Incestuous Narcissism Part 2

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. -Old Chinese Proverb.

And these days not only do people get fish, they demand that you catch it for them and/or “the rich” give them their fish because it’s only “fair”.

And if that fish isn’t good enough for them they will throw it back until they get a bigger, better fish that THEY like!

Unemployment insurance prior to the Age of Obama was for 26 weeks. 6 months and was only meant to help you out in between jobs. Not be de-facto welfare.

Or a stimulus, if you remember what Speaker Pelosi said in July 2010:

“Let me say that unemployment insurance… is one of the biggest stimuluses (sic) to our economy. Economists will tell you, this money is spent quickly. It injects demand into the economy, and it’s job creating. It creates jobs faster than almost any other initiative you can name.”

So unemployment is good for everyone! So nearly 10% unemployment is great!

Aren’t you happy? Don’t you have lots of Hope!? 🙂

Now it stretch to 2 YEARS or more. Because Democrats have made finding a job so hard they have to cover their own buts by bribing people.

They call it “compassion”. I call it a bribe. Democrats are very good at paternalistic bribes.

The government pays you not to work. You in turn don’t bother looking. And if you aren’t looking you aren’t one of the statistics on Unemployment numbers because you aren’t looking.

Thus, the government can keep it artificially lower than it already is. Which is very high indeed.

So the Unemployment rate is just another political game to be manipulated.

Meanwhile, you have people just sitting around eating Doritos and hanging out doing nothing and getting paid for it!

And the government doesn’t make it easy to get off the dole either. Whether on purpose or not.

In the first year of unemployment, the size of the benefit check is based on your old salary. You can go right back on unemployment after a temp job, and nothing changes. But federal law requires states to recalculate benefits for the second year. If you worked a few days or a few months, the second year’s checks will be based on that lower earnings total. (Hartford Courant)

So you’re on unemployment, you get a temp job, your benefits get cut. So the obvious answer is to not take the temp job, right?

The government makes you want to stay.

But now Ms. Hanson rues the day she took that work. Why? The Connecticut Department of Labor used her negligible earnings in her part-time job as the new baseline for Hanson’s unemployment benefits. She went from receiving $483 a week to getting nothing.

“Afterwards, unofficially, they said I shouldn’t have taken the job,” Hanson says. (CSM)

Incentives to stay unemployed. Incestuous you might ask? At least I would.

Employers and economists point to several explanations. Extending jobless benefits to 99 weeks gives the unemployed less incentive to search out new work. Millions of homeowners are unable to move for a job because the real-estate collapse leaves them owing more on their homes than they are worth.

The job market itself also has changed. During the crisis, companies slashed millions of middle-skill, middle-wage jobs. That has created a glut of people who can’t qualify for highly skilled jobs but have a hard time adjusting to low-pay, unskilled work…

Many of the applicants he (Mark Sperry of Catepillar) saw at job fairs, he says, were just going through the motions so they could collect their unemployment checks. Some workers agree that unemployment benefits make them less likely to take whatever job comes along, particularly when those jobs don’t pay much. Michael Hatchell, a 52-year-old mechanic in Lumberton, N.C., says he turned down more than a dozen offers during the 59 weeks he was unemployed, because they didn’t pay more than the $450 a week he was collecting in benefits.

It is particularly troubling at a time when 4.3% of the labor force has been out of work for more than six months—a level much higher than after any other recession since 1948. (WSJ)

So what are you to do if Unemployment pays better than the job?

Just game the system.

And the system shall provide.

The disconnect between workers and jobs could constrain the economy for some time. It makes it hard for even small firms, which as a group typically account for an outsize share of job growth in a rebound. (WSJ)

So if you have 99 weeks of unemployment, you go out “looking” for a job but not really, then when it gets to about 95 weeks you get serious about it. But that’s nearly 2 years later!

There was a Swedish study that when they cut the benefit time, the amount of time people kept “looking” decreased in proportion.

Alan Krueger, the current Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and a highly respected labor economist has said in his academic writing exactly that: unemployment insurance causes the unemployed to stay unemployed longer.

In his academic studies Dr. Krueger wrote that “more generous unemployment insurance (UI) benefits have been found to be associated with longer spells of unemployment,” and further finds that “the job finding rate jumps up around the time benefits are exhausted. Most importantly, we find that job search intensity is inversely related to UI benefit generosity for those who are eligible for UI.” In other words, a senior Obama administration official finds that less generous UI benefits cause the unemployed to search harder for new work.

Lawrence Summers, Director of the White House’s National Economic Council has said the same:

“government assistance programs contribute to long-term unemployment by providing an incentive, and the means, not to work. Each unemployed person has a ‘reservation wage’—the minimum wage he or she insists on getting before accepting a job. Unemployment insurance and other social assistance programs increase [the] reservation wage, causing an unemployed person to remain unemployed longer.”

