http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2013/09/06/august-employment-report/2772875/
The article summarizes how the goal for jobs to be created was not met. However, it focuses on the positives that were accomplished through trying to achieve this goal. I think that although the goal was not met, it is still an accomplishment that 169,000 jobs were still created. That enables 169,000 people to go out and begin working (and potentially 169,000 people who will stop collecting government assistance), both of which are positives for the economy.
Many people may see the negative side of this article and the fact that the goal of number of jobs to be created was not met. But, I think it is important to see the positives that did come out of the situation. Even though the goal wasn't reached, there were still a good amount of jobs that were created as a result of attempting. That's the key: doing SOMETHING. If no problems are even attempted to be fixed then no problems will be fixed, it's as simple as that. So while many frown on the "failures" of the government's actions, keep in mind that they are at least attempting to solve the many issues presented in front of them.
Tuesday, October 8, 2013
Monday, October 7, 2013
Viewpoints: How should long-term unemployment be tackled? BBC News
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24330111
I thought this article was really interesting because it exemplified the opinions of multiple different people and how they view solutions to long-term unemployment issues. From the viewpoints of Democrats to the viewpoint of Republicans, solutions can be considerably different. However, no possible solution is better or worse than another; at least progress is being considered and looked into.
Through changes introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, people who collect unemployment for more than two years have to choose between three different options to continue collecting unemployment. Their choices include community work placement, visiting a job center everyday, or taking part in training for work. The fact that people who collect unemployment and government assistance will have to provide for the economy in some way, shape, or form is extremely appealing to me and most likely many others. It provides a way for the economy to be stimulated even when the unemployment rate continues to be at the same level. Also, it is a good way to ensure that people who are unemployed are working towards getting a job. Perhaps this method is more effective than the United State's method of ensuring that Americans who collect unemployment are working or looking for work. Do you think a similar program in the United States would be effective?
I thought this article was really interesting because it exemplified the opinions of multiple different people and how they view solutions to long-term unemployment issues. From the viewpoints of Democrats to the viewpoint of Republicans, solutions can be considerably different. However, no possible solution is better or worse than another; at least progress is being considered and looked into.
Through changes introduced by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, people who collect unemployment for more than two years have to choose between three different options to continue collecting unemployment. Their choices include community work placement, visiting a job center everyday, or taking part in training for work. The fact that people who collect unemployment and government assistance will have to provide for the economy in some way, shape, or form is extremely appealing to me and most likely many others. It provides a way for the economy to be stimulated even when the unemployment rate continues to be at the same level. Also, it is a good way to ensure that people who are unemployed are working towards getting a job. Perhaps this method is more effective than the United State's method of ensuring that Americans who collect unemployment are working or looking for work. Do you think a similar program in the United States would be effective?
Analysts: 2012 Poverty Rate Basically Unchanged Time Magazine
http://nation.time.com/2013/09/17/analysts-2012-poverty-rate-basically-unchanged/
In 2012, 15% of Americans were living in poverty. In 2011, about one in every seven Americans were living in poverty (Statistically speaking, this is essentially equivalent to the 15% in 2012). Overall, for the last six years, the poverty rate has not improved. A large reason for the constant poverty rate is the unemployment issue the United States has been facing. The unemployment rate directly correlates with the poverty rate.
Also in 2012, Greece was suffering from an economic crisis. The percentage of people living in Greece who were near or under the poverty line was roughly 31% (http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_wsite1_1_03/12/2012_472690). In addition to their unemployment rate at the time, which was 26.4% (http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/2013/04/18/countries-with-highest-unemployment/), it is clear that unemployment strongly influences the poverty levels of countries. As this fact becomes more evident, we must ask ourselves if the real remedy for the number of people living in poverty is more aid through government systems (welfare, healthcare, etc.) or perhaps an easier and more cost effective solution, the creation of more jobs.
Although there are many implicit costs that would come along with creating more jobs for people, I still believe it could be, if done the correct way, more cost effective than throwing billions of dollars into government assistance programs. I also feel this way because I believe that every American capable of earning money should be doing so, rather than collecting benefits from the government without necessarily having to work. If more jobs are created and less money is budgeted for the assistance programs, people will have more of an incentive to get a job.
In 2012, 15% of Americans were living in poverty. In 2011, about one in every seven Americans were living in poverty (Statistically speaking, this is essentially equivalent to the 15% in 2012). Overall, for the last six years, the poverty rate has not improved. A large reason for the constant poverty rate is the unemployment issue the United States has been facing. The unemployment rate directly correlates with the poverty rate.
Also in 2012, Greece was suffering from an economic crisis. The percentage of people living in Greece who were near or under the poverty line was roughly 31% (http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_wsite1_1_03/12/2012_472690). In addition to their unemployment rate at the time, which was 26.4% (http://www.foxbusiness.com/economy/2013/04/18/countries-with-highest-unemployment/), it is clear that unemployment strongly influences the poverty levels of countries. As this fact becomes more evident, we must ask ourselves if the real remedy for the number of people living in poverty is more aid through government systems (welfare, healthcare, etc.) or perhaps an easier and more cost effective solution, the creation of more jobs.
Although there are many implicit costs that would come along with creating more jobs for people, I still believe it could be, if done the correct way, more cost effective than throwing billions of dollars into government assistance programs. I also feel this way because I believe that every American capable of earning money should be doing so, rather than collecting benefits from the government without necessarily having to work. If more jobs are created and less money is budgeted for the assistance programs, people will have more of an incentive to get a job.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)