New Study Shows that Welfare Benefits are Exceeding Minimum Wage Jobs.......Why Work?

[Vteckidd]

Welfare: A Better Deal than Work | Cato Institute

Interesting Facts and figures, specifically:

In nine states — Hawaii, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, Rhode Island, New York, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maryland — as well as Washington, D.C., annual benefits were worth more than $35,000 a year. The median value of the welfare package across the 50 states is $28,500.

But that doesn’t tell the whole story. Welfare benefits are not taxed, while wages are, so we calculated how much money a welfare recipient receiving these six benefits would have to earn in pretax income if she took a job and left the welfare rolls. We computed the federal income tax, the state income tax, and the FICA payroll taxes one would have to pay on wage income; we also took into account both federal and state versions of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) as well as child tax credits where available (these helped increase the relative value of work but did not fully offset the taxes due).

We found that, just to break even, a person on welfare would often have to take a job that paid considerably more than the value of the forgone welfare benefits. In Hawaii, for example, a person leaving welfare for work would have to earn more than $60,590 a year to be better off. In fact, welfare currently pays more than a minimum-wage job in 34 states and the District of Columbia. In Hawaii, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, D.C., welfare pays more than a $20-an-hour job, and in five additional states it yields more than a $15-per-hour job.

With the economy shifting toward more and more part time jobs, because of Obamacare and the Economic policies put in place by this administration, no wonder food stamps are up 17 million 5 years after the 2008 Collapse. Why work if you can make the same money OR MORE on the govt take?

Theres no incentive to get off govt money.

[.blank cd]

Another interesting fact from the study, that we should go ahead and get out of the way, before the lot of this subsection starts implying something the study doesn't say....

"There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy or do not wish to work"

[.blank cd]

With the economy shifting toward more and more part time jobs, because of Obamacare and the Economic policies put in place by this administration, no wonder food stamps are up 17 million 5 years after the 2008 Collapse. Why work if you can make the same money OR MORE on the govt take.

Correllation is not causation.

[Vteckidd]

Another interesting fact from the study, that we should go ahead and get out of the way, before the lot of this subsection starts implying something the study doesn't say....

"There is no evidence that people on welfare are lazy or do not wish to work"

i wasnt making that assumption at all, just merely stating that there is a connection between giving free money vs earning money.

If a society refuses to take the low paying jobs because it becomes complacent with free govt money, and there is no incentive to take those jobs, then we are building a vastly inferior work force for the future IMO

Also, under Obamas watch, all hes done is extend UE benefits 99 weeks, and lessened the welfare requirements. Hes made it EASIER to stay on the take. Thats not encouraging people to take jobs and move up, it encourages them to stay at the current level. If people arent willing to take lower paying jobs and move up, because Govt money is MORE, then they will never be skilled or qualified to take the higher jobs. Its short sighted thinking.

All we can hope is the welfare people are going to school and getting an education, which is subsidized by the govt anyway.

[Vteckidd]

Correllation is not causation.

not blaming Obama solely for the environment, let me make that clear. Clinton and Bush did nothing to address this issue, however, they had much better economic environments over their terms.

But, Obamacares rules for providing HC has caused companies to draw down their workforce and cut hours. Thats no longer debatable, that is happening across the board from every company. So, if you have an economy that is moving toward 30 hours or less jobs, and lots of lower end minimum wage jobs being created and replacing the higher end jobs, then this study is scary.

[.blank cd]

i wasnt making that assumption at all, just merely stating that there is a connection between giving free money vs earning money.

If a society refuses to take the low paying jobs because it becomes complacent with free govt money, and there is no incentive to take those jobs, then we are building a vastly inferior work force for the future IMO.

But this study doesn't say that society is refusing to take low paying jobs, or that they're becoming complacent with (not)free government money

Is there a study you've read that's suggested this?

[Vteckidd]

But this study doesn't say that society is refusing to take low paying jobs, or that they're becoming complacent with (not)free government money

Is there a study you've read that's suggested this?

youre right, i shouldnt make that leap.

But IMO the numbers suggest that is happeneing, it is my interpretation.

Minimum wage jobs are growing-fact
higher end jobs are shrinking-fact
foodstamps- 17 million more in last 4 years
welfare growing-fact

What else could be causing this? remember we are 5 years into this "recovery". either people are happier taking lower paying jobs, or they are choosing NOT to work.

