iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Lawrence H. Summers

GET UPDATES FROM Lawrence H. Summers
 

The Economic Case for Extending Unemployment Insurance

Posted: 07/14/10 10:20 AM ET

The lapse in extended unemployment insurance benefits at the end of May has resulted in 2.5 million jobless Americans exhausting their assistance. If we do not reinstate benefits by the end of the month, this number will grow to 3.2 million. These losses are exacting an enormous human toll on families who count on these benefits as they continue to search for jobs.

As the president recently remarked: "Lasting unemployment takes a toll on families, takes a toll on marriages, takes a toll on children. It saps the vitality of communities, especially in places that have seen factories and other anchoring businesses shut their doors. And being unable to find work - being able to provide for your family - that doesn't just affect your economic security, that affects your heart and your soul. It beats you up. It's hard."

It is also bad for the economy. But unemployment insurance puts money in the pockets of the families most likely to spend the money - which in turn expands the economy and creates jobs. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has identified increased aid to the unemployed as one of the two most cost-effective policy options for increasing economic production and employment.

Missed unemployment insurance payments since May total over $10 billion - enough to have created 100,000 jobs. An abrupt and premature withdrawal of relief is not only something families cannot afford, it is something that the economy cannot afford at a time when the economy is at a critical juncture. The economy is finally creating jobs, but not nearly fast enough to close the 8 million-job gap opened by the recession.

Some opponents of providing relief to unemployed families have been making the fallacious claim that unemployment benefits are a cause of the unemployment we are facing today. Some of them have even taken an article I wrote two decades ago, under different economic circumstances, and used excerpts out of context to suggest that I share their view.

This is a misreading both of my research and of the economic situation today.

In an economy that is as demand constrained as ours, whatever small changes in search intensity may be associated with unemployment insurance are not the reason for the persistence of joblessness. With five unemployed Americans seeking work for every job opening available, there can be little doubt that the overwhelming cause of unemployment is not a lack of will among the jobless to find work, but a lack of work opportunities.

Opposing extending unemployment benefits will do nothing to put people back to work. It will not result in an increased number of job openings to apply for. And it will not result in a higher level of employment. What it will do is create a more difficult situation for thousands of families hit hardest by the economic crisis and cut off a powerful channel for spurring economic growth.

That is why President Obama will continue to press Congress to extend unemployment benefits and pass commonsense measures to strengthen our economic recovery - like extending unemployment insurance and COBRA, supporting our clean energy economy, providing aid to state and local governments, and saving the jobs of thousands of teachers.

Lawrence H. Summers is Director of the National Economic Council

 
The lapse in extended unemployment insurance benefits at the end of May has resulted in 2.5 million jobless Americans exhausting their assistance. If we do not reinstate benefits by the end of the mo...
The lapse in extended unemployment insurance benefits at the end of May has resulted in 2.5 million jobless Americans exhausting their assistance. If we do not reinstate benefits by the end of the mo...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 1,215
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (19 total)
11:00 PM on 07/18/2010
As far as the VP is concerned we will never recover the Jobs lost in the last 2 years. Others have said we will go on like this for years. With that as a backdrop what would be a time frame for U.I. to be paid? I don't know how long but just maby we as a Nation can come up consensus.
photo
sixchair
Always left, usually right
10:09 PM on 07/18/2010
Does this mean Dr. Summers no longer adheres strictly to the laissez faire economic model? Of course it does.

"The invisible hand of the market" only functions when there IS a market (aka demand). The policies and influence of Ayn Rand's acolytes, including Dr. Summers, brought the US to disaster, which now necessitates intervention (gasp!).
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
NABNYC
09:59 PM on 07/18/2010
What our nation cannot afford is to continue to send hundreds of billions of dollars to defense industries for the purpose of war against foreign nations, most of which money is essentially blown up with no return on investment. We cannot afford, never could afford giving hundreds of billions of dollars to Wall Street for them to line their own pockets and further their control of our nation's economy and the world. What we cannot afford are these disastrous treaty agreements that have caused millions of jobs to leave these country and created double-digit unemployment.

I could express other opinions on business and economics, having worked in the field in law for many decades now, but I am a female and we all know that us gals are just too stupid to even be considered. So I'll say nothing more.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:16 PM on 07/18/2010
...yes unemployment benifits should've extended but it is a dumb idea to have bailed out and keep bailing out Wall Street.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
07:37 PM on 07/18/2010
I don't believe what I just read: common sense out of the one person more vilified than Getner. Have you seen the light or smelling the political winds? There could be a lot of angry people out the come election time and they usually blame the current administration for their woes.
photo
sixchair
Always left, usually right
10:11 PM on 07/18/2010
They fought derivatives reform tooth and nail and apparently want Warren sidelined. I guess the peasants get a crust to keep them from revolting.
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
ncmom54
07:14 PM on 07/18/2010
The Economy was considered a disaster... billions went to sustain Wall Street
why is unemployment (caused by the economic disaster) any different?
There is disaster aid for crops,floods, hurricanes.
SBA for businesses affected by a disaster ...
(why wasnt the economic crash a valid reason for SBA to issue disaster funds to Main Street ?)
There are many instances where the Federal Govt. steps in beyond insurance coverage when a disaster is declared.
How can Wall Street receive disaster assistance but not Main Street and the unemployed?