“Public policy designed to help workers who lose their jobs can lead to structural unemployment as an unintended side effect. . . . In other countries, particularly in Europe, benefits are more generous and last longer. The drawback to this generosity is that it reduces a worker’s incentive to quickly find a new job.”-Liberal Economist Paul Krugman’s Macroeconomics textbook.

The Same Paul Krugman  recently described Sen. Jon Kyl’s (R-AZ) statement that unemployment insurance causes individuals to stay out of work longer “a bizarre point of view.”(Heritage.org)

More specifically, In the NY Times:  In Mr. Kyl’s view, then, what we really need to worry about right now — with more than five unemployed workers for every job opening, and long-term unemployment at its highest level since the Great Depression — is whether we’re reducing the incentive of the unemployed to find jobs. To me, that’s a bizarre point of view — but then, I don’t live in Mr. Kyl’s universe.

So, like everything with Liberals, it’s all politics.

We, The Democrats, who have the patent on “compassion” will kiss your behind and let you sit on your ass for 2 years. As long as those evil Republicans don’t come in and demand you have some self-respect that is. 🙂

Even if they do, the Democrats will trot out their “grandma eating dog food” “they want to cut you off” “they’re heartless” “mean” “Cruel” class warfare hoaries anyhow.

Or as Mr. Krugman put it, “How can the parties agree on policy when they have utterly different visions of how the economy works, when one party feels for the unemployed, while the other weeps over affluent victims of the “death tax”?

Democrats feel your pain (good,sense they are the cause of most of it!). And Republicans are heartless, greedy and obsessed with the kiss up to “the rich”.

Meanwhile, you sit on your behind for up to 2 years eating Doritos and watching Judge Judy.

Who are you going to vote for, the pimp or Mom who says get you lazy ass off the couch? 🙂

Unemployment has become a political weapon and a tool, akin to welfare.

You don’t work, we pay you. You vote for us, we keep paying you.

Regardless of the economic and social cost.

Unemployment insurance exists for good reason, and no-one has suggested abolishing it. However, the good that it does also comes with a cost in delaying the return of the unemployed to work. Economists from right to left and in the Obama administration agree about this. Wishing it were not so does not make it true. Congress should consider both the costs and benefits of extended UI benefits when weighing how many years of benefits to provide unemployed workers. (Heritage).

But what we have now is incest at it’s best.

Think Happy

I don’t claim to be an economics wiz. Never will.

But consider the following from two different sources:

WASHINGTON — The U.S. economy shed more jobs than expected in July while the unemployment rate held steady at 9.5%, a further sign the economic recovery may be losing momentum.

The U.S. economy lost 131,000 jobs in July, with the private sector adding only 71,000 to its payrolls. The unemployment rate held steady at 9.5%.

Companies in the U.S. added workers in July for a seventh straight month at a pace that suggests the labor-market recovery will be slow to take hold.

Private payrolls that exclude government agencies rose by 71,000 after a June gain of 31,000 that was smaller than previously reported, Labor Department figures in Washington showed today. Economists projected a 90,000 July increase, according to the median estimate in a Bloomberg News survey. Overall employment fell 131,000 and unemployment held at 9.5 percent.

How can you lose 131,000 jobs but have job gains for 6 months in a row??

I don’t get it.

“Non-census payroll growth has averaged just 12,000 in the latest three months, which, no matter how you might try to spin it, is just plain lousy,” said Joshua Shapiro, chief US economist at MFR.

Those figures are expected to show that the US economy lost 63,000 jobs in July with the unemployment rate ticking up to 9.6 per cent. However, private sector employment is projected to rise by 90,000.

How does the unemployment rate increase, and employment rise at the same time?

And how can you have job gains and say the economy is recovering if unemployment is still 9.5 %  (and this figure doesn’t even touch the people who aren’t even looking anymore) and have Treasury Secretary Geithner say it’s going up before it goes down. How is that a “recovery”??

It’s not. But it sounds good. It’s Happy News.

Structural unemployment is defined as unemployment arising from technical change such as automation, or from changes in the composition of output due to variations in the types of products people demand. For example, a decline in the demand for typewriters would lead to structurally unemployed workers in the typewriter industry.

And it’s new buzzword.

And so, because of globalization and the the fact that the games has changed the nearly 10% unemployment is here to stay. That the long-term unemployed come to be seen as unemployable or as forgotten.

Shrinkage.

It’s not our fault.

It just is.

That seems to be the new line coming from the Elites.

We can’t do anything about it, so stop bitching about it. 😦

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, who were excluded from the Financial “reform” lost $1.5 billion for the 12 quarter in a row!

