The pestilence of unemployment benefits...

Today our hero hideously misinterprets Mike Konczal's tortured analysis of Austrian unemployment insurance.

The facts, shrunk: In Austria, people who receive a lump-sum unemployment check take a longer time to find a job than those who receive regular unemployment checks. Konczal interprets this as an argument for lump-sum disbursements, because longer unemployment means people are taking extra time to find even better jobs. Ydiot thinks this sounds like being happy over an extra month in a full body cast because it gives your bones extra time to heal even better. Also, there may be some eensy-weensy other differences between Austria and the United States, but let's cast those aside.

Our hero's take:

Interestingly, whether you agree with Konczal’s interpretation or want to stick with the traditional disincentive view, either way the lesson seems to be that the main reform UI needs is not automatic extensions, but transformation into lump-sum payments. If you want to do something automatic, you could add some criteria that triggers a new round of payouts.

Casey Jones, you better watch your speed. We highly recommend giving your brain an occasional chance to catch up to your fingers. The reality is, if we reject Konczal's longer-unemployment-is-better argument, lump-sum payments appear an even worse idea: Ongoing benefits appear to get people back to work more quickly. Here's a handy proof for future reference:

Unemployment = bad.
Lump-sum payments = longer unemployment
ergo
Lump-sum payments = longer bad
Q.E.D.

Everybody got that?