John Ransom
Recommend this article

Ca7 wrote: It's cute that you would try to paint this as "democrats don't think of unemployment insurance fraud as a crime" when your only specific example of unemployment insurance fraud is one where all the parties involved were actually arrested on fraud charges.- in response to How Stimulating: Unemployment Benefits for Murderers

Dear Comrade 7,

Actually the specific examples (plural) that I included did include one example where someone was arrested on fraud charges- because he was unlucky enough to be incarcerated for murder. Local authorities got involved where the feds likely wouldn’t have. And like the typical progressive, you point to the exception and ignore the rule.

The rule is that $16.5 billion was paid out in fraudulent claims, with less than 5 percent of that money recovered. And under Democrats, unemployment fraud has jumped another 11 percent year-over-year. One would think perhaps someone in the federal government who has the responsibility to administer the program might actually do something about it.

But nope.

“We don’t think this is mostly about fraud—we think it’s a lack of clarity of understanding what eligibility is,” Jane Oates, Assistant Secretary for Employment and Training Administration at the Department of Labor, told the Times.

Tortured words and tortured reasoning for not enforcing the law just leads to more crime and encourages people to steal.

Rob Mitchell wrote: Perfect example of conservative truth distortion. Nowhere in fact is Pelosi advocating for benefits for convicted murderers. I hope they do not pay you to write this stuff.- in response to How Stimulating: Unemployment Benefits for Murderers

Dear Comrade Rob,

Why yes I do get paid to write this stuff. I’m guessing that you are wondering how to tax it. The Stamp Act has already been tried. But hey: Maybe Democrats can bring it back and just call it a fee? Three cheers for King Obama!

Pelosi doesn’t have to advocate for convicted murders to get unemployment. They already collect the benefit according to the example cited above. And why wouldn’t they? The “Clarity of Understanding” training that they’ll make these gang-bangers go through as punishment probably won’t be much of a deterrent to people who make a living breaking the law.

Recommend this article

John Ransom

John Ransom is the Finance Editor for Townhall Finance.
TOWNHALL FINANCE DAILY

Get the best of Townhall Finance Daily delivered straight to your inbox

Follow Townhall Finance!