[.blank cd]

Also, under Obamas watch, all hes done is extend UE benefits 99 weeks, and lessened the welfare requirements. Hes made it EASIER to stay on the take. Thats not encouraging people to take jobs and move up, it encourages them to stay at the current level. If people arent willing to take lower paying jobs and move up, because Govt money is MORE, then they will never be skilled or qualified to take the higher jobs. Its short sighted thinking.

In your opinion, do you think the policy of reducing requirements and extending benefits is used explicitly to create a society dependent on welfare , or is it used to reduce the burden of the recession?

[Sammich]

they need to make the requirements more stringent..i was talking to a old lady that lives below me about food stamps and what not, as all of us know, there are people that do recreational drugs that are on food stamps...correct me if i'm wrong, but the money to buy your recreational drug is the same money you could be using to feed you and your family...i see poor money management. because of this, those that REALLY need this assistance are being left to the side. almost gives them the thought process of, why should i try so hard, if mary jane down the road is succeeding and not doing evrything she needs to, but me joe blow am trying everything to get a job and i'm still failing.

i mean that's how i felt at one point. hell i was on partial unemployment and working a part time job at dollar general when i got laid off. it got to the point where i would have been making more or the same on unemployment if i left. i didnt quit, per say but circumstances at that time made it difficult for me to get back to work before they just had to write me off as an employee. (they switched managers, the manager didnt know my schedule i could work and i was helping my father in law at the time, back and forth w/ a pending back surgery get around).

it's hard to keep trying when the purposeful failers of life make it better than you can. i put more time into dropping resumes and putting in applications

[Vteckidd]

In your opinion, do you think the policy of reducing requirements and extending benefits is used explicitly to create a society dependent on welfare , or is it used to reduce the burden of the recession?

In the short term, reduce the burden of recession.

However, the recession ENDED 4 years ago, are we going to have 10 years of unlimited UE and welfare and food stamps? The recession has been done since June 2009, we are in "recovery", the parties (notice i said PARTIES, plural) have been in power 4 years SINCE the recession ENDED, UE is still 3-4% higher than where it should be under normal recovery periods. Although im not a HUGE fan of trump but he was recently asked what he would do if he was president, in response to people that depend on SS and MC/MC , too poor for health insurance, etc. His response:

"I would make people so rich, they wouldnt need to worry about SS or MC^2 "

Now thats easy to say i know, but thats the mentality that I believe makes America great. Instead of figuring out how to give stuff to people who are "poor", we should be teaching "poor" how to acquire goods and services they want. Giving someone UE doesnt teach them anything. Giving them almost 2 years of UE is almost borderline wrecking their career intentionally. How do you explain a 2 year gap on your resume?
Labor Force has SHRUNK.

OBama (whether you are for him or not) has not done anything to make the economy better since the end of the recession. Agreed? Republicans havent either, but I place blame at leadership.

So, knowing that Obama wants to double down on the same policies that havent worked 4 years after the end of a recession, I can only theorize that hes not interested in creating higher paying jobs and careers. Hes not interested in what Corps have to say about what works and what doesnt. Hes interested in putting more people on the govt hook because its a type of social retribution

[Vteckidd]

they need to make the requirements more stringent..i was talking to a old lady that lives below me about food stamps and what not, as all of us know, there are people that do recreational drugs that are on food stamps...correct me if i'm wrong, but the money to buy your recreational drug is the same money you could be using to feed you and your family...i see poor money management. because of this, those that REALLY need this assistance are being left to the side. almost gives them the thought process of, why should i try so hard, if mary jane down the road is succeeding and not doing evrything she needs to, but me joe blow am trying everything to get a job and i'm still failing.

i mean that's how i felt at one point. hell i was on partial unemployment and working a part time job at dollar general when i got laid off. it got to the point where i would have been making more or the same on unemployment if i left. i didnt quit, per say but circumstances at that time made it difficult for me to get back to work before they just had to write me off as an employee. (they switched managers, the manager didnt know my schedule i could work and i was helping my father in law at the time, back and forth w/ a pending back surgery get around).

it's hard to keep trying when the purposeful failers of life make it better than you can. i put more time into dropping resumes and putting in applications

Ive been laid, off, I have been on UE as well. But I always thought that 40 hours a week at $8/hr would lead to $10/hr, $12/hr etc if i worked hard. UE was a means to get me from 1 job to the next.

UE is really the big issue yet, its the EIC , we pay people to have kids, not let people keep extra money to take care of their children.

