Maybe Members of Congress Want to Cut Unemployment Benefits to Increase Unemployment
|
|
|
Tuesday, 13 July 2010 05:09 |
|
The Post yet again tells us that members of Congress are political philosophers, telling readers that: "Congress's inaction [in approving an extension of unemployment benefits] has been accompanied by a growing sentiment among lawmakers that long-term unemployment benefits create a disincentive for the jobless to find work."
How does the Post know what sentiments members of Congress have? Furthermore is there any reason to believe that their sentiments explain their votes on important issues?
Members of Congress get elected and re-elected by getting the support of powerful interest groups, not on their abilities as political philosophers. While the opponents of extending unemployment benefits may believe that they are bad policy, this is likely less relevant to the their votes than the political considerations behind this vote.
At the moment, the Republicans appear to have adopted a strategy of blocking anything that President Obama tries to do, with the idea that a bad economy will be good for them on Election Day. While the Post may not want to assert in a news story that this is the explanation for their opposition to extending unemployment benefits, it is certainly inappropriate to provide an alternative explanation for which it has zero evidence.
(Only one link allowed per comment)
 |
They had three choices. Report it as a disincentive to work based on what politicians said, report it as a disincentive to work based on the natural laws of economics, or report it as a political tactic to actually increase unemployment to win the elections.
Since the last option not only contradicted the first two, but also sold less newspapers and threatened their own employment status, including increased incentives to accept unemployment benefits, they reported what politicians said and backed it up with the usual second independent source of irrefutable natural laws in economics.