Maybe Rand Paul has a point. Yesterday he was all over the teledtubes promoting his philosophy that continuing, or rather extending, unemployment benefits is wrong. It's a bad path to take because it disenfranchises those people who are working so hard to make their bones. Why should someone, in his mind a lazy person, be rewarded for doing nothing.
WASHINGTON -- Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday he opposes extending unemployment benefits for workers, arguing that it would be a "disservice" to jobless individuals.
"I do support unemployment benefits for the 26 weeks that they're paid for. If you extend it beyond that, you do a disservice to these workers," he said in an interview on "Fox News Sunday."
Evidently collecting unemployment insurance payments, to the Kentucky senator, is a disservice to both the unemployed and the people who are fortunate enough to have a job. He claims it causes the working people to build resentment that others, the freeloaders, are being paid to do nothing while they have to toil away at their jobs for little more than the government tit the unemployed are being allowed to suckle.
So, the extension promotes injustice. I have to ask, to whom? To the person who's looking for a job but can't find one or to the person who finds part time work to survive but doesn't qualify for benefits?
Paul is right that there's a disservice, but here's where it really lies. This is what frosts most employees, the lucky ones with a full time job. It's the disparity between their hourly wages and executive pay.
Workers don't become disenfranchised by those out of work collecting unemployment. They're disgusted by the obscene money top CEO's are making, not to mention the perks that go along with their positions, compared to their meager wages.
Take a look at this list from FORBES:
Those are the top paid CEO's of 2012. Now if you're an average worker at one of these companies, say making $30/hour you'd be earning around $60,000/year. And not all that many companies average $30/hour, but go with it for a minute.
The average annual salary of these aforementioned ten CEO's is over $61.5 million. So if you think there's anyone making $60 thousand a year who's worrying about someone getting a weekly unemployment check for the maximum of 26 weeks for a total of $7800, you're off your Kentucky veranda rocker. Unemployment benefits aren't what causes jealousy and anger among working employees. Disgruntled employees are concerned about their pay and the incentive to work hard when their CEO's are making 1,025 times more than they're making. That's about $32,000/hour vs $30. You'd be angry too. But you'd put the anger where it belongs. On the corporate CEO rapists, not the poor and opportunity-less individuals. That's the real disservice.
Here we are facing Christmas season and the cold weather of the winter. Heavier burdens come our way during the winter months. Heating costs, warm clothes, hot food and higher risks from weather related illness and injuries. Here's what Rand Paul is leading a fight against -- a temporary reprieve for so many needy:
About 1.3 million long-term jobless Americans will lose federal benefits if Congress fails to reauthorize the Emergency Unemployment Compensation program, which expires at the end of December.
Without congressional action, the most time that people could get would be six months of state unemployment benefits.
So hopefully Congress will do the right thing. It's not common for them to do so, but maybe the holiday feeling of "good will towards all men" will prevail. If not, we've failed our country once again. Believe me, if this was a bill to raise their salaries or strictly add to the defense budget, every conservative and hawk in the Republican party would be falling over themselves to be a sponsor of the bill.