I can’t tell which ‘side’ you are referring to.
I can’t tell which ‘side’ you are referring to.
Do you really need us to spell it out?
America was and continues to be built in large part by wage theft and labor exploitation. We don’t provide the social support services that are taken for granted in first-world countries like Canada, because doing so conflicts with the strongly-held belief — the ideology — that the best way to support the poor is to ensure that they’re employed in a job, no matter how terrible the working conditions or pay. Workers are told that this is a “ladder of success”, but upward mobility has stalled due to the wealth being drained out of the system into the ultra-wealthy and their families. Workers are encouraged to work for local businesses, who are themselves going bankrupt and collapsing at the swordpoints of Walmart, Amazon, and Covid. Health care costs have skyrocketed, health insurance is only offered to a subset of the workforce, and minimum wage doesn’t cover rent, food, and health care (pick one only).
So, Montana is canceling unemployment as a way to force people to work at jobs they otherwise wouldn’t work at. This forces people back into the modern enslavement system, and takes for granted that enough employers are left in Montana to hire those workers. Rather than assessing whether enough jobs exist for their citizens and then requiring businesses to pay a reasonable wage that covers living costs, or offering benefits to attract workers, the state of Montana will simply block unemployment benefits. Employers that offer miserable wages, no health insurance, and poor working conditions are expected to see an increase in workers applying for those roles, further weakening the negotiating position of workers versus employers.
The best analogy, then, for the perceived cruelty of these motivations is, in these modified words of the consultant from “Office Space”:
“We fixed the glitch. So they won’t be receiving an unemployment check anymore. So it’ll just work itself out naturally.”
Of those options, I think you meant this to be an insulting and dismissive comment, wherein you jokingly compare me to a dead man in order to weaken or diminish the views represented in my detailed writeup of the 'unspoken' viewpoint referenced upthread. If so, you will find that Hacker News is not a reliably effective venue for that sort of manipulation of others. If I'm wrong in my interpretation, I of course welcome clarification. :)
didn't even know he was dead-- read his book not that long ago. not sure what the fuck you're on about comparing people to dead people-- are we just supposed to stop speaking of the dead altogether?
Suggesting the US is not a first world country further weakens this entire comment.
By your own statement, if they raise the wage, people will go back to work. This "solution" is just kicking the legs out from under people who are just barely able to stand as it is.
Where I am from I can get 90% of my previous paycheck up to a max of approx 3200 USD a month for the first two years.
Then they start to drop off quite fast to a much lower buttom.
So even if a new job was lower than the 3200 USD I could be getting I would still be incentivised to get a new job before the high benefits runs out.
I think you’re advocating for UBI. Maybe UBI is a better idea, but UI is not that.