"One of the very difficult parts of the decision I made on the financial crisis was to use hardworking people's money to help prevent there to be a crisis."
George W. Bush - Washington, D.C., Jan. 12, 2009

many of those 'hardworking people' are now unemployed
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:29 PM on 07/18/2010
Dear Raperson:

You don't know what you are talking about. Unemployment comes from a fund established mostly by employers. Employers pay unemployment taxes and not workers. If you lose your job through no fault of your own, or largely through no fault of your own, you are in most cases eligible for unemployment. However, your employer has to pay unemployment taxes and be covered by unemployment insurance that your employer pays into.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sam1USA
10:20 PM on 07/18/2010
Hey, HenryS

True statements. However, the employee actually bears the cost of UI as their pay is reflected as a lower amount to offset what the employer puts in.

So...when you receive UI, you're only getting back a portion of what you had already sacrificed in lower pay.

Any honest HR person will tell you exactly what I have noted.
Bladernr1001
Vote Libertarian
06:24 PM on 07/18/2010
The problem here is that you look at each problem in isolation. Unemployment benefits seem great and needed looking at it this way...but you ignore the impacts of the added debt and bloat of government. You need a bigger picture view of things to arrive at teh best answer.
04:20 PM on 07/18/2010
Unemployment extensions may keep families from starving, but where are the jobs? Oh, that's right, trillions of dollars were given to Wall Street, after deregulation, in order to help Main St. I remember the propaganda and lies on cable TV -- the reason taxpayers were giving money to these Wall Street firms was to free up credit. Bullcrap. It was the bad debt, sold all around the world, that brought down the global economy.

Well, the working class (99% of us) is comprised of all kinds of people; some who are very smart and educated, and some who aren't educated but also know a fleecing when they see one.

The minute the first multinational outsourced jobs, it should have been tried for treason against U.S. citizens. Politicians and the federal government should be working for us, the American people. To hell with what you call globalization. It's become a world of haves and have nots.

.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
07:39 PM on 07/18/2010
I wholeheartedly agree and I hope in this lifetime.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
07:56 PM on 07/18/2010
How about the pols who paved the way? Ruben, Getner Summers et all
03:42 PM on 07/18/2010
Mr. Summers, what about your intellectual input and support that promulgated the financial decisions which deregulated and greatly corrupted the banking and financial system, supported the low interest rates and the dot and real estate bubbles which destroyed the world economy while outsourcing 8-10 million U.S. middle class jobs and almost every major U.S.economic sector on the alter of the "inexhorable process of globalism" flim-flam? I'm sure, like Greenspan, et al, you have an answer for that like you have an answer for everything. How horrible it is to read your opinion on anything.
photo
HamletsMill
All Myth is Astronomy
07:46 PM on 07/18/2010
Absolutely fanned!
01:18 PM on 07/18/2010
Women workers don't have the ''innate ability" of their male counterparts, right Larry? And that's why more women have jobs now, because they can be paid less. (I didn't even attend Harvard, but look how good I learned that!)
photo
HamletsMill
All Myth is Astronomy
07:47 PM on 07/18/2010
Yep. Fanned!
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
12:02 PM on 07/18/2010
I feel very mixed about extending benefits. I'm not insensitive to the fact that there are less jobs overall forcing some to be unemployed for abnormally extended periods of time. The flip side is I know for a fact that people are taking advantage of unemployment benefits when there are jobs. I'm a small business owner who took over a location. The employee was only working part-time for the previous owner of the location I took over and worked at another location as well, but was being laid off from the other location of which the bulk of their hours and money was earned. We offered the employee more hours and a higher hourly wage. The employee turned down the position because they made more money on unemployment than they would if they worked. This leads me to the next issue. Who do I hire? If I see someone who has been laid off and are about to have their unemployment benefits expire, I would be less likely to consider them for employment. The exception to this would be people who have been laid off from construction, financial sector, and a few other sectors who have statistically been hit the hardest and really are suffering from loss of opportunity.
01:40 PM on 07/18/2010
so you "consider" potential employees based on their unemployment status? WOW, you sound like a really "thoughtful" individual!!!!! I hope that you will one day walk in the shoes of the longterm unemployed. Maybe then you'll realize how senseless your judgement is.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
02:34 PM on 07/25/2010
I really don't think you understand my reasoning. Health-care related fields and the secretarial positions that support them are not affected by this financial downturn as much as other fields in my area. Construction and, less so, housing right now are slowly starting to pick up. It's at a snails pace. The other field that was hit pretty hard was the financial sector like brokers and account managers etc... What I mean by suffering loss of opportunity is that there is a significant decrease in the amount of available jobs compared to the amount of people in need of work. I've been unemployed before. I don't like it, but it's never been longer than a month or two. I am not saying that there are those who are unemployed now for well over a year who still need assistance. They should still get assistance until this passes. Please try to consider this point of view, let's say you had a business and are in need of a receptionist and you have two candidates One who is still employed the other who has has had their unemployment benefits lapse and there currently isn't an economic loss of opportunity for said position. Both pretty much have identical resumes. Which would you hire and why?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
06:33 PM on 07/18/2010
Dear Invisibleinsanity, if it is true that you offered an employee more work, especially work that they were doing part time already, and they refused it because they made more money on unemployment, then contact your local unemployment office immediately and notify them so they can investigate this apparent work refusal that you encountered. However, I think that you are blowing smoke, who hires people from such a wide range of possible backgrounds for the select jobs of a particular company?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
01:58 PM on 07/25/2010
I was speaking generally, but people are switching careers. The position in question is a receptionist position for a health-care related field.
10:55 AM on 07/18/2010
Hey, Larry--why don't you apologize to the American people for helping to destroy our economic system? We wouldn't need the extension of unemployment benefits if you, Robert Rubin, and Phil Gramm had not monkeyed with laws that kept our economy stable so you could make your wealthy Harvard friends richer.
photo
HamletsMill
All Myth is Astronomy
07:50 PM on 07/18/2010
Fanned big time!.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
07:58 PM on 07/18/2010
Absolutely true. Do you think he has buyers remorse?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClarcKing
Citizen
10:25 AM on 07/18/2010
There is a good argument for extending the unemployment benefits. However a lot more then that must be done; the citizenry has been terrorized by irrational governance.