[bu villain]

It's hard to find someone who doesn't think our welfare system could be better but difficult question arise quickly when you get into details. Like you said, UE helped you to make a transition in your life while others may use it as a crutch. The idea of letting people keep their extra money to take care of their children sounds good but it doesn't work if the parents don't have jobs or are just plain terrible with money. You can try to provide the best incentives you can but in the end, you can't force people into being motivated, improving their skills, becoming more intelligent, etc. Some people are perfectly happy letting these people starve in the streets, others are not. There will never be universal agreement on what the right balance of benefits and what the implementation should be.

[Sinfix_15]

It's amazing to think about how pathetic and weak our country has become.

[.blank cd]

It's amazing to think about how pathetic and weak our country has become.

Why do you hate America?

[Sinfix_15]

Why do you hate America?

Entitlement society is not America. It is a disease that has infected America.

[.blank cd]

Entitlement society is not America. It is a disease that has infected America.

So you hate everything America stands for

[Sinfix_15]

So you hate everything America stands for

You are delusional.

[BanginJimmy]

It's hard to find someone who doesn't think our welfare system could be better but difficult question arise quickly when you get into details. Like you said, UE helped you to make a transition in your life while others may use it as a crutch. The idea of letting people keep their extra money to take care of their children sounds good but it doesn't work if the parents don't have jobs or are just plain terrible with money. You can try to provide the best incentives you can but in the end, you can't force people into being motivated, improving their skills, becoming more intelligent, etc. Some people are perfectly happy letting these people starve in the streets, others are not. There will never be universal agreement on what the right balance of benefits and what the implementation should be.

You are right, these programs had/have great intentions, but they have been manipulated and abused to the point they have become a career path. I'm one of those that think people on these programs should be given educational opportunities while on welfare. At the same time, it needs to have a solid time limit and many other limitations. It would be more expensive in the short term to offer free or cost deferred college or trade school but in the long run those people will have the skills needed to get higher paying jobs.

For those without the motivation to take advantage of the benefits, I am perfectly happy to let them starve on the streets.

[Julio]

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day...show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime. But it becomes hard when some refuse to learn.. Or shit, even have the skill level to mop a floor.

[BanginJimmy]

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day...show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime. But it becomes hard when some refuse to learn.. Or shit, even have the skill level to mop a floor.

I remember being in HS and worked a 40 hr work week on top of school and I couldn't wait to get my drivers license. Kids these days are so lazy and over sheltered they don't bother trying to get a job or even care about driving. With that kind of lack of motivation its no wonder they get out of HS with no job skills or even basic common sense.

Sent from my Galaxy SIII using Tapatalk 2.

[ISAtlanta300]

I remember being in HS and worked a 40 hr work week on top of school and I couldn't wait to get my drivers license. Kids these days are so lazy and over sheltered they don't bother trying to get a job or even care about driving. With that kind of lack of motivation its no wonder they get out of HS with no job skills or even basic common sense.

Sent from my Galaxy SIII using Tapatalk 2.

You speak the truth. Back then if I wanted stuff, I would work for it, and pay for it out of my own money. I have personal experience with seeing how kids behave these days. They wait until Christmas to cash in their gift cards and Christmas money for iphones and Xboxes (that is, if they didn't already get them as a Xmas present), and after that, always have their hand out for more money. Yes, their biggest worry is getting all prestige on COD rather than getting out and working to fatten their bank account to move out of the house by at least 21......

I have actually seen a boom of 'basement dwellers' nowadays compared to years ago....

[Sinfix_15]

Give a man a fish, and you feed him for a day...show him how to catch fish, and you feed him for a lifetime. But it becomes hard when some refuse to learn.. Or shit, even have the skill level to mop a floor.

The democratic party isnt interested in teaching anyone how to fish. Theyre perfectly content robbing fisherman and buying voters with the fish they stole.

[bu villain]

You may have answered this before Sin, but what do you think is the best way to teach people to fish (on a societal level).

[Sinfix_15]

You may have answered this before Sin, but what do you think is the best way to teach people to fish (on a societal level).

Lesson 1, the consequences of not learning how to fish.

Telling someone "if you dont catch a fish, that's ok, we'll just give you some of your neighbor's fish" probably isnt going to bring the best out of someone.

If this guy doesnt catch a fish, he doesnt eat.


If these guys dont catch a fish, the government takes fish from other people to feed them.





and that, in a nutshell, is america. People are no longer required to be strong, educated or independent and we wonder why people are no longer strong, educated or independent.

[BanginJimmy]

You may have answered this before Sin, but what do you think is the best way to teach people to fish (on a societal level).

I'm going to answer this too and my answer will never happen in the US.

