Here is my suggestion to help the unemployment and homeless problem.
Give an incentive for people to help people.
If a person or company hires or otherwise helps find employment for an unemployed or homeless person they will receive that persons federal income tax for the next five years for which that person is employed, rather then the IRS. Also any State can forgo their income tax.
If person helps an unemployed or homeless person start a business the same applies.
If an unemployed person starts his own business and hires unemployed or homeless people he gets the same benefit.
.
The government gains by not having to pay unemployment insurance and they will indirectly increase tax revenue from the purchasing power of the newly employed.
This will stop the unemployment insurance bleeding and increase the size of GDP.
The program should continue until unemployment numbers are at reasonable levels.
If someone quits their job, they are not eligible.
What is your idea?
What you are describing are "what ifs".
For one, people who quit their jobs are not eligible for unemployment now.
Second, what kind of job? What is the job? Making what? Doing what?
People only hire when there is demand. If only the top 1% have all the money, they will be the only ones buying anything. If people don't buy, then there is no "demand", hence, no "jobs". If no one is working, who cares about "taxes"?
People fail to look at the big picture.
For instance, how many times have those on the right said, "Why build a bridge? After all, when the bridge is finished, then those people stop working". When you try to explain how that bridge now connects three communities, meaning commerce, meaning jobs, their little eyes go all glazie and they call you a "communist socialist".
It's difficult seeing the big picture when you are used to relying on "slogans" and "sound bytes".
You were so close. So close...
"People only hire when there is a demand". If you had stopped right there, you had it.
Building a bridge may help and it may not. If the commerce already moved and a differnt community is thriving as a result of that moved commerce and we now build the bridge and destroy that commerce in favor of the old commerce that the Ear Mark producer just fuinded with a promise to get his name on it, did we help or hurt?
There's a dandy bridge in Alaska. Did this fulfill the needs? The Alskan voters didn't think so.