7 ms·

It’s ironic. In the USA they freak out over the idea that someone might receive more unemployment than they are entitled to, but they will happily waste million

by 65536 6y ago

It’s ironic. In the USA they freak out over the idea that someone might receive more unemployment than they are entitled to, but they will happily waste millions of dollars paying someone to do a shitty job.

jagged-chisel 6y ago
Tangent: during my last stint on unemployment, there was this class we were required to attend. In that class, they repeatedly told us that we are not entitled to unemployment benefits. They didn't exactly offer an alternative vocabulary.
- cosmie 6y ago
  It certainly fits the government's definition of an entitlement[1]. It's also structured as a non-optional, government-ran insurance scheme predominantly funded through explicit payroll tax obligations[2], which employers aren't entitled to opt out of. As long as you meet your states particular flavor of requirements, you're entitled to your unemployment insurance benefits. Despite any statements to the contrary states may push in their mandatory unemployment class. [1] https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.htm https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.h... [2] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-unemployment-insurance-trust-fund-and-how-it-financed https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-unemploym...
- c3534l 6y ago
  That's absurd. They take it out of your paycheck every month, it's paid entirely from employee wages, it can't be spent on anything but unemployment, and you get benefits proportional to what you contributed. It's literally your own money that they're giving back to you that they took for the sole purpose of forcing you to save money for if you lose your job at some point. It's like if I asked to borrow a pen, then when you asked for it back pretending like it was some benevolent gift.
  - jagged-chisel 6y ago
    It's definitely not a line item on paychecks in my state. It's structured as an insurance premium paid by companies to the state. The company's premiums increase when there's a claim against the "policy." Smaller companies like to try denying claims in an attempt to prevent this increase. One could certainly argue that if this 'premium' didn't exist, it could be paid out in salaries.
    - c3534l 6y ago
      That's right, I recall something like that. I think states administer their own unemployment system even though it's mandated by the federal government. It's a payroll tax where I live. It's calculated based on your wages and paid based on the amount of insurance you've funded regardless of whether the regulations/company decides to display it on the calculation or not. It might also get buried under something like "state and local taxes," too.
  - Chozenlaruso 6y ago
    Unemployment costs are handled by the employer. It is the State Unemployment Insurance (SUI) tax. All employers are experience rated based on age, number of claims, and win/loss rates in claim protests. It is not taken out of employee paychecks.
ianlevesque 6y ago
I fully support more generous unemployment benefits but there are problems with just handing out money too. https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerian-crime-ring-steals-millions-us-unemployment-sites-coronavirus-fraud-2020-5?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerian-crime-ring-steals-m...
- monadic2 6y ago
  Well whatever we’re doing with half a million homeless is clearly not working.
  - pstuart 6y ago
    The problem is that things are working great for those in charge. With the coming wave of evictions that number is likely to soar. Things are going to get a lot worse before there's any opportunity to fix things.
- cryptoz 6y ago
  Your link doesn't support your claim. The article indicates a crime syndicate was responsible, a group who had already stolen lots of money. The weakness here is not in a UBI-type system at all; money was being stolen regardless of the source. > The fraudsters took advantage of states that were already struggling to process a flood of jobless claims amid the COVID-19 pandemic and related government shutdowns. To me, this reads as a negative mark against the US federal government for denying the existence of the threat. Not a result of the aide programs themselves.
  - ianlevesque 6y ago
    Yeah UBI could’ve fixed this.
daenz 6y ago
>they will happily waste millions of dollars Who is "they"? I don't think anyone but corrupt politicians and their cronies are happy about wasting millions of taxpayer dollars. Certainly not the taxpayers.
- bobthepanda 6y ago
  The "small government" party also likes to push the fallacy that if it's private-sector work it must be efficient. Now the government has been broken so thoroughly that it no longer has the capacity to actually audit the private-sector work it contracts out.
  - daenz 6y ago
    Are you saying that if the government was bigger, it would spend taxpayer dollars more efficiently?
    - bobthepanda 6y ago
      The fact that one extreme is false does not make the other extreme true. That being said, at some point if you're cutting, or if you don't know where you're cutting, at some point you will hit bone. More money is not a panacea but neither is less.
      - daenz 6y ago
        I guess I don't understand your position other than "just make it run better." What concrete steps do you want to see occur to make the government run more efficiently, and will they grow or shrink the government?
        bobthepanda 6y ago
        If the government is going to contract out work it at least needs to have the capability to audit the results of such work on an ongoing basis, rather than just get left with a flaming bag of crap after the fact. To that end the government needs to attract, develop, and keep in-house talent, starting by actually offering competitive compensation.
bezmenov 6y ago
It's embedded in the human psyche. Thousands a day will step over a street beggar to begrudgingly buy a barely palatable coffee from the kiosk they're sitting beside.
PragmaticPulp 6y ago
> In the USA they freak out over the idea that someone might receive more unemployment than they are entitled to, There isn’t an infinite amount of unemployment money available. If you allow fraud to run rampant in these systems, there is less money available for those who actually need it. Enforcing rules and regulations is a good thing for everyone. Furthermore, many people are earning more on the current USA unemployment system than they did from their original jobs. The system was designed to overpay some people for the sake of quickly delivering the system. (Source: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-americans-are-getting-more-money-from-unemployment-than-they-were-from-their-jobs/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-americans-are-gett... )
- jacques_chester 6y ago
  It's not mutually exclusive. And a lot of welfare legislation is about posturing for voters, rather than settling on an optimal balance.

