're nutritious! And she might lose some of that weight she complains is keeping her from getting a job. And maybe they could move to a place with cheaper rent.

But this sort of speculation is the wrong way to go about it. Whatever you might think individuals should do differently, the problem is structural. People like her used to be able to get jobs. And, they did a good enough job to earn the money they received. Now, no matter how hard they look, they can't because the jobs aren't there. In a weak economy like this, if one person does better and does find a job, that means another doesn't. Better individual choices won't do much to solve a collective problem. Its a miserable situation. Welfare is not much help, because thanks to Clinton's reforms it's much harder to get, and you're often required to be working to qualify.

I had very low expectations for Obama and the Democrats. But one of the things that surprised me was their reluctance to do things very clearly in their self-interest, such as improving the social safety net for the long-term unemployed.

It would help them in the polls, and it would help the economy, which would also help them in the polls. They've done a bit to help, but really they should have done a lot, lot more, purely from self interest.

They haven't. They cut a lot of good things to help the poor from the stimulus, and replaced them with tax cuts. Tax cuts don't help Jean Eisen very much. And they wonder why a Republican took Kennedy's seat.

People are suffering, and the guys in power don't seem to be fixing things, so they vote for the other ones. It might not make sense, but the American two party system doesn't make sense. A competent political party (ie. not the Democrats) would have recognized that if they don't make simple fixes like more unemployment insurance to aid to those suffering in the downturn, people will vote for the other guys, even if they're frothing, raving lunatics. It should be a simple choice, not something they debate and waver about.

Democrats: mendacious, and stupid.

No comments:

Post a Comment