No High School Diploma or GED, No Unemployment Benefits?

What the heck were they thinking on this one?

H.R. 3630 Could Cut Off Unemployment Benefits to People Who Cannot Access Adult Education Services

http://jeffcrtr.wordpress.com/2011/12/1 ... -services/

On Friday, House Republicans released H.R. 3630, (“The Middle Class Tax Relief & Job Creation Act of 2011″), a bill that, among other things, would extend the Social Security payroll tax cut, extend unemployment insurance (UI), provide a two-year Medicare doctor reimbursement fix, and a bunch of other things. One provision in the bill appears to deny UI benefits to individuals without a high school diploma unless they are enrolled in classes that will lead to a GED or another “state-recognized equivalent.”

Tough love?
I have a nephew who is currently a mechanic but he never got his diploma or GED. If this passed, he might be inspired to finish up his GED on weekends or after work so that he can better support his wife and kid if he would find himself unemployed again.

Sounds more like kicking a bunch of people who are already about as far down as they can be to me.

I wonder if the genuises in Washington even realize that a fair percent of people who lack high school diplomas do so because they simply don't have adequate intelligence to earn one?

True, some of the people I know without diplomas or GED's are pretty lacking in intelligence, but most were too bored, unmotivated, drugs, booze, their lives had huge changes like moves or families falling apart.

I think if they paid un-employment insurance when they were working - then they are entitled to collect on that insurance if they lose their job due to no fault of their own.

Attaching additional requirements because of their education level is wrong.

AspenValley wrote: Sounds more like kicking a bunch of people who are already about as far down as they can be to me.

I wonder if the genuises in Washington even realize that a fair percent of people who lack high school diplomas do so because they simply don't have adequate intelligence to earn one?

If one is mentally challenged to such a degree, then they would qualify for other charity subsidies from federal coffers and not need to worry about unemployment insurance being one of them.

BearMtnHIB wrote: I think if they paid un-employment insurance when they were working - then they are entitled to collect on that insurance if they lose their job due to no fault of their own.

Attaching additional requirements because of their education level is wrong.

Employees don't pay the unemployment premiums - employers do. Unemployment "Insurance" isn't insurance any more than OASDI (Social Security) is. If it was insurance, you would have an actual private property right to the benefits, which you don't because neither of them are actually insurance - they are appropriations like any other appropriation of the legislature are - nothing more, nothing less.

BearMtnHIB wrote: I think if they paid un-employment insurance when they were working - then they are entitled to collect on that insurance if they lose their job due to no fault of their own.

Attaching additional requirements because of their education level is wrong.

Employees don't pay a penny into unemployment benefits. Why did you think that was the case?

You're employer pays it on you're behalf.

I don't consider this to be an entitlement.

If it wasn't an entitlement then it wouldn't be something paid for by the levying and collecting of taxes - which is exactly how it is paid for. This isn't like life insurance, or property insurance, where you have a legally binding contract - it is the product of legislation subject to change at any point in time with regards to premiums, conditions of coverage and benefits due. If the federal legislature can change the term over which "benefits" are paid on a whim, they are equally able to change the conditions upon which benefits will be paid. It is an entitlement created by the federal legislature that is paid for by the levying and collection of taxes and whether or not you consider it as such does not change what it actually is.