But don’t worry, everything’s fine. Nothing to see here. Think happy thoughts.

**********************

The fundamental issue dividing America right now is whether the people with power represent those they govern. Democrats certainly won lots of elections in 2008, and they have large majorities in both House of Congress, but have those majorities done their job of accurately representing majoritarian opinion in the U.S.? Or did the president, campaigning as a centrist, usher in a hard left Congress and then himself lurch left?

I believe that there is a deep, deep disconnect between the elites and the mainstream, and the anger that is surging on both sides of the divide grows out of the sense that majorities are being trampled on. Left-wing activists point at the Senate and argue that a minority of Republican senators is blocking the majority’s will. Center-right activists applaud those Republicans as representatives of the genuine mainstream and point to the votes and polls noted above and argue that the current Congressional majorities are false positives, unrepresentative of where the country truly is, delivered in large part by an Obama-awed MSM dominated by Journolistas moving in lock step to promote the left’s agenda.

The self-righteous and angry rhetoric of scorn and indignation employed by Bloomberg (On The Ground Zero Mosque issue) and the opponents of Prop 8 this week, and routinely by the president and his Congressional allies over the past many months, provide the perfect fuel for the fires of the neopopulism of the Tea Parties. The vast majority of Tea Party participants are mainstream Americans who work hard, pay taxes –lots and lots of taxes– and are concerned about the huge lurch left. They are fearful about the incompetence of the economic team and the vast gusher of deficit spending which continues to flow out of D.C. –another $26 billion Wednesday!– and they are concerned that their childrens’ futures are being compromised by ideological zealots. They are sick to death of the media gamesmanship of “summits” and the president’s refusal to answer questions directly or to engage his political opponents with other than sneers. Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid are the “leaders” of the left and they are mean-spirited and do not appear to be either very bright or at all good humored.

So that is where we are, 89 days from what may well be a historic “U Turn” election. The stakes are very very high, and the left has gone a long way beyond their previously announced goals and agendas.

And they will do anything to win. And after all, it’s all Bush’s Fault anyhow! 🙂

The left is, in a word, exposed. Clarity is a wonderful thing, as my friend Dennis Prager likes to say. As August unfolds, there isn’t any need to guess which way the Democrats and the cultural left wants to take the country. The only question is whether the country wants to go along, and that will be answered on November 2. (Hugh Hewitt)

So the counteraction is, REMEMBER IN NOVEMBER and vote them out.

Unless you like the status quo of Orwellian overuse of  “racism”, structural unemployment, debt, deficits, and a government running every facet of your life, that is. 🙂

And Just to make you feel good and happy: Even the innocence of childhood is being trampled by bureaucrats!

lemonade1JPG.JPG

It’s hardly unusual to hear small-business owners gripe about licensing requirements or complain that heavy-handed regulations are driving them into the red.

So when Multnomah County shut down an enterprise last week for operating without a license, you might just sigh and say, there they go again.

Except this entrepreneur was a 7-year-old named Julie Murphy. Her business was a lemonade stand at the Last Thursday monthly art fair in Northeast Portland. The government regulation she violated? Failing to get a $120 temporary restaurant license.

Turns out that kids’ lemonade stands — those constants of summertime — are supposed to get a permit in Oregon, particularly at big events that happen to be patrolled regularly by county health inspectors.

“I understand the reason behind what they’re doing and it’s a neighborhood event, and they’re trying to generate revenue,” said Jon Kawaguchi, environmental health supervisor for the Multnomah County Health Department. “But we still need to put the public’s health first.”

It was for your good. Doesn’t that make you feel better that the government is looking out for rogue lemonade stands! 🙂

And in the news story about Riverhead, NY officials using Google Earth to spot unlicensed pools and boy you just gotta thank your lucky stars that the government is there to protect you.

That is, unless you’re in Arizona, then you’re not allowed to do that. 🙂

Julie had become enamored of the idea of having a stand after watching an episode of cartoon pig Olivia running one, said her mother, Maria Fife. The two live in Oregon City, but Fife knew her daughter would get few customers if she set up her stand at home.

Plus, Fife had just attended Last Thursday along Portland’s Northeast Alberta Street for the first time and loved the friendly feel and the diversity of the grass-roots event. She put the two things together and promised to take her daughter in July.

The girl worked on a sign, coloring in the letters and decorating it with a drawing of a person saying “Yummy.” She made a list of supplies.

Then, with gallons of bottled water and packets of Kool-Aid,  they drove up last Thursday with a friend and her daughter. They loaded a wheelbarrow that Julie steered to the corner of Northeast 26th and Alberta and settled into a space between a painter and a couple who sold handmade bags and kids’ clothing.

