Welfare Pays More Than Minimum-Wage Work In 35 States

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by TacticalDesire, Oct 12, 2013.

  1. macrumors 68020

    TacticalDesire

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Michigan
    #1
    Article pretty much says it all.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapot...ays-more-than-minimum-wage-work-in-35-states/

    Help the poor but don't subsidize poverty. Welfare shouldn't be a disincentive to work which is what I feel it has become. At least to a certain degree. Welfare should NOT provide comfortable living but rather provide the absolute bare essentials for somebody to get back on their feet. It can be argued that it already provides the bare essentials or that it's too much or too little but that is where I will let the discussion start so others can provide their thoughts.

    As Bill Clinton was quoted in the article during is 1992 campaign on a platform to “end welfare as we know it, to make welfare a second chance, not a way of life.”
     
  2. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #2
    1. Welfare needs to be properly defined, as it consists of both temporary federal assistance as well as state and local programs that get combined under the general rubric, "welfare".

    2. All those forms of "welfare" equal more than a $7.50 per hour job? Thank god. Otherwise we might as well call ourselves India and call the poor "untouchables".
     
  3. macrumors 68020

    localoid

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2007
    Location:
    America's Third World
    #3
    Cato Study Distorts the Truth on Welfare and Work

     
  4. zin
    macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 5, 2010
    Location:
    United Kingdom
    #4
    Then perhaps it is time to increase the minimum wage rather than decrease welfare assistance.
     
  5. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2010
    #5
    I suggest you try living on "welfare" (thats if you actually qualify for any in your state) for a couple of months. Get back to us and let us know how "comfortable" it was for you.
     
  6. macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2006
    #6
    Yeah, as others have said, this is more a sign of minimum wage being too low. People on welfare aren't exactly living large.
     
  7. macrumors 68000

    Happybunny

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2010
    Location:
    's-Hertogenbosch Netherlands
    #7
    I to must join the people saying that all that statement shows is that the "Minimum wage is too low"



    One side effect that the crisis of 2008-2013 had here in the Netherlands, was before the crisis many many people were saying that unemployment benefits were far to high.
    These were mostly on the right of the political spectrum VVD or PVV, since 2008 and many of these same people were themselves made unemployed suddenly the mood changed, and the cry went up just how hard it is to live on unemployed benefits.
     
  8. macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    Either increase minimum wage or lower welfare.
     
  9. macrumors 6502

    Bug-Creator

    Joined:
    May 30, 2011
    Location:
    Germany
    #9
    Or:

    - adapt welfare in a way that allows people earning min. wage to still get some (and be better of than with just welfare)

    - stop trusting statistics compiled with intent :rolleyes:
     
  10. macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA
    #10
    This is pretty much the truth.

    Do you really believe that people on welfare have a comfortable living? Do you think that minimum wage provides a comfortable living? Are you one of those people who thinks that if someone is eating two meals a day of cheap frozen entrees and actually has a window air conditioner and a 15-year-old tube TV in their 300 square foot apartment that they are living comfortably?

    Define comfortable living and then explain how you think welfare provides that. Also explain how you think minimum wage might provide a comfortable living. The federal minimum wage for a 40-hour/week, 52-week/year job is $15,080 before any deductions. That is most certainly not comfortable. Twice that is not comfortable. Three times that is barely what I would call "comfortable". So yet again, please explain how welfare provides for a comfortable life.
     
  11. macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #11
    That is what it does, minimum wage is just too low in most places to be able to survive on whiteout working 2 or 3 full time jobs. Welfare should stay about the same and minimum wage should go up so that people working a full time job that earns minimum wage are able to live without having to be working 80+ hours per week.
     
  12. macrumors 68000

    VulchR

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2009
    Location:
    Scotland
    #12
    Time to increase the minimum wage. Simples.
     
  13. thread starter macrumors 68020

    TacticalDesire

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Michigan
    #13
    I didn't say that everyone on welfare is living comfortably. I said welfare shouldn't be that which is what some people want. I didn't say I knew what the solution was either. I have my own beliefs and opinions but I left everything open for discussion. Not to be attacked and have words put in my mouth.
     
  14. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #14
    If it wasn't something you said, who are you responding to? I don't think anyone here has claimed that those on benefits should live "comfortably".
     
