The Head Of A Household Of Four Making Minimum Wage Has More Disposable Income Than A

[NW-Bound]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tryan ...The tenant is disabled...

Do you know what her disability is?

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SunsetSail This is the key in my opinion. It seems like people who are critical of entitlement programs are attacked on the basis that the critics are selfish and greedy because they don't want to share their money. However, some (hopefully most) are critical of entitlement programs mainly because history has shown that they don't really work in the aggregate at least not at any level of reasonable efficiency.

I believe your post points out one of the main differences between realists on this type issue, and hopeful hopers.

Realists tend to have had real life experience with these things, to many hopeful hopers they are more of an abstraction or an academic construct. Add to this that the liberal outlook seems on the surface to be more loving and less selfish, and thus more attractive on that basis alone.

If a person has spent their life in academia, or locked away in a cublicle, and living in a suburb with their kids in suburban schools, they are free to believe whatever makes them feel good- as the chance of being directly harmed by that belief should it prove wrong is small.

Ha

[Westernskies]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound Do you know what her disability is?

Well, she's obviously not suffering from stupidmerkin disease...

[tryan]

No, I don't know what the disability is; I don't doubt the disability. She has trouble walking (and has been truthful with me ... so far).

[donheff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by thinker25 I agree. But I remember a few years ago, an ongoing story on NPR about a high school (in Chicago?) where they got the parents and kids to buy into the whole education and go to college thing. It was in a very poor neighborhood. Anyhow, the experiment worked. I tried to find it via google but failed. I thought it was Washington Irving HS but apparently not...

IS this the deal where a philanthropist guaranteed an entire grammar school class (1st grade or kindergarten IIRC) that he would pay their way through college? He kept up with the students for decades and a remarkable number made it through college. Interesting show.

[Texas Proud]

I know there is this debate on if this... some seem to try and say 'it is not so, and if it is why would someone not just work for minimum wage'...

But I think this is not a valid argument... I think what the article is trying to show is that there are some very expensive programs out there that do not expire and they have real value... and real costs to society...

Sure, if they had the choice most people would choose the $60K job because it gives them more freedom... they do not have to go to a doc that takes medicaid... they do not have to live in a Sec 8 house... they do not have to deal with the hoops etc (I do not know if this is really a problem or not... maybe it is way to simple) to get these benefits... So I do not think they are saying the person has a 'better life' making minimum wage, just that their disposable income is a lot higher than what one would think...


I also think that it shows how welfare is out there... heck, the benefits this family gets is more than the income.... and if you multiply this times the number of people receiving this aid it has a real cost... and I also think it makes some people not want to improve their lives... it makes a permanent subclass of person...


Now, if we invested the same amount of dollars to improve their skills... so they CAN get a higher paying job... which in turn means more taxes... that to me sounds like a better 'investment'...

[haha]

Saw this yesterday-

Food Stamp Usage Hits New High Of 43.2 Million | zero hedge

The analysis is tongue in cheek, but the numbers are real. This is 14% of our population.

Ha

[kumquat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brewer12345 What about all the stupid people out there?

Well, a few ended up in executive positions at my former mega-corp.

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha I believe your post points out one of the main differences between realists on this type issue, and hopeful hopers. Realists tend to have had real life experience with these things, to many hopeful hopers they are more of an abstraction or an academic construct. Add to this that the liberal outlook seems on the surface to be more loving and less selfish, and thus more attractive on that basis alone. If a person has spent their life in academia, or locked away in a cublicle, and living in a suburb with their kids in suburban schools, they are free to believe whatever makes them feel good- as the chance of being directly harmed by that belief should it prove wrong is small. Ha

I believe your post points out one of the main differences between the tight-fisted "I-am-an-island" types and the realists on this issue.

Realists tend to have had real life experience with these things, to many tight-fisted isolationists they are more of an abstraction or an academic construct. Add to this that the conservative outlook seems on the surface to be "I-got-mine-forget-you", and thus more attractive on that basis alone.

If a person has spent their life thinking that society doesn't affect them, or locked away in a cublicle, and living in a suburb with their kids in suburban schools, they are free to believe whatever makes them feel good- as the chance of being directly harmed by that belief should it prove wrong is small.

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERD50 I'll say, the numbers appear to be 'cherry picked' to show the peak of the effect. Some cases may even be worse, many may be better. But if the slope of risk/reward isn't enough to make many people want to get off the programs, you can't expect them to (there will be exceptions of course).

