The Senate is back this week from the winter recess and will vote on whether to extend unemployment insurance and whether it will confirm Janet Yellen as the Fed chief.
Shall we extend unemployment insurance? Let us analyze what the extension means for the economy and in politics. Is it morally justifiable?
First and foremost: it is not very easy to cut social welfare money, especially in the election year. No one wants to look like cold blooded, heartless monster that cut the vital supplies to workers that are cut off by no faults of their own. That, of course depends upon how the rest of us would react to another spending and big government issues. How is the extension funded? Are our taxes going up again for those people in need?
The unemployment insurance is not exactly welfare. The money is not paid based upon whether the person needs it or not. The payment amounts are based upon how much he or she was earning. The higher the wages are, the more they get the UI money. Yes, the UI money could be for maintaining the big houses already own, or paying for. Should it be supported by our tax money? How should the middle class be paying for them to keep their houses?
Some say the UI money will be spent because they need it. But again, it is not the welfare money that will be supplied to them. There is this thing that if the UI money won't be given to those in need, they will get it from the welfare anyway. The supposed cost of UI should that taken into account. The UI money minus the welfare would be the cost of such measures that will be discussed in the Senate. How much more should we have to pay for an extra money to support those who need more than the welfare money?
How about the moral aspect of the UI money versus the welfare money? Should it give more encouragement to the unemployed workers, since it is time limited?
The maximum weekly UI caps are shown here:
Alabama - $265
Alaska - $441
Arizona - $240
Arkansas - $457
California - $450
Colorado - $454
Connecticut - $555
Delaware - $330
District of Columbia - $405
Florida - $275
Georgia - $330
Hawaii - $560
Idaho - $343
Illinois - $385
Indiana - $390
Iowa - $459
Kansas - $420
Kentucky - $415
Louisiana - $258
Maine - $372
Maryland - $410
Massachusetts - $653
Michigan - $362
Minnesota - $585
Mississippi - $235
Missouri - $320
Montana - $446
Nebraska - $348
Nevada - $398
New Hampshire - $427
New Jersey - $600
New Mexico - $455
New York - $405
North Carolina - $535, $350, effective 7/1/13
North Dakota - $470
Ohio - $524
Oklahoma - $368
Oregon - $507
Pennsylvania - $573
Puerto Rico - $133
Rhode Island - $566
South Carolina - $326
South Dakota - $295
Tennessee - $275
Texas - $426
Utah - $451
Vermont - $425
Virginia - $378
Virgin Islands - $454
Washington - $604
West Virginia - $424
Wisconsin - $363
Wyoming - $387
Shall we extend unemployment insurance? Let us analyze what the extension means for the economy and in politics. Is it morally justifiable?
First and foremost: it is not very easy to cut social welfare money, especially in the election year. No one wants to look like cold blooded, heartless monster that cut the vital supplies to workers that are cut off by no faults of their own. That, of course depends upon how the rest of us would react to another spending and big government issues. How is the extension funded? Are our taxes going up again for those people in need?
The unemployment insurance is not exactly welfare. The money is not paid based upon whether the person needs it or not. The payment amounts are based upon how much he or she was earning. The higher the wages are, the more they get the UI money. Yes, the UI money could be for maintaining the big houses already own, or paying for. Should it be supported by our tax money? How should the middle class be paying for them to keep their houses?
Some say the UI money will be spent because they need it. But again, it is not the welfare money that will be supplied to them. There is this thing that if the UI money won't be given to those in need, they will get it from the welfare anyway. The supposed cost of UI should that taken into account. The UI money minus the welfare would be the cost of such measures that will be discussed in the Senate. How much more should we have to pay for an extra money to support those who need more than the welfare money?
How about the moral aspect of the UI money versus the welfare money? Should it give more encouragement to the unemployed workers, since it is time limited?
The maximum weekly UI caps are shown here:
Alabama - $265
Alaska - $441
Arizona - $240
Arkansas - $457
California - $450
Colorado - $454
Connecticut - $555
Delaware - $330
District of Columbia - $405
Florida - $275
Georgia - $330
Hawaii - $560
Idaho - $343
Illinois - $385
Indiana - $390
Iowa - $459
Kansas - $420
Kentucky - $415
Louisiana - $258
Maine - $372
Maryland - $410
Massachusetts - $653
Michigan - $362
Minnesota - $585
Mississippi - $235
Missouri - $320
Montana - $446
Nebraska - $348
Nevada - $398
New Hampshire - $427
New Jersey - $600
New Mexico - $455
New York - $405
North Carolina - $535, $350, effective 7/1/13
North Dakota - $470
Ohio - $524
Oklahoma - $368
Oregon - $507
Pennsylvania - $573
Puerto Rico - $133
Rhode Island - $566
South Carolina - $326
South Dakota - $295
Tennessee - $275
Texas - $426
Utah - $451
Vermont - $425
Virginia - $378
Virgin Islands - $454
Washington - $604
West Virginia - $424
Wisconsin - $363
Wyoming - $387