The article clearly says:
"a handful of senators and representatives from both parties have said this year that they suspect extended unemployment benefits actually discourage people from looking for work."
The article goes on to attack members of BOTH parties. Yet as usual you are blinded to your own party's shortcomings and blame it all on those nasty Repugs. THE EVIL REPUBLICANS WILL OWN US ALL! 
Yep, back to the "Good Old Days" when the workers were sold with the land! Blue Dog Dems don't count, they are Wolves in Sheep's clothing!
why the heck would someone want to work when free money is been given. They hold out until a "better" job offer is found or continue until the gravy train is gone....
That's the whole point of unemployment insurance, and it's not exactly a gravy train, it just helps keep you from losing your house. The payout is a fraction of what you earned while working.
Even in jest, that is just plain stupid.
I don't have a problem with it as long as we cut spending else where to fund it. That's the real hold up.
It's worth running a deficit for this kind of thing if that's what it takes. But you are right, we should be practicing Keynesian economics, running a surplus in the good times to spend in the bad. Sadly, we had a tax cut instead. Deficit spending is not the best way to run a country, just look at 20th century Argentina.
Wow! Someone that actually, "Gets It". Thing to remember is that a lot of the "Rich People", loved the Great Depression! It solved the Servant problem for them! Give them food to eat, clothes to wear and a place to sleep and a couple of bucks a week to spend on their half day off and they worked their little hearts out for you!
The employer, feds and state pay for UI, not the employee - I posted this last week.
The money received is not that much, that is true. I've posted articles before that they could not fill jobs in Michigan because people go more with UI than the jobs paid.
You can get up to 99 weeks of UI.
The whole question of how we can keep paying for people who are unemployed does need to be answered. This congress originally was a firm believer of the Pay as You GO ... that is if you want to spend something then you have to have a way of paying for it to reduce debt (HAH). That of course is much harder for a politician to do .. they will make all the promises they can, give you someone else s money but when it comes to paying th bill ... who does that - dems want to continue to charge it up ... on a federal debt of over 13$ Trillion we have now .. astronomical numbers?
As our discussion last week on this - I said the govt needs to help small business owners get going with loans to them, tax incentives instead of bailing out monolithic WALL Street and banks - which they have been doing. You can't have a recovery without jobs growth .. you can talk the talk about recovery but without jobs it isn't going to happen, so far this administration has added lot's of federal jobs - which is not going to really help the overall economy because someone has to pay for those federal jobs.
I think that it has been shown that Keynesian economics has failed us. Austrian economics foretasted this collapse, not Keynsian.
Don't blame me .. I voted for Ron Paul.
This country has NEVER practiced Keynesian economics, so how could it have failed? It's nothing more than sounds financial management, just like we should all practice at home.
Sound economics - that would be something that DC does not adhere too - unless you voted for Ron Paul.
I disagree with your statment about NEVER practicing K economics
Keynesian Economics was so dominant after World War II, Richard Nixon remarked "we're all Keynesians now"
The former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, President of the United States Barack Obama, and other world leaders have used Keynesian economics to justify government stimulus programs for their economies
Keynes vs. Hayek
Britain Follows Germany in Departing from Keynesian Economics 13 U.S. Looks Socialist in Comparison
No, we have never maintained a substantial surplus to be used in a national economic crisis. We've always borrowed. In any case, beginning with Reagan we abandoned all pretense of sound management, that's when things started going South.
K Economy we'v ehad since WWII .. was hit highly succefuyl ..NO .. it's like saying that we''ve had real captiolism too .. taht isn't the case either - but many will say we have. We don't have a true free market.
And you do you blame for the out of control spending in DC'
Only Jackson had a budget that was really balanced and in the black .. BTW he was against a Central Bank in which the oligarchs today love for the power it can give them.
If spending is out of control then, by definition, it's not responsible K econ.
lamparty
It's all part of the Republican plan! First get rid of all Illegals, then replace them with Americans who have run out of Unemployment Insurance, since that is the only way you will get them to pick strawberries and such, if they have the choice of doing that or starving to death! It's all part of the plan to turn the clock back to the "Good Old Days", when the rich were rich and the poor were poor and everyone knew their place, the 1300s! Feudalism and Serfdom!