Opinion: Do Unemployment Benefits Promote Laziness?

(July 20) -- Editor's note: On Monday, President Barack Obama pushed for passage of an unemployment benefits extension bill, calling out Republicans who'd been trying to block the move by saying "These leaders in the Senate who are advancing a misguided notion that emergency relief somehow discourages people from looking for a job should talk to these folks. That attitude, I think, reflects a lack of faith in the American people."

We wanted to know what people thought of this debate, and asked writers to respond through Seed.com. Here are some of the responses:

Americans Want to Work

Extending the unemployment benefits would not, in most cases, discourage people from seeking full-time employment. Unless you've never received unemployment benefits, you know that the benefits are a fraction of the monetary amount you would receive if working full time.

Americans want to work, but in today's job market many jobs are still unavailable. Some unemployed Americans have even stooped to applying for jobs that pay far less than they were getting paid, only to be denied by the company because the employer felt the applicant was "overqualified" for the job.

Have you looked in your local newspaper's help wanted section lately? If you have, then you will see that there is usually more garage sale listings than job listings.

The idea that unemployed Americans only want extended benefits so they do not have to work anymore is preposterous. Americans want to work!

Subsidizing Too Many Deadbeats

When President Obama brought three unemployed Americans out with him for his press conference, it highlighted the problem with the current state of the debate. Trotting out hand-selected people who need assistance is more about politics than anything else.

There is no doubt that some people will avoid returning to work while they have income coming in. People who have family who support them may just use the unemployment income as spending money. While there are obviously people out there who are trying to secure work, how many deadbeats are the American people supposed to subsidize for each hardworking person on unemployment.

While on the surface unemployment seems like a perfectly reasonable expense for the country, at its core it fails in the same way that most welfare systems do. The bureaucrats who run these organizations have no method of policing their systems, leading to rampant abuse.

The best course is to cut unemployment back to its original length. Yes, some very good people will be cut off in their time of need, but many people who are just riding the free money train will finally be thrown off. With the deficit and the debt as the two largest problems in America right now, somewhat drastic steps need to be taken.

Extending Benefits Boosts the Economy

Denying continued benefits to the unemployed makes no sense economically. The meager compensation received by most unemployed workers is directed back into the economy in the form of paying for housing, transportation, food and other necessities. Without that compensation, millions of people will lose their homes (thus exacerbating the housing crisis) and be unable to care for themselves, thus creating a further drain on the economy.

Of course there are hard-core unemployed and unemployable individuals who take advantage of the system. But most of those individuals are not collecting unemployment benefits. The vast majority of the nation's unemployed want to work and are seeking work. Their work search is discouraged not by receiving unemployment benefits but rather by the inability of industry and government to create jobs.

Use the Stimulus to Pay for It

My take on this is, last year the Congress approved unemployment benefits for 99 weeks, and the money was there to pay for it. So it was voted in, not too much of a surprise to the American people. Now this month they want to extend it out to 126 weeks, 27 more weeks further than last year, and not fund it but borrow the money. That is why the Senate is hesitating. The Senate argument is that we have almost half the stimulus money left over from last year that we can now use instead of borrow. The amount is a paltry $34 billion that can be covered easily by the stimulus fund that was not spent.

The question is, Why borrow when you can pay for it upfront with the stimulus money? After all, aren't we in debt to the tune of $13 trillion? Why borrow when you can pay for it?

Providing Some Breathing Room

I was let go on May 1 of 2009. On May 2 I applied for unemployment and began the search for a new job. My unemployment benefits gave me a bit of breathing room, but they certainly did not offer relief from the panic I felt at not being employed. I was worried about staying on unemployment too long and worried about how that looked to employers.

I spent hours every single day searching online for work, going through the paper and even walking uninvited into offices all over town, resume and letters of recommendation in hand, just hoping for an interview. Had I known how long it would take to find a job, and had I been offered extra time on unemployment, I absolutely would have taken it. I do not believe that the acceptance of aid in that situation indicates laziness or ineptness; it is simply a symptom of our struggling economy.

We Should Do Onto Others

The argument is simply this: If it were YOU without a job, would you want your society to help you in your time of need? My husband was on unemployment following the loss of his job, and it helped us "in the meantime" so that we could stay in our home and pay our bills. I was still working, yet my salary alone would not have been enough to make ends meet.

The people who have lost their jobs in the recession were not fired because they were lazy or unable to perform, and this is important to keep in mind. Americans are a hardworking people and also a generous people. We are not the kind who can sit idly by while our fellow citizens suffer in silence

We Should Stop Babying People

I believe that to truly re-create a stable economy, America needs to endure the hardships that stem from preventable mistakes as well as unpreventable tragedies like Katrina. I think that America's babying policy, as shown with unemployment benefits going to perfectly able workers, discourages spontaneous "Oh s---! " creativity and encourages sitting on your ass unproductively.

Without the money, one might feel inspired to create salsa as a last resort to financial stability. The least it could do is create more jobs.


A Few Bad Apples

Unemployment benefits have unfortunately been a part of my reality for the past two years. I've had close relatives that have lost their jobs due to cuts and layoffs at companies that they had been loyal to for decades. These people lived off of unemployment benefits while actively searching for employment. The reality is that jobs are in short supply at this point in time, and unemployment benefits are the only things keeping some people off of the streets.

That being said, I do know that there are people who try to cheat the system and live off of "free money" as they try to skirt around the rules of unemployment benefits. Obviously, I disagree and am disgusted by this behavior. However, there will always be people who bend the rules and twist a good thing meant for good people for their own benefit. The question is, Can we punish the majority of hardworking American people who are truly searching for jobs, due to the lazy, childish behavior of the few?

It's Insurance, People

As Republican leaders lobby hard against extending benefits to the unemployed, a troubling narrative has surfaced, with some conservative politicians essentially suggesting that unemployment benefits are for freeloaders that simply don't want to work. We expect our representatives in Washington to debate policy. We don't expect them to insult Americans simply for being unemployed during one of the worst job markets in recent history. To add insult to injury, the Republicans then turn and insult the unemployed simply for claiming what they're owed.

That's right, I said it: Benefits are owed to the unemployed. Think I'm wrong? Check your pay stubs. You'll notice that you have been paying into something called unemployment insurance. That's right, paying for insurance. Although Republicans would have you equate unemployment benefits with "welfare," they're not remotely the same, since you've been paying for unemployment benefits all your working life.

In this job market, finding work could take time or even require new training or relocation. Unemployment insurance helps get you from one job to the next, which begs the question, Why don't Republicans want to help people transition into new jobs?

Is Help a Dirty Word?

The Republican contention that those currently unemployed are just lazy and happy to live on unemployment benefits is ludicrous. No one used to working and having health benefits would be happy to lounge around receiving a few hundred dollars a week and no health benefits.

Republican congressmen make over $100,000 a year and have the best health care that money can buy. The irony is that the benefits they are receiving are partially paid for by those "lazy" people. Even unemployment money is taxed. Such politicians have lost their humanity.

When did the Republicans become so ideological that for them, helping less fortunate Americans has become a dirty word? Perhaps they have forgotten what being an American truly means.