The “New Normal”

I agree that unemployment is a serious problem. The question is what to do about it. Monetary stimulus (such as the QEII program) and fiscal stimulus (such as the extension of the Bush tax cuts) are designed to help reduce unemployment by getting nominal spending back to its pre-crisis trend.

Why don’t you deal with the content of his post? He provides reference links to every point that he makes.

For the same reason I do not engage in line by line readings of the writings of Robert Welch.

Mortimer Adler and Charles van Doren published several editions of a guide called How to Read a Book. Among their recommendations is that in approaching a piece of literature, one size up every cue their is about its content, browse the index, read the first and last page, skim rapidly, &c. One makes a preliminary examination and then decides on whether or not to do an ‘inspectional reading’; one undertakes an inspectional reading and then decides whether to do a line by line reading and so forth.

Unidentified individuals peddling social apocalypse I put in a category equivalent to the category I would place a book with a title like None Dare Call It Conspiracy, i.e. diversions for people with an affinity for that sort of thing. It is not the sort of think that merits close reading. There is ample literature out there generated by people who have made a serious study of economic life their vocation. I do not understand why you waste your time on this crap, and, no, I am not going to waste my time with yours.

David,

The facts cited in the article are generally correct. I believe that the Fed’s actions have kept unemployment lower than it otherwise would have been. Hopefully things like QEII and the new tax deal will help spur growth and reduce unemployment.

Forum civility seems to be the standard on AC, and although I admit to being snarky at times, I still respect all views posted on this website, however misinformed : )

Aside to Art: Have you ever read Charles Van Doren’s book “The Joy of Reading.” ? Well done introduction to some great literature. His father, Mark, wasn’t a bad poet either.

Blackadder inquiry: Given your study of jobless stats, was wondering what your take is on extending unemployment benefits. After all, what is the incentive to look for a job if you can collect a paycheck from the government for up to two years, ranging from $250 in the South to as much as $900 a week in the People’s Republic of Massachusetts?

Perhaps some kind of measurable “indolent” index ought to be reflected in the “official” unemployment report every month.

You could stand to be less snippy in your comments to David. Implied personal attacks generally aren’t very persuasive.

I am implying not one thing. I am saying in explict terms that he is spending time reading junk literature when he could be reading good literature. If that fails to persuade, too bad. (That actually was snippy).

Anecdotally, Adder, I ran into someone this morning, who worked for many years as an $8.50-per-hour convenience store clerk and was fired the other day. She says she’s going to “sit back and collect unemployment for as long as I can. My husband says why should I go to work when I can get more staying home and driving a school bus 3 months a year?”

The Welfare State is alive and well.

MZ, first I am not making it up.

Secondly, you may reasonably infer from my comments that I was critical of the recipient; to a degree I am because it suggests indolence on her part and those whose attitude is that just because they paid premiums they are somehow entitled to benefits. Those benefits should be after an effort is made to acquire employment, in my view. Not having ever collected any such benefits in 50 years of working, I am still under the impression that state laws require that some regular effort be made to get a job in order to stay on the dole. Perhaps, being more familiar with such benefits, you can enlighten me on this point.

By the way, she was not fired for any just cause — she told me her employer state that “by law” he did not have to give a reason.

I never used the word “illegitimately” nor suggested that what she is doing is in any way unlawful. I wouldn’t even fault her on moral or ethical grounds. Merely reporting facts and giving my opinion that it seems the “work ethic” has eroded in American life because of socialistic trends that many would say began in the 1930′s with FDR. In essence, if you can’t take care of yourself, the government will. I understand this is called a “safety net” and as a Social Security recipient it would be hypocritical of me to complaint. But since I paid in I suppose I am “entitled” to the benefits that I helped finance.

Thanks for clarification.

“why should I go to work when I can get more staying home and driving a school bus 3 months a year?”

I was in that situation some years ago — I lost a job, was on UI for two months, and accepted a new job that paid LESS than what I got in unemployment benefits. In retrospect, I probably could have held out a little bit longer and found something that paid better, but at the time I was deathly afraid of staying out of the workforce too long and leaving a gap in my resume. There was also the matter of obtaining health insurance for my family, since there was no way I could afford COBRA coverage, and I thought I didn’t qualify for Medicaid (I later found out that my daughter did, at least). Nobody had to prod me to keep looking for another job — looking for work became a full-time job in and of itself