by 65536 6y ago

jagged-chisel 6y ago

Tangent: during my last stint on unemployment, there was this class we were required to attend. In that class, they repeatedly told us that we are not entitled to unemployment benefits. They didn't exactly offer an alternative vocabulary.

cosmie 6y ago
It certainly fits the government's definition of an entitlement[1]. It's also structured as a non-optional, government-ran insurance scheme predominantly funded through explicit payroll tax obligations[2], which employers aren't entitled to opt out of. As long as you meet your states particular flavor of requirements, you're entitled to your unemployment insurance benefits. Despite any statements to the contrary states may push in their mandatory unemployment class. [1] https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.htm https://www.senate.gov/reference/glossary_term/entitlement.h... [2] https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-unemployment-insurance-trust-fund-and-how-it-financed https://www.taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/what-unemploym...
c3534l 6y ago
That's absurd. They take it out of your paycheck every month, it's paid entirely from employee wages, it can't be spent on anything but unemployment, and you get benefits proportional to what you contributed. It's literally your own money that they're giving back to you that they took for the sole purpose of forcing you to save money for if you lose your job at some point. It's like if I asked to borrow a pen, then when you asked for it back pretending like it was some benevolent gift.
- jagged-chisel 6y ago
  It's definitely not a line item on paychecks in my state. It's structured as an insurance premium paid by companies to the state. The company's premiums increase when there's a claim against the "policy." Smaller companies like to try denying claims in an attempt to prevent this increase. One could certainly argue that if this 'premium' didn't exist, it could be paid out in salaries.
  - c3534l 6y ago
    That's right, I recall something like that. I think states administer their own unemployment system even though it's mandated by the federal government. It's a payroll tax where I live. It's calculated based on your wages and paid based on the amount of insurance you've funded regardless of whether the regulations/company decides to display it on the calculation or not. It might also get buried under something like "state and local taxes," too.
- Chozenlaruso 6y ago
  Unemployment costs are handled by the employer. It is the State Unemployment Insurance (SUI) tax. All employers are experience rated based on age, number of claims, and win/loss rates in claim protests. It is not taken out of employee paychecks.

ianlevesque 6y ago

I fully support more generous unemployment benefits but there are problems with just handing out money too. https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerian-crime-ring-steals-millions-us-unemployment-sites-coronavirus-fraud-2020-5?op=1 https://www.businessinsider.com/nigerian-crime-ring-steals-m...

monadic2 6y ago
Well whatever we’re doing with half a million homeless is clearly not working.
- pstuart 6y ago
  The problem is that things are working great for those in charge. With the coming wave of evictions that number is likely to soar. Things are going to get a lot worse before there's any opportunity to fix things.
cryptoz 6y ago
Your link doesn't support your claim. The article indicates a crime syndicate was responsible, a group who had already stolen lots of money. The weakness here is not in a UBI-type system at all; money was being stolen regardless of the source. > The fraudsters took advantage of states that were already struggling to process a flood of jobless claims amid the COVID-19 pandemic and related government shutdowns. To me, this reads as a negative mark against the US federal government for denying the existence of the threat. Not a result of the aide programs themselves.
- ianlevesque 6y ago
  Yeah UBI could’ve fixed this.

daenz 6y ago

>they will happily waste millions of dollars Who is "they"? I don't think anyone but corrupt politicians and their cronies are happy about wasting millions of taxpayer dollars. Certainly not the taxpayers.

bobthepanda 6y ago
The "small government" party also likes to push the fallacy that if it's private-sector work it must be efficient. Now the government has been broken so thoroughly that it no longer has the capacity to actually audit the private-sector work it contracts out.
- daenz 6y ago
  Are you saying that if the government was bigger, it would spend taxpayer dollars more efficiently?
  - bobthepanda 6y ago
    The fact that one extreme is false does not make the other extreme true. That being said, at some point if you're cutting, or if you don't know where you're cutting, at some point you will hit bone. More money is not a panacea but neither is less.
    - daenz 6y ago
      I guess I don't understand your position other than "just make it run better." What concrete steps do you want to see occur to make the government run more efficiently, and will they grow or shrink the government?
      - bobthepanda 6y ago
        If the government is going to contract out work it at least needs to have the capability to audit the results of such work on an ongoing basis, rather than just get left with a flaming bag of crap after the fact. To that end the government needs to attract, develop, and keep in-house talent, starting by actually offering competitive compensation.

bezmenov 6y ago

It's embedded in the human psyche. Thousands a day will step over a street beggar to begrudgingly buy a barely palatable coffee from the kiosk they're sitting beside.

PragmaticPulp 6y ago

> In the USA they freak out over the idea that someone might receive more unemployment than they are entitled to, There isn’t an infinite amount of unemployment money available. If you allow fraud to run rampant in these systems, there is less money available for those who actually need it. Enforcing rules and regulations is a good thing for everyone. Furthermore, many people are earning more on the current USA unemployment system than they did from their original jobs. The system was designed to overpay some people for the sake of quickly delivering the system. (Source: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-americans-are-getting-more-money-from-unemployment-than-they-were-from-their-jobs/ https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/many-americans-are-gett... )

jacques_chester 6y ago
It's not mutually exclusive. And a lot of welfare legislation is about posturing for voters, rather than settling on an optimal balance.