SFC Casey O'Mally - Actually, I can say that (although I'm not saying that). My point is that a temporary policy that provides some temporary relief is not the permanent solution. Therefore, much of the angst I'm seeing is treating this as a permanent solution, and I don't see that as being the case.

What most conservatives are saying has nothing to do with permanence. We are saying that this temporary policy - which has been in effect for 14 months and is projected for another 4 - has gone from providing temporary relief to being a temporary problem (at least in many cases, even if not all of them).

There is a very real possibility that the continued high level of unemployment benefits is damaging the overall economy. If that is true (and I say "if" because I am not smart enough to provide valid proof, I can just say that it makes logical sense to me) then it is a very real cause for concern.
When the remedy or worse than the disease, you have to question the remedy.

SFC Casey O'Mally - I'm not sure it has reached the point of being a temporary problem. I haven't seen any clear evidence supporting that assertion. At this point, all I've seen is anecdotal evidence that is being spun into supposedly being evidence of a bigger problem. I don't want the government using anecdotal evidence (or rhetoric) to make policy changes, either to stand up a program or to tear down a program. If conservatives want to enact a policy change from being in the minority position, they need to come armed with more than a handful of personal stories, some hypotheses based on economic theory, and a bunch of political rhetoric.

You say raise minimum wage and I'm going to say abolish minimum wage and let each state set its own minimum wage. In high taxed states of California and New York 15 dollars doesn't get you much. 15 dollars an hour in cities such as Los Angeles and New York doesn't do anything either. Yes your making more however your still in the same boat as before. 15 an hour in places like west Virginia or Alabama you're living like a king however you will kill industry there. Locality based pay is what we need to go to. I'm sure you know the federal government has done it for decades under the GS, WG, and other pay graded fields. It makes more sense and frees up enterprise. We are already seeing inflation on the raise because of the 5 trillion we've spent in the last year on stimulus alone not including the 1.3 we spent in federal budgeting as well. I'm seeing companies raise pay in select industries and others stay the same. I helped a friend get a job at a target warehouse outside of Philadelphia starting at 18 an hour. My friend is enjoying it, he tried to get a friend employed there as well however the friend declined and wants to ride unemployment out until it drys up which is set to end in October now. Some people want to work others do not is all I have to say. I think some states ending the unemployment incentive in some states is warranted and needs to stay in place in others based on vaccination rates and case counts ect.