2020 dem pres pick

Originally Posted by shawndoggy

I don't know anyone on welfare, but I've certainly known people who have been laid off and collecting unemployment who haven't pursued less than perfect jobs because to do so would mean that they no longer get unemployment checks. I think the means testing of welfare is the same... get a job that pays too much and you lose all benefits. That's a pretty perverse disincentive to seeiking work.

I don't know the specifics on how/why on this story, but I was talking with the supervisor at our local landfill. He was trying to fill a vacancy there and tried hiring a guy for $25/hour. The guy turned him down because he would lose his welfare. I don't know the specifics to the guy's situation, and maybe it just wasn't enough of a pay bump to make him work, but he factually turned down $25/he work to stay on welfare.

Originally Posted by bcd

I don't know the specifics on how/why on this story, but I was talking with the supervisor at our local landfill. He was trying to fill a vacancy there and tried hiring a guy for $25/hour. The guy turned him down because he would lose his welfare. I don't know the specifics to the guy's situation, and maybe it just wasn't enough of a pay bump to make him work, but he factually turned down $25/he work to stay on welfare.

You may have discovered the cost between living in crap and working in crap. Apparently the pay rate delta needs to be much higher. Truth be told many of these folks can't be talked out of it no matter what the pay is because they don't want to sober up enough to go to work.

Originally Posted by bcd

I don't know the specifics on how/why on this story, but I was talking with the supervisor at our local landfill. He was trying to fill a vacancy there and tried hiring a guy for $25/hour. The guy turned him down because he would lose his welfare. I don't know the specifics to the guy's situation, and maybe it just wasn't enough of a pay bump to make him work, but he factually turned down $25/he work to stay on welfare.

We have an employee who refuses to take a raise simply because she'll lose her benefits & it'd cost her more to be on our benefits than the raise she would receive. In my mind, this is how welfare should work. She works, she makes money, she gets help from the state that allows her to live in a better apartment, put her son in a better school & have money to have a little fun on the side. Too many on the left are successful guilt ridden white people who have no clue how bad welfare is abuse or that it's a way of life for many. In my HS the Mexican girls were encouraged to pump out kids & collect benefits. The black community? Good lord, generational welfare & a way of life. The white trash in the south? Same thing.

Originally Posted by wombat2wombat

We have an employee who refuses to take a raise simply because she'll lose her benefits & it'd cost her more to be on our benefits than the raise she would receive. In my mind, this is how welfare should work. She works, she makes money, she gets help from the state that allows her to live in a better apartment, put her son in a better school & have money to have a little fun on the side. Too many on the left are successful guilt ridden white people who have no clue how bad welfare is abuse or that it's a way of life for many. In my HS the Mexican girls were encouraged to pump out kids & collect benefits. The black community? Good lord, generational welfare & a way of life. The white trash in the south? Same thing.

Should it though? That is what keeps people on the benefits though. Would she be the only person at that pay level or is everyone at the company eligible?

Technically a family making $102,000 a year in the bay area qualifies for assistance.