  15. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #15
    This post is a prime candidate for the thread, Should A Person's Opinion be Dismissed Due to a Grammatical Error?

    Could you please restate that in a way that makes some sense?

    Thank you.
     
  16. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #16
    I managed to parse it. It's not that difficult, really.
     
  17. thread starter macrumors 68020

    TacticalDesire

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2012
    Location:
    Michigan
    #17
    I'm saying some people think welfare should provide a comfortable standard of living and I'm saying it shouldn't. Do not construe that as me saying that I think people on welfare are living large.
     
  18. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #18
    You can find "some people" who believe virtually anything.

    Who are these people? Can you identify them or are they just some vague population out there?

    Is there any specific political movement or legislation that you can connect to them so we can discuss something specific and not simply base the discussion on what you think "some people" believe?
     
  19. macrumors 603

    Menel

    Joined:
    Aug 4, 2011
    Location:
    ATL
    #19
    You can create less expensive more wholesome, whole foods by staying away from frozen pre-mades.

    Comfortable? On minimum. No. That is not the purpose. Bare essentials, minimum luxury. As that is all that is being earned.

    My grandparents have window/wall units. Does fine even in hot humid GA summers. When the family gets together we are plenty comfortable.

    If a tube TV is still working, why replace it? Electronics like that only depreciate in value. It's very wasteful and landfill-fillling to discard of devices just because they don't meet somebody else's cosmetic requirements. (I am guilty of this)

    We are nerds and gadget lovers.
    You make the mistake of assuming everyone has the same wants as you.
     
  20. macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2009
    #20
    The problem with welfare and housing is a lack of personal inspection.
     
  21. macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #21

    If you read the article it does indeed say it all. The writers conclusion is to tax welfare benefits . How this gives incentive to welfare recipients to work is beyond me.

    And keep in mind the origin of the article.

    Avik Roy is a Senior Fellow at the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research. In 2012, he served as a health care policy advisor to Mitt Romney. In addition to his Forbes blog, he write on health care, fiscal matters, finance, and other policy issues for National Review.
     
  22. macrumors 6502a

    jnpy!$4g3cwk

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2010
    #22
    A few points:

    1) With or without kids? A young single guy might figure that living under a bridge is "comfortable". A single mom with two kids (with her deadbeat ex- ) might feel that a roof over her head and some food for the kids with protein in it is the bare minimum.

    2) How much do you punish children for the bad judgement of their parents?

    3) A few times in my youth about the only food I could afford was rice with potatoes. Tough circumstances are probably good for those who can benefit from them, but, can be very destructive for others. I don't think it is a good idea to punish people for being destitute, or, punish unmotivated people with destitution, even if some people actually do benefit from it.

    4) The Living Wage Calculator can be a helpful way for people to think about how much money it takes to live.

    http://livingwage.mit.edu/

    5) Most of us live in an urban environment. My experience has taught me that the modern urban environment is very, very different from the Jeffersonian "yeoman farmer" ideal. Some type of Welfare State will come into existence; pure Libertarianism simply does not work. What we have right now is an extremely punitive form of welfare state, contrary to what the Cato Institute believes. I think there is a better way.
     
  23. macrumors 65816

    citizenzen

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2010
    #23
    Some type of Welfare State was already in existence. For anybody interested, English Poor Laws had long tried to address the problem if the "idle poor" (seemingly healthy individuals who refused to work). The modern urban environment did not create this problem, it has existed and proven unsolvable for centuries.

    I'd be interested in hearing what CATO or anyone else thinks is the solution for this population. I personally think we're a wealthy enough nation to afford the relief programs that give them some degree of food and shelter and am happy my tax dollars go to such programs. However, if we as a society decided that it was time government stopped spending money on the poor, then the only solution that I believe is realistic are shantytowns.

    Let's hear it for cinder blocks, tin roofs and raw sewage running through the streets.
     
  24. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Denver/Boulder, CO
    #24
    Mostly, it was missing a comma.
    Try "I said welfare shouldn't be that, which is what some people want."
    Or to expand:
    "I said that welfare shouldn't be a comfortable living. Some people want welfare to be a comfortable living."
     
  25. macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #25
    I ask again, who are these "some people"? Are they all straw men?
     

Share This Page