Even before her daughter had finished making the first batch of lemonade, a man walked up to buy a 50-cent cup.

“They wanted to support a little 7-year-old to earn a little extra summer loot,” she said. “People know what’s going on.”

Even so, Julie was careful about making the lemonade, cleaning her hands with hand sanitizer, using a scoop for the bagged ice and keeping everything covered when it wasn’t in use, Fife said.

After 20 minutes, a “lady with a clipboard” came over and asked for their license. When Fife explained they didn’t have one, the woman told them they would need to leave or possibly face a $500 fine.

Surprised, Fife started to pack up. The people staffing the booths next to them encouraged the two to stay, telling them the inspectors had no right to kick them out of the neighborhood gathering. They also suggested that they give away the lemonade and accept donations instead and one of them made an announcement to the crowd to support the lemonade stand.

That’s when business really picked up — and two inspectors came back, Fife said. Julie started crying, while her mother packed up and others confronted the inspectors. “It was a very big scene,” Fife said.

Technically, any lemonade stand — even one on your front lawn — must be licensed under state law, said Eric Pippert, the food-borne illness prevention program manager for the state’s public health division. But county inspectors are unlikely to go after kids selling lemonade on their front lawn unless, he conceded, their front lawn happens to be on Alberta Street during Last Thursday.

“When you go to a public event and set up shop, you’re suddenly engaging in commerce,” he said. “The fact that you’re small-scale I don’t think is relevant.”

Kawaguchi, who oversees the two county inspectors involved, said they must be fair and consistent in their monitoring, no matter the age of the person. “Our role is to protect the public,” he said.

From Childhood, obviously! 🙂

The county’s shutdown of the lemonade stand was publicized by Michael Franklin, the man at the booth next to Fife and her daughter. Franklin contributes to the Bottom Up Radio Network, an online anarchist site, and interviewed Fife for his show.

As for Julie, the 7-year-old still tells her mother “it was a bad day.” When she complains about the health inspector, Fife reminds her that the woman was just doing her job. She also promised to help her try again — at an upcoming neighborhood garage sale.

While Fife said she does see the need for some food safety regulation, she thinks the county went too far in trying to control events as unstructured as Last Thursday.

“As far as Last Thursday is concerned, people know when they are coming there that it’s more or less a free-for-all,” she said. “It’s gotten to the point where they need to be in all of our decisions. They don’t trust us to make good choices on our own.”

No they don’t.

But they can be pressured into sounding like they care, especially when they’ve been embarrassed into it.

PORTLAND, Ore. — A county official in Oregon has apologized after a 7-year-old’s business venture was soured because health inspectors shut down her lemonade stand.

Multnomah County Chairman Jeff Cogen, the county’s top elected official, said Thursday that running a lemonade stand is a “classic iconic American kid thing to do.”

He says he called Julie Murphy’s mother, Maria Fife, to offer his apology and says she appreciated it.

Fife helped her daughter set up a lemonade stand last week at a local arts fair in northeast Portland. They had to pack up and leave after being approached by two inspectors who said the stand lacked a license.

Cogen says while the inspectors were doing their job, the rules are meant for professional food service operators. He adds he ran lemonade stands as a child.

Cogen said the inspectors were “following the rule book,” but should consider that food-safety laws are aimed at adults engaged in a professional food business, not kids running lemonade stands.

But if someone does it again, what do you want the “fair” inspectors will be back. 🙂

And just what does it say about the mindset that would even go there on a lemonade stand to begin with?

How about this comment on the story: So the moral of this is that if you take your little darling to another location in the city away from your home and have them sell food or drinks from a stand, the health inspectors should do nothing to insure the food or beverage is safe. Great. Why even bother having health inspectors? This is a bad precedent to set. The inspectors did nothing wrong.

The government must be ever-present to save you from yourself!

Personal Responsibility is the Government’s job after all! 🙂

And if they can’t be there every minute of every day to protect you from yourself, anarachy will rain down upon us all!

Dr. Peter Venkman: This city is headed for a disaster of biblical proportions.
Mayor: What do you mean, “biblical”?
Dr Ray Stantz: What he means is Old Testament, Mr. Mayor, real wrath of God type stuff.
Dr. Peter Venkman: Exactly.
Dr Ray Stantz: Fire and brimstone coming down from the skies! Rivers and seas boiling!
Dr. Egon Spengler: Forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes…
Winston Zeddemore: The dead rising from the grave!
Dr. Peter Venkman: Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together… mass hysteria!

So what happens with us adults when we want to do something the “rules” says we can’t do or we want the government to live up to it’s own rules that it’s ignoring? Or if we want the rules changed?

Like object to Health Care Mandate for instance? Or Illegal Immigration?

Hmmm… 🙂