75-04-A2
- Main Page \ Reagan Radio Commentaries \ 1975
| << Previous Broadcast | Next Broadcast >> |
Unemployment # 2[edit]
Transcript[edit]I'm going to talk some more about unemployment, how much of it and where. I'll be right back. Yesterday I was talking about unemployment and whether we should consider a person truly unemployed if there's a waiting market for his particular job skill in some other town or even in some other state. If we're going to give the unemployment figures the overall national total shouldn't we also give the overall total of unfilled jobs? Well-intentioned but ridiculous government regulations and some court decisions have had the effect of saying no one must leave home to find a job the job must be brought to the worker. Well if this had been true 200 years ago we'd all still be living east of the Alleghenys. During my last term as governor of California two skilled workers employed in another state by one company decided they wanted to live in California. So they packed up their families and moved west to live continuing as neighbors in the same town. When they were unable to find jobs in their particular line of work they applied for welfare. Now we'd already instituted our successful welfare reforms and in keeping with the new procedures, we got in touch with their former employer. Well he said not only were their jobs still open if they'd come back but he also had openings for 40 more in their particular job skill. 42 jobs waiting in one state and two who could handle such work were asking to be supported by their fellow citizens in another state. California refused them welfare. But that didn't end the story. They sued the state and a judge ruled that we had to give them welfare; that not to do so was a denial of their right to travel and to live where they wanted to. Now it's true that one of our great freedoms is to be able to cross state lines and live wherever in America we choose. But do we have a moral right to be supported by our fellow citizens simply because we want to live in a certain place even though there's no work for us in that place? I went to one of the lawyers on our staff and posed a hypothetical question. I pointed out that I'd soon be leaving office but that my line of work for most of my life had been motion picture acting. Now my question was, in light of the judge's decision could I choose to live in my hometown in Illinois and would I be eligible for welfare as an unemployed motion picture actor even though there's no such work available there? Well it was his opinion that this was exactly what that judge's decision meant. Well, don't send me a care package, motion picture acting is a closed chapter in my life and I'm still living in California. I just use this as an example of how far we've strayed from ordinary common sense in our social reforms. This is Ronald Reagan. Thanks for listening. |
Details[edit]
| |||||||||||
Added Notes[edit] |
