Did you read your link? It sounds like Paul Ryan could have written it.

Unemployment benefits burden the economy, but job creation stimulates the economy.

Tolerating unemployment means:

1. With less labor, less is produced, and therefore less can be consumed. The result: hunger, poverty, and wage cuts.
2. The fewer who work, the fewer who pay taxes, To get the same tax revenues, therefore, individuals must bear a heavier burden. The result: tax increases.
3. Decreasing purchasing power and increased taxation forces more firms into bankruptcy. The result: an increase in unemployment.
4. The unemployed must be supported by the community, which means an increase in public expenditures. The result: the collapse of public finance, despite an increase in taxation.
5. Contributions to the unemployment fund decrease, while poverty forces more to depend on it. The result: collapse of the unemployment compensation system, despite increases in contributions and cutting of benefits.
6. Private industry collapses under the increased burdens. Small firms become bankrupt. Independent people are ruined. Big capitalist firms, trusts, etc., are rescued by the state, since their collapse would throw hundreds of thousands of people into poverty. Billions go for rescuing banks, hundreds of millions for supporting the big industrial and shipping concerns.

This is exactly the opposite of the point you were trying to make.