We fix our dependency problem in this country by taking the long approach. Instead of giving people money for nothing, require anyone receiving someone elses money to go to college on interest free or deferred school loans. It can be a 4 year school or a 2 year tech school. Benefits are tied to school performance and are capped at 5 years during your lifetime. At the 5 year mark or upon accepting employment the checks stop. No waivers, no appeals, no nothing. You fail a class, checks stop coming. Decide to have more kids? You can figure out how to feed and clothe them yourself, you dont get more money to pay for more bad decisions.

Take away the endless safety net and let Darwin do his job. I guarantee you that a lot of these bad decisions will stop when people start seeing others drop over the side of the net.

[Sinfix_15]

I'm going to answer this too and my answer will never happen in the US.

We fix our dependency problem in this country by taking the long approach. Instead of giving people money for nothing, require anyone receiving someone elses money to go to college on interest free or deferred school loans. It can be a 4 year school or a 2 year tech school. Benefits are tied to school performance and are capped at 5 years during your lifetime. At the 5 year mark or upon accepting employment the checks stop. No waivers, no appeals, no nothing. You fail a class, checks stop coming. Decide to have more kids? You can figure out how to feed and clothe them yourself, you dont get more money to pay for more bad decisions.

Take away the endless safety net and let Darwin do his job. I guarantee you that a lot of these bad decisions will stop when people start seeing others drop over the side of the net.

You've got my vote.

[.blank cd]

Oh boy...

We fix our dependency problem in this country by taking the long approach. Instead of giving people money for nothing,

Does all this apply to corporate welfare as well?

require anyone receiving someone elses money

Someone else's money? LOL. Do you not understand how taxes work?

go to college on interest free or deferred school loans. It can be a 4 year school or a 2 year tech school. Benefits are tied to school performance and are capped at 5 years during your lifetime. At the 5 year mark or upon accepting employment the checks stop. No waivers, no appeals, no nothing. You fail a class, checks stop coming. Decide to have more kids? You can figure out how to feed and clothe them yourself, you dont get more money to pay for more bad decisions.

Interest free huh? Lol.

So what do you do about people on welfare who have completed graduate and tech classes

What about TANF?

I see a lot of thinly veiled classism going on here. Par for the course though on any welfare discussion here.

[Vteckidd]

Its actually much simpler than that.

1) Stop subsidizing people having kids. No more EIC
2) Cap UE benefits to 6 months like it used to be, no more of this 99 week crap. Its been 5 years Obama since the recession, its over, jobs are available. Recovery is here (according to them) put your money where your mouth is.


Those 2 things alone would fix a lot of the issues. Look at the HISTORICALLY LOW UE during Clinton and Bush, wonder why? Because JOBS. The single worst problem with welfare and UE is that there is no incentive to work the $7/hr job anymore. The higher end jobs are being diluted. If Obama was serious about lowering the people on FS and Welfare, he would do those top 2 things. But hes not. its a significant voting block for him.

Also, college and technical schools are almost free already. Im not going to pay people to go get an education so it further dilutes what an education really means. College isnt for everyone. It should stay that way. Just like owning a house isnt for everyone. You saw what happened when we tried to force everyone into a house that didnt deserve one, same thing is happening with education.

[Vteckidd]

Oh boy...


I see a lot of thinly veiled classism going on here. Par for the course though on any welfare discussion here.

Yeah theres 2 classes, people who wanna work, and people who dont.

PERSONAL STORY TIME:

I lost my 90K a year job, and worked a $10/hr job. It would have been WAY easier for me to go on UE and sit on my ass and do nothing vs working $10/hr for a shithead of a boss. But that $3/hr made a huge deal to me. After 6 months, I got hired at a different place making a lot better money. Not near where I was 3 years ago, but Enough that with some budgeting and some cutbacks, my standard of living isnt that drastically different.

I know 10 other people, who are still on UE that got laid off when I did, because its easier for them to collect a check than go back into the market. They are looking for jobs, but not seriously. They do some side work, but the jobs we all once had just arent there anymore. A lot of them are going to school to finish a cert or something while collecting UE.


Conversely, I go to school full time, I work full time, and i go to the gym 2 hours a night. Its worth it to me.

[.blank cd]

Yeah theres 2 classes, people who wanna work, and people who dont.

My point exactly.

[bu villain]

Lesson 1, the consequences of not learning how to fish.[/IMG]

That doesn't answer the question though. You are telling me how to motivate them to learn, not how to teach them. If someone says you don't get to eat until you learn brain surgery, I would starve before I figured out how to do brain surgery. Now obviously obtaining a living wage is not as hard as brain surgery but hopefully you get my point. Motivation alone isn't always enough. We need a system that can allow people to live while helping them to become self sufficient.

