Is it immoral to take gov't unemployment money we didn't pay for?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Alyosha1984
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
A

Alyosha1984

Guest
My wife was working part-time (20 hrs/wk) for a small yoga studio, which furloughed her down to 10 hrs/wk as a result of the Chinese virus. As a result, she is eligible for unemployment here in California, to the tune of 70-80% of her reduced income (a few hundred bucks a month).

Both of us have a visceral reaction against accepting government handouts, and never did so in our lives excepting some scholarships / Pell grants for college.

I feel it is immoral to take this government money because she did not pay any meaningful amount of unemployment insurance (I have done so in my job, but she did not for hers), and so any handout would be solely made up of taxes taken involuntarily from people, not anything we contributed to as part of insurance. Nor do we really need the money right now.

The contrary view on why it might in fact be moral to take the money – we have a 2.5 year old and are expecting a baby girl in July – so extra money would be useful for my family and little kids, especially as who knows what the future brings. (My job is secure now, who knows in 6 months?)

I wonder what a Catholic view on the immorality of accepting this money would be?

Is accepting government handouts in general immoral?

Is taking handouts balanced out by the benefit of extra money for a young and growing family? (Especially when it’s during an exceptional circumstance like the Chinese virus pandemic?)

Any thoughts or opinions appreciated…God bless…
 
Last edited:
Alyosha1984 said:
it is immoral to take this government money because she did not pay any meaningful amount of unemployment insurance (I have done so in my job, but she did not for hers), and so any handout would be solely made up of taxes taken involuntarily from people, not anything we contributed to as part of insurance.
Click to expand...
Taxes are not immoral. Jesus paid the temple tax. We are to render under Caesar what is Caesar, and Caesar can spend the money as he wills provided its not immoral. If you don’t need or want to use the money, then you can donate it all to a charity of your choice. I’m sure the St. Vincent de Paul society could really use it right now. Also:
Alyosha1984 said:
Chinese virus
Click to expand...
Please don’t call it that.
 
Last edited:
The government is a public institution that represents you, your family, and millions of other people and has allotted this type of support for precisely these circumstances. There is nothing against Catholic teaching against accepting government support (anymore than there is against using public roads, police, or education), especially during a time of crisis (even if an economic crisis).
 
If you qualify by the rules and you haven’t done anything dishonest or immoral in order to qualify, then it’s not immoral to benefit from it.
If you don’t feel right about taking it then there’s nothing wrong in declining it either.

Edit: And Fauken is right. Please don’t call it the Chinese virus. China didn’t invent COVID-19 or use it against us: they’re victims of the pandemic like everyone else.
 
Last edited:
I’ll just add to my last post that in such an acute crisis keeping businesses in business and consumers consuming are counter measures to an even worse economic downturn.
 
No, it is not immoral.
Zaccheus said:
Edit: And Fauken is right. Please don’t call it the Chinese virus. China didn’t invent COVID-19 or use it against us: they’re victims of the pandemic like everyone else.
Click to expand...
This.
 
Totally agree.

Government collects money for people in need. If you’re in need, you have every right to accept it. You’re part of the class intended to benefit, even if you personally didn’t pay in to that particular program.
 
Keep in mind that the Founding Fathers objected to taxation WITHOUT representation.

What we have in the USA is taxation WITH representation.

It, quite frankly, is those calling it something like “theft” or “immoral” who refuse to pay their taxes who are acting immorally. Taxes are specifically allowed in the Constitution as well as other acts in the General Welfare.
 
People are getting too bent out of shape over the whole Chinese virus thing. I’ve even seen a Chinese American on Facebook being called a racist for saying they have no problem calling the virus by its place of origin.

OP, if it will make you feel better, just give the money you accepted from the government back when you and your family are in a better position financially. Or donate it.
 
You not taking the money and spending less because you don’t have enough money is NOT helping the economy. The State can pay those money because the economy is working. If the economy fails or the state is bankrupt no money can be given.
So the money being handed out are also necessary for the economy and the wellbeing of all society members.
Trust me, when the State can’t afford to give back the money they taxed people for, it simply doesn’t give it and there is no one who can force it to give money it does not have.
I say take it and use it and you’re helping everyone by doing so.
 
Thank you for the insight. This will influence our decision.

I will continue calling it the Chinese virus because it originated in China.

I will also continue calling the 1918 pandemic the Spanish flu.

And Lyme disease after Old Lyme, Connecticut.

