Skip to comments.WH Spokesman Jay Carney: Unemployment Benefits Could Create Up To One Million Jobs or Something
Posted on 08/10/2011 9:35:28 PM PDT by Nachum
Short term unemployment benefits provide people financial resources while the look for a new job. Extending unemployment benefits to 18 months or longer only encourages people to take their time looking for that new job. They do not create jobs. This is the liberal concept that spending money can be equated with job creation. If that theory worked, the Stimulus would have kept unemployment under 8% as promised. We all know how that worked out.
(RCP) I understand why extending unemployment insurance provides relief to people who need it, but how does that create jobs, Wall Street Journals Laura Meckler asked Jay Carney Wednesdays WH briefing.
Carney sarcastically responded: Oh, uh, it is by, uh, I would expect a reporter from the Wall Street Journal would know this as part of the entrance exam.
(Excerpt) Read more at bluegrasspundit.com ...
The inmates are running the asylum.
Didn’t they say that when they extended benefits to 99 weeks ...
Where are THOSE 1 million jobs ???
The only thing it does is put food on the table [barely], keep a roof over their heads, and keep people subsisting in life ...
Are you serious? Nancy pelosi
When we need the Dems to do something all we get is their sarcasm
Let’s just extend unemployment benefits for 20-30 years.
Heck, I’ll jump on that gravy train. Yeah, I’ll get bored but I’ll just work under the table so I can double dip.
As far as who pays, well, that is SEP*
*SEP=Someone Else’s Problem
The only jobs the Odummy Administration has created are caddies.
It does more than discourage people from finding work. It increases the premiums companies pay...especially if they log even one layoff...so nobody’s hiring...its a self-fulfilling death spiral. If Mr. Carney can’t think of any other way to get money into the economy, might I suggest lower taxes.
Thank goodness I'm a patient man. LOL
Just think how many jobs would be created if everyone was on unemployment. The thought sure stimulates me... and astounds me too..
This is what passes for leadership in the WH and the DemocRat Party?
That would be wrong. I'm sure nobody would do that....except every construction worker I know who is on unemployment.
The same economic illiterates who disparage the multiplier effect when the growth is in the private sector, want you to believe in trickle down economics when government welfare is the source.
All of the pinheads in this regime act and talk like they are on drugs.
What a total maroon.
How did the photographer get them to sit so still?? - That pic sums up the Obama OPM (Other People’s Money) Team!
If there were soup lines, the farmers that produce the ingredients would make more money, allowing them to hire more people to produce more ingredients.
Easy... just put more people on the soup lines.
“only encourages people to take their time looking for that new job. “
I know a liberal guy who took a year off, living off his girl friends salary and unemployment. He purposefully blew job interviews. Figured it was his right since he had paid into the system for so long.
Same with a former next door neighbor, union type guy. Took a whole year of unemployment, just doing enough to make it look like he was in a job search.
I will agree to this is if they put this stipulation in place- If we are going to give them unemployment, they need to be picking up garbage in their city, painting over graffiti, trimming tress, mowing lawns etc. The if they are not in a job interview, this is how we need to use the unemployed for the betterment of our society. win win
White House spokesman Jay Carney was preaching the religion of Keynesian economics. It is a method by which government inflates demand by putting money into peoples’ pockets to spend on products, thus, stimulating productive segments of the economy that would have otherwise remained idle, to produce wealth. They would argue that the poor are more likely to spend that money rather than keeping it from circulation by saving it. This behavior, Keynesians argue, guarantees even more generation of wealth. Eric Cantor comments that the theory is: “government can be counted on to spend more wisely than the people.”
The problem is demand does not generate wealth, capital, both human and material, does. Wealth is generated by the accumulation of income producing assets or what economists call capital formation. Keynesian economics fails becuase government misallocates resourses, and because government can’t create wealth. It can only move it around.
Paying someone not to work does not grow the economy. When someone spends all of their money instead of saving or investing it, they will never be wealthy. They become dependent on the system.
Keynesian economics fails because of an effect called “Crowding Out.” Simply put, for every dollar of government spending, private investment must be reduced by the same amount. Since the government does not have a surplus of money to spend, it must sell treasury bills to finance this spending. Thus, personal and corporate savings are used to buy these T-bills, and these funds are no longer available for private spending and private investment. Thus any increase in government spending is exactly offset by a reduction in private investment and private spending.
When Keynesian policy fails to stimulate, the chorus from the left will be that the government didn’t do enough. Didn’t spend enough. The government will rush out an even larger stimulus package, but this time our Asian benefactors might not be so quick to finance it. In fact, they may decide it’s time to cash in their chips. If that happens, hyperinflation will ensue decimating what is left of the consumers purchasing power.