The President and his entire cabinet must be removed from office, placed in protective custody.

Market forces demand the expansion of hunger, homelessness, foreclosures, bankruptcies, unemployment, loss of health-care, contraction of production, etc; A threat to the population as all out war, a national security crisis exists.

This Administration is set to manage an economic and population contraction policy.

Trillions in bailouts are dedicated to the banker-speculators who speculate with bailout trillions. The market is disintegrating, they cry for more bailouts; demanding your Social Security and Medicare.

The international monetary financier derivative debt based market system is in an uncontrollable, unrelenting, irreversible, accelerating, collapsing operation. It is a killing machine; demanding trillions, contraction of employment / production.

The Administration passes the Big Bank and Derivative Debt Protection Act.

Statecraft demands termination of the monetary system: put the Fed into bankruptcy protection, recover the bailout trillions, banks that qualifyl join the US National Bank under Glass-Steagall standards. Assert the national authority; create the debt capital that refinances the American argo-industrial economy; dedicated to the population's physical economy.

The United States must stabilize itself: end the US submission to Globalization, stop the Perpetual War Policy, reinstate Glass-Steagall in US banking, start the Nuclear Fueled Energy Economy, Expand NASA space programs, Expand Social Security and Medicare, refurbish the life enhancing infrastructure grid.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dennidus1680
07:52 PM on 07/18/2010
Don't leave out congress. The administration can't force congress critters to get a brain or work in their constituent's best interest.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ClarcKing
Citizen
10:30 PM on 07/18/2010
You're right Congress is the most dangerous organization confronting Americans today. Congress conducts irregular warfare against the population. Their total indifference to the generally citizenry while dedicating the nation's financial resources to the organizers of the financial collapse is inexcusable, intolerable.
for more info: www.larouchepac.com
photo
ghostrider57
Unable to find reality.sys Universe halted
12:16 AM on 07/19/2010
Lets not forget the Supreme Court either. They totally need to be put into retirement and replaced with people who realize a corporation is not a person.

That has got to be one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard. If a corporation is a person then why aren't CEOs in jail for breaking laws and wrong doing just like any other person would be for breaking the laws. After all, aren't they the representative of the corporation?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:16 AM on 07/18/2010
I think what we ought to do is require those recieving benefits to show that they are trying to find a job. A lot of times like in Los Angeles and San Francisco where they have similar programs they just lay about and do drugs. In addition with that in mind, all beneficiaries are to also undergo drug alcohol screening before they recieve their checks. Unless it comes back negative. No more benefits

The bottom line is if we are going to spend other peoples money for this, we cannot do so if there are no strings attached. The only time anyone should get money from the government is if they have a mental or physical disability that keeps them from working.
10:34 AM on 07/18/2010
1. Already a requirment.
2. Rich people do drugs too so we should take away all their money?
3. Almost all of the unemployed were already drug tested by their last employer.
4. It's funded by workers who usually have to work at least 2 years and many 30 or 40 and never applied for the benefits they paid premiums on.
5. Don't know much about history. Are you a Daid Burton fan?
6. It was Reagan who took away the mental or physical disability benefits. Don't know much about history again.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:56 AM on 07/18/2010
Unfortunately it is not always enforced. In some major cities they give beneficiaries a free pass even after they are long expired.