And Ebola after the Ebola River in Zaire…

I will certainly not stop calling it the “Chinese virus” because a Communist government (that actively persecutes Christians, taxes its citizens with no representation, and generally is an abhorrent regime) doesn’t like it.

Least of all because some media elitists in the USA brand it racist.

Calling it the “Chinese virus” is not racist. It is factual. Conversely, covering up the fact that it originated in China is a lie.

“Keep your tongue from evil
and your lips from telling lies.” Psalms 34:13

The Chinese government is objectively the most evil of all time (killed 50+ million of its own citizens) and papering over their atrocities is irresponsible and I believe un-Christian. Apologists in the West helped prop up the USSR for decades as well.

“Hate evil, you who love the LORD” Psalms 97:10
 
Employers pay a maximum of $420/employee-year for unemployment insurance. ANY claim will vastly exceed what anyone has recently paid for it; unemployment insurance works on the assumption that most people won’t make claims, either because they remain employed or because their termination is not eligible. Go ahead and take the money you are eligible for as long as you abide by the terms imposed by law about seeking work. Only if they required you to do something immoral would it be immoral to claim the benefits.

Furthermore, your wife is still working with reduced hours; if her employer hasn’t maxed out unemployment tax in her name, she will continue paying in until she does.
 
Last edited:
The US government has no money of its own. It collects taxes from you. Even people on SSI will be getting a check.
 
Alyosha1984 said:
as a result of the Chinese virus.
Click to expand...
You mean Covid-19. No such thing as the “Chinese virus“.
Alyosha1984 said:
Both of us have a visceral reaction against accepting government handouts
Click to expand...
Then don’t.
Alyosha1984 said:
she did not pay any meaningful amount of unemployment insurance
Click to expand...
Employees do not pay unemployment insurance, employers do.
Alyosha1984 said:
I wonder what a Catholic view on the immorality of accepting this money would be?
Click to expand...
The church does not teach it is immoral to apply for or receive government benefits.

It would only be immoral to fraudulently claim a benefit that a person does not qualify for by means of lying.
 
Last edited:
Alyosha1984 said:
I wonder what a Catholic view on the immorality of accepting this money would be?

Is accepting government handouts in general immoral?
Click to expand...
The government is attempting to do a small bit to help people survive economically. There is nothing immoral about that.
 
But this is admirable, because more and more people just want to use the state for their benefit not helping the state.
I mean It’s admirable in democratic western society, where system works for te benefit of people who distribute wealth and proud of their dignity.

In Early communist society after October revolution people were sacrificing their lives for the State, lived and died for te state, for the future of earthly paradise, but the time has shown that they were building totalitarian state that degradet human nature and impoverished people.

I don’t know, for me the refuse of social benefits is the sign of real authentic western man in the best sence of the word.

Unfortunately, there is also a new generation or type of citizens and entrepreneurs who are skilful only how to use the system, get social benefits, and avoid the taxes.
 
Last edited:
Short answer, it is not immoral. Long answer:

We all know the famous saying of Jesus on giving to Caesar what is Caesar’s. But what is Caesar supposed to do with it? The whole point of public authority is to serve the common good. Taxes, therefore can be levied justly as essentially payment for that service to the common good provided.

Take a common example: the government may use taxes to fix potholes in a road. No one objects to this–it obviously serves the common good. Further, I am not being treated unjustly if I never drive on that road so long as I have the same potential for service if the road I drive on were to develop potholes.

The same can be said of public programs that the government provides for periods of disability, old-age, or unemployment. As long as we all have the potential to benefit from it if we fall on hard times, there is no injustice.

What would be unjust would be the forcible redistribution of wealth as its own end–simply, say, to equalize everyone. Distributive justice would also be violated if taxes were levied from all strictly to benefit some, without the potential to benefit the common good. Finally, the state cannot exhaust public wealth–it can’t completely absorb private property.
 
Last edited:
There is nothing wrong with using the money for what it was intended for - stimulating the economy. Spend it with those hit hard by this, like local businesses that do not get federal bailouts. Or give to charities who will also get no help from the government, but will see a drastic drop in donations, particularly local parishes.
 
Fauken said:
Please don’t call it that.
Click to expand...
Zaccheus said:
And Fauken is right. Please don’t call it the Chinese virus. China didn’t invent COVID-19 or use it against us: they’re victims of the pandemic like everyone else.
Click to expand...
How nice it would be if the Chinese government were equally careful in its use of language. Guess who’s calling it “the Italian virus” or, alternatively, “the Japanese virus”.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top