We fix our dependency problem in this country by taking the long approach. ... You fail a class, checks stop coming. Decide to have more kids? You can figure out how to feed and clothe them yourself, you dont get more money to pay for more bad decisions.

Take away the endless safety net and let Darwin do his job. I guarantee you that a lot of these bad decisions will stop when people start seeing others drop over the side of the net.

While I agree that your approach would increase the percentage of self-sufficient people, I am not willing to let people or their children die to achieve that. I would rather support unproductive people than let them die. Do you think there is any middle ground between someone with your values and mine that we could both accept?

[Vteckidd]

Yes, there is. Theres going to be leeches, its life.

however, i think we should all agree that its gotten out of control.

99+ weeks of UE
Millions MORE on foodstamps


If we are in year 4 of the recovery, these programs should be trimmed, not expanded.

[bu villain]

But does trimming those programs solve the problem? Is that addressing the cause or the symptom? Yes we are recovering but we certainly are not fully recovered.

[Vteckidd]

But does trimming those programs solve the problem? Is that addressing the cause or the symptom? Yes we are recovering but we certainly are not fully recovered.

yes it solves the problem.

A safety net is there to catch you when you fall. Its not there to hold you, coddle you, and never let you leave.

The net has been wokring for 4+ years. Where do you draw the line? 5 years? 10 years?

Gotta cut the cord sometime. People on UE for 99 weeks, Should be out working at Mcdonalds, YES, if they cant find a job in 99 weeks, during a RECOVERY, they should be out working a job that pays them the same amount UE does. At least at the jobthey have a chance to get promoted

[Sinfix_15]

That doesn't answer the question though. You are telling me how to motivate them to learn, not how to teach them. If someone says you don't get to eat until you learn brain surgery, I would starve before I figured out how to do brain surgery. Now obviously obtaining a living wage is not as hard as brain surgery but hopefully you get my point. Motivation alone isn't always enough. We need a system that can allow people to live while helping them to become self sufficient.



While I agree that your approach would increase the percentage of self-sufficient people, I am not willing to let people or their children die to achieve that. I would rather support unproductive people than let them die. Do you think there is any middle ground between someone with your values and mine that we could both accept?

Our species made it where we are today based on my values. Our country was formed and became what it is today based on my values. Maybe all of the problems in society today is a result of trying to accommodate you with something you can accept. Government dependency is a man made problem.

Right now in the US there are more children in need of parents than we have the ability to support. Maybe if we quit supporting dead beat adults, we would be able to take care of the children and eventually there would be a lot less dead beat adults and children in need of support. All of the problems in america are growing because of your values. America is the land of opportunity, not the land of guarantee. When forced to sink or swim, some people are going to sink....

[Vteckidd]

Thats the other thing no one talks about.

I DONT WANT THE CHILDREN TO SUFFER!!

So, your answer is to keep paying people to have kids? Seems Legit

[.blank cd]

Thats the other thing no one talks about.

I DONT WANT THE CHILDREN TO SUFFER!!

So, your answer is to keep paying people to have kids? Seems Legit

No one talks about it because its not an issue. No one is paying anyone to have kids in any sense.

[Sinfix_15]

Thats the other thing no one talks about.

I DONT WANT THE CHILDREN TO SUFFER!!

So, your answer is to keep paying people to have kids? Seems Legit

Liberals are just really compassionate and caring individuals. Seeing that children are taken care of is one of their utmost priorities.

[Vteckidd]

No one talks about it because its not an issue. No one is paying anyone to have kids in any sense.

As usual, wrong again.

why give credits to people who have kids vs people who dont have kids. I know people whoare divorced and trade off who gets to claim the kid that year because of Tax credits.

The dependent exemption is not the only tax break that parents can claim. Provided that your income is below $110,000 for married couples filing jointly, $75,000 for a single head of household, or $55,000 for a married person filing separately, you can also claim the child tax credit. The child tax credit trims your tax bill by $1,000 per child. Because it is a credit, and not a deduction, the child tax credit gives you $1,000 back in your pocket for every child that you have.

And then theres the EIC

The earned income credit is a refundable tax credit designed for lower income working families and individuals. The amount of the credit varies depending on your level of income and how many dependents you support.

Earned Income Credit: What is the Earned Income Tax Credit?

People are being PAID to have children, stop doing it.

A CREDIT is the same as paying someone for having a child.

[.blank cd]

As usual, wrong again.

Could you then quote the part that says they're paying for people to have kids?

Or is that just your interpretation of what the tax credit is?