No High School Diploma or GED, No Unemployment Benefits?

BearMtnHIB wrote: You're employer pays it on you're behalf.

I don't consider this to be an entitlement.

I agree... it's not an entitlement... it's a redistribution of wealth... and you benefit from it for absolutely no effort on your part.

PrintSmith wrote:

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.

Not so. There are millions of people with IQs too low to successfully complete a high school curriculum but too high to be considered a disability. And most of them are employed, although it can be challenging to find a job with limited skills. Punishing them by denying them unemployment insurance is nothing short of cruel.

I volunteered for many years in a literacy program, I know of what I speak.

Payment of unemployment benefits should not be dependent upon a high school diploma or GED. It should be based upon the work history of the recipient and his willingness to seek employment.

The recipient has demonstrated his ability and willingness to work.

Oh please AV. To complete the minimum requirements necessary to obtain a high school diploma in Colorado one need only complete 4 credits of English, 3 credits of math, 2 credits each of science and social studies and a half credit each of physical education and arts. That's the equivalent of 1 class each semester in English for 4 years, 1 class for 3 years of math, 1 class for 2 years in both science and social studies and 1 class in 4 years for physical education and arts. If you can't get a 'D' average in such a class load then you have a learning disability that would clearly qualify you for other federal assistance or you didn't even minimally apply yourself while at school. You can get a 'D' in most classes simply by putting your keister in a seat 5 days a week and turning in your homework assignments.

I have known classmates in college who were the offspring of parents who were highly skilled in the trades but only had grade school education. The parents worked with their hands and heads because of circumstances that required that they discontinue their education. But they supported their families and funded college educations for their children.

I do not believe that those parents were undeserving of unemployment benefits if they had found themselves unemployed.

Arlen wrote: Payment of unemployment benefits should not be dependent upon a high school diploma or GED. It should be based upon the work history of the recipient and his willingness to seek employment.

If it were truly based on that there would be a lot more people denied benefits under the program than there are currently. People who quit are eligible to receive unemployment benefits. People dismissed for cause are given the benefits as well. Willingness to seek employment? Don't make me laugh. I easily get at least 1 call a day from someone asking if my business is hiring. When I say no, they ask for my name so that they can fill out their form. What is the requirement these days, 5 such attempts a week? Picking a random business out of a list and calling them to see if they are hiring now qualifies as willingness to seek employment?

I will admit that there are likely millions of people whose intelligence is insufficient to allow them to obtain a high school diploma. With our population of over 300 million, only 1% of the population would be necessary to sustain that argument, but I don't think it's as widespread as she wants to make it out to be. If you can obtain a driver's license, you possess the necessary intelligence, with a little effort, to obtain a high school diploma or a GED. You might have a couple learning disabilities that need to be taken into account and worked with, but you possess the raw intelligence necessary to obtain that slip of paper. If you didn't get it when you should have and find yourself among the unemployed, there is certainly no reason that you can't enroll in the necessary classes and work towards achieving that goal as a condition of receiving money from that societal safety net.

Obtaining that goal is in the best interests of society and we would be remiss in our obligations if we didn't insist upon it. Isn't that why we fund public schools? An educated populace is in the best interests of a free society? What are "progressives" afraid of here - if the dropouts are required to complete their education they will be too smart to continue to support the "progressive" agenda?

PrintSmith wrote: Oh please AV. To complete the minimum requirements necessary to obtain a high school diploma in Colorado one need only complete 4 credits of English, 3 credits of math, 2 credits each of science and social studies and a half credit each of physical education and arts. That's the equivalent of 1 class each semester in English for 4 years, 1 class for 3 years of math, 1 class for 2 years in both science and social studies and 1 class in 4 years for physical education and arts. If you can't get a 'D' average in such a class load then you have a learning disability that would clearly qualify you for other federal assistance or you didn't even minimally apply yourself while at school. You can get a 'D' in most classes simply by putting your keister in a seat 5 days a week and turning in your homework assignments.

I'm sorry but you are just wrong. There are millions of people who have IQs too low to learn how to read without great difficult and a lot of tutoring and even then their ability to comprehend what they are reading may never be high enough to pass a high school examination. And while such persons may qualify as learning diasabled and can usually get help in education, that is not the same thing as qualifying for federal assistance to support them as adults. Nor do many such people WANT to go on the dole. They want to work. And any one of them that would qualify for unemployment insurance has already SHOWN that, because you can't get unemployment benefits unless you've been recently employed.

Arlen wrote: I have known classmates in college who were the offspring of parents who were highly skilled in the trades but only had grade school education. The parents worked with their hands and heads because of circumstances that required that they discontinue their education. But they supported their families and funded college educations for their children.

I do not believe that those parents were undeserving of unemployment benefits if they had found themselves unemployed.

I don't either. What next, will they require that you have to have a college degree to qualify?

And I think that, while receiving the "benefits" of the entitlement program, they should get that help and assistance so that they do learn to read, write and figure well enough to understand ballot initiatives, fill out applications, write resumes and balance their checkbooks. I would completely support a program which required one without a diploma or GED to enroll and work towards that goal while receiving their charity stipend from the societal safety nets. Not helping such poor souls better their situation pretty much dooms them to a lifetime of very limited opportunities. We can't have that in our union now, can we? Not and call ourselves an advanced society at least.

What most people do is stereotype the unemployed as lazy and trying to work the system. I do not believe that this is the case.

Sure a person can quit a job and collect benefits. Consider sexual harassment. The reasons for quitting a job and receiving benefits are justified.