Unemploment Extended: Benefit or Burden?

Unemployment has helped millions survive without jobs. Some see it as a saving force for those between jobs, but with the job market like it is, changes need to me made.

For a little unemployment background, it began in the 1930's with Wisconsin first creating unemployment insurance. Today, all 50 states have a type of benefit system along with the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico.

Until now, state benefits lasted a maximum of 26 weeks with payment of around 35% of individuals' previous weekly wage, but in June Congress passed a Bill extending benefits for 60 to 99 weeks.

But is the extension a benefit or burden for the US? Is this the solutions we need to fix the job market and keep families afloat?

According to CNN, the extension could be the reason so many are still unemployed. The almost 2 years of coverage does not give the unemployed incentive to find another job. With the job openings limited, along with the extension, it is difficult for unemployed with strong, specific experience to taken anything less than their previous position. For example, it is difficult for an advertising professional to have incentive to take a wait staff job when they are collecting a percentage of their previous weekly salary?

Some experts say that unemployment would be much less if unemployment benefits were not changed. No source of income is the best incentive and driving force for unemployed to become employed no matter the position.

"If people have different incentives to be searching and accepting jobs, it would make a big difference how many jobs would actually be filled," Robert Barro, Harvard University economics professor, told CNNMoney.

Others in the Senate believe unemployed would rather be working, but with high competition it's much more difficult to get a job.

"The [unemployment] payments are so much lower than a salary or wage would be," said Max Baucus, D-Mont.

Unemployment benefit extension, benefit or burden? You be the judge.