MSNBC reported today that the number of unemployed people collecting benefits is now approaching 5 million. Maybe the economists here can help me come up with a number on the cost / drag this has on the economy.

Assuming 5 million people collecting benefits of $1k per month = $5 BILLION a month???

Lost personal tax revenue on 5 million people????

Lost business tax revenue on companies who have laid off 5 million people (assuming the companies are now earning less)???

Lost sales tax revenue on 5 million unemployed who are no longer spending???

Social costs associated with healthcare issues, rising crime rates and the potential collapse of entire communities who have been devistated by plant closures?

I tried to find some numbers on what the total drain on the economy might be but I couldn't find anything. Anyone feel like putting a number on all of this?

Is it worthwhile injecting money into the economy to try and turn things around or is it better to just let the chips fall where they may?

How about we bitch about the cost of imprisonment?

 

Originally Posted by saxman

is it better to just let the chips fall where they may?

Always the better option or start a world war.

if the gov hires those people then there is no unemployment. think of the savings! er...

^^ is confused about reasons for war

also, the gov obligations they have promised would cost 13 iraq and afghanistan wars. 13!

I honestly don't know what the number is but i would guess if you consider the costs of shelling out benefits plus lost revenues the number would be closer to 30 billion a month. I was hoping someone with an economics background would take a shot at it.

 

Originally Posted by emcee21

Obviously socialized unemployment insurance requires socialized everything else. I wonder why Willy is constantly making slippery slope arguments.

The slippery slope argument is valid unfortunately we can't turn back the clock. We're in this mess now and trying to get out of it. It's kind of like an engineer trying to fix 10 problems at once. Where do you start and what fix solves what issue, and what fix causes further deterioration. You have to take one step at a time, measure the success or failure and move on to the next issue.

^this. educated lefties read posts like this and think "lol, silly jeff, economics is for economists". wrong. economics is for you.

<a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href=http://jim.com/econ/contents.html>Economics in One Lesson</a>
<a target="_blank" rel="nofollow" href=http://mises.org/books/introtoaustrian.pdf>Intro to Austrian Economics</a>

I keep hearing repeated the idea that many former "free market" economists are now favoring Keynesian policies because shit is just that bad. This is horseshit perpetuated by people who never understood or truly advocated capitalism in the first place. The next time an expert tells you that the government can make something out of nothing, ask yourself who benefits from such an idea.

 

Originally Posted by RichardHurtz

 

Originally Posted by saxman

is it better to just let the chips fall where they may?

Always the better option or start a world war.

or instill a 10% flat tax for income,cap gains,corp...

everybody pays the same rate regardless of how much they make...

same allowances...30k singe h of h, 40 married, 25 single...5k per child....so

couple with 2 kids making 100k pays 10% of 100k-40k-5k-5k=50 = 5k tax
single head of household =6k
single= 7.5k

gg recession ...but a depression is needed to allow the guberment to take control of all money,business,health care,education,media(fairness doctrin)...

 

Originally Posted by emcee21

got any recommendations for me?

meh .... nothing you probably haven't read or looked at and dismissed immediately lol. Most recently:
Friedman - Lexus and the Olive Tree, Hot Flat and Crowded
Chalmers Johnson - Sorrows of Empire

lol 3B .... i'm sure it made for good kindling in his fireplace :)

<img src=http://celebrityhookups.files.wordpress.com/2007/06/hugh_grant.jpg>

"Insightful..."

Obesity is a troubling problem. Along with increased size from overconsumption, the obese also suffer from decreased circulation, hindered mobility, the need for more expensive assistance and the mental trauma associated with forcing one's self into that state by reckless over consumption. If Uncle Sam was a person, he'd weigh about 1,400 pounds. Time to put that dude on a serious, strict and permanent diet.

 

Originally Posted by El Burro

Obesity is a troubling problem. Along with increased size from overconsumption, the obese also suffer from decreased circulation, hindered mobility, the need for more expensive assistance and the mental trauma associated with forcing one's self into that state by reckless over consumption. If Uncle Sam was a person, he'd weigh about 1,400 pounds. Time to put that dude on a serious, strict and permanent diet.

Obama just came out with a new study that says the cure for obesity is more eating. It will speed up your metabolism and then poof you're skinny again.