Tell me: In a real world context, is a Master’s degree in economics of any more value than a Bachelor’s in ethnic studies? Or Polynesian basket weaving?
It seems somebody in Washington noticed that for all the weeping and wailing, backing off on federal unemployment handouts didn’t produce piles of emaciated bodies mummifying in the cold. Top government economists find this perplexing, and so they ask,
What do the jobless do when the benefits end?
…most baffling to economists are the people who appear to come up with more-idiosyncratic solutions, which are tough to identify and almost impossible to track.
NOW they ask this?
And these are the people who have placed themselves in charge. They’ll never admit they’re responsible for the situation, have never even considered the possibility that paying people not to work is unlikely to get them employed, and now when even the magical unicorn money has run out they’re noting with alarm that life can go on without them.
It’s scary. I expect them to next seek a solution to that.
Pingback: Morning “Joe” | The Cafe
I’m old enough to remember more that a few “bad times’ when work was scarce and I’m still here. Made it through using my best street skills. Prolly made more money back then I would have with a “job” if you think about it.
Sure their are risks, if you think about them, but the desire to feed the wife and two kids outweighed the risks. Ya got a brain, so use it.
Good post Joel.
Therein lies the rub with the statists. It isn’t that they’re worried that the people will starve without them; it’s that they are worried that THEY WON’T.
To a statist, the worst thing on Earth is to see a man who’s not getting a dole check, who’s not gainfully employed with a W-4 on file somewhere, and yet who seems to be getting by without any worry at all.
It bothers them because it means that man doesn’t need them, and it bothers them because they can’t effing STAND to see a man doing something they don’t understand, and cannot track in some way.
Look at the quote:
“…most baffling to economists are the people who appear to come up with more-idiosyncratic solutions, which are tough to identify and almost impossible to track.”
There are people out there that they can’t identify, and can’t track. it’s causing them to flip their goddamn lids. What does that tell you about them?
What does it tell you when they can’t even fathom the idea that a man who isn’t getting a dole check and doesn’t have a w-4 on file somewhere will still find ways to take care of himself?
Look at the quote where they talk about how the ex-airforce lady PROVIDES SERVICES FOR OTHER PEOPLE IN EXCHANGE FOR A FEE FOR THOSE SERVICES (GASP!!!) like she’s committed some kind of witchcraft that they will never, ever be able to grok.They even come up with a name for it: “legal hustle” or some such, as if its some new concept that we’ve never experienced before, as opposed to what it actually is: the one single thing that is at the basis of every single market that has ever existed since the dawn of man.
It drives them effing NUTS to know that markets will exist in spite of them; that they aren’t needed for people to live comfortable, happy lives. Statists literally cannot understand this. it is outside of their ability to comprehend.