You acknowledge that your argument is based on cherry picked numbers yet you still continue to make an argument?!? Unbelievable.

[frayne]

What about the stupid people out there ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by kumquat Well, a few ended up in executive positions at my former mega-corp.

Some people do better in the brain lottery than others.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus I believe your post points out one of the main differences between the tight-fisted "I-am-an-island" types and the realists on this issue. Realists tend to have had real life experience with these things, to many tight-fisted isolationists they are more of an abstraction or an academic construct. Add to this that the conservative outlook seems on the surface to be "I-got-mine-forget-you", and thus more attractive on that basis alone. If a person has spent their life thinking that society doesn't affect them, or locked away in a cublicle, and living in a suburb with their kids in suburban schools, they are free to believe whatever makes them feel good- as the chance of being directly harmed by that belief should it prove wrong is small.

Very cute. Nevertheless, good management manages for desired outputs, not a priori preferred inputs.

A responsible person will always demand proof of both need and efficacy before handing out other people's money.

Also, have you not noticed that your screed is full of non sequiters? How does a person wanting to be responsible about money, his own or what has been taxed away from him and others, equate to thinking that society does not affect him? Only a fool could think that. Unfortunately, much of the way that society affects us is overall negative to our well being.

Ha

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by haha Very cute. Nevertheless, good management manages for desired outputs, not a priori preferred inputs.

Exactly.

Quote:

A responsible person will alwys demand proof of both need an efficacy before handing out other people's money.

Yeah, there's plenty of proof in this thread all right.

Quote:

Also, have you not noticed that your screed is full of non sequiters?

I'll try and take out your non-sequiters the next time I mock one of your posts.

[FUEGO]

That's it! I'm going to save for a few more years and then quit working and get a bunch of government benefits! Will post a thread. Guess it's time for me to switch my Party affiliation to the one lining up the handouts for me.

(and glad to see porky pig isn't here quite yet!)

[eridanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO That's it! I'm going to save for a few more years and then quit working and get a bunch of government benefits! Will post a thread. Guess it's time for me to switch my Party affiliation to the one lining up the handouts for me. (and glad to see porky pig isn't here quite yet!)

It's obviously better to do it now if you're making a purely economically rational decision.

[haha]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus Exactly. Yeah, there's plenty of proof in this thread all right. I'll try and take out your non-sequiters the next time I mock one of your posts.

You may not have much to say, but I must admit that you say it very cleverly.

[Martha]

Aside from the inflammatory language in the article (minimum wage earners are ripping off the middle class) , the chart in the article the OP posted is misleading. For example, it assumes that the person making $60,000 a year gets no benefits. No health insurance. No nothing other than wages. It also assumes a level of taxes that is extremely unlikely for a family of four. The medicaid assumptions for the $14,000 and $30,000 earner are also questionable and vary from state to state. The use of the words "disposable income" is incorrect. He also gos back and forth between family of three and family of four so it is hard to know exactly what kind of family he is talking about. He mentions SSI and then doesn't say why. All in all, poorly written.




The worst thing about being poor is the way you are treated. There is no rule more iron, in my experience, that the less you get paid, for example, the worse you will be treated at work. Clerks in stores treat you worse. Government bureaucrats can often barely conceal their contempt. And so on. Ian Welsh: Disrespecting the Poor


Anyone who believes the poor don't try hard enough hasn't seen the guys on Chicago street corners in sub-zero weather selling everything from Streetwise to socks to dashboard ornaments. They haven't talked to ex-felons who've filled out more than 40 job applications--and keep going despite receiving rejection after rejection. Single moms raising a family on a minimum wage-income may be the hardest-working people in America--but no one ever talks about them that way.Alden Loury: Why Do We Hate the Poor?

[lets-retire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eridanus Add to this that the conservative outlook seems on the surface to be "I-got-mine-forget-you", and thus more attractive on that basis alone.

It might appear that way on the surface, but in reality the outlook is more, "I-got-mine-you-can-get-yours-too."

[DeborahB]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Retch The Grate which Facebook game company? The game industry is small, she may work with friends of mine.

Zynga

[samclem]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FUEGO And many of the non-taxable benefits of the 60k job are also appealing. 401k matches, vacation time, paid holidays, training, professional development, etc.

What would a person working 1 week per month need with vacation time? And every day is a "paid holiday". And as far as training and professional development--hey, the person apparently has all the training they need. And a 401K is for suckers who want to support themselves--ya never need one if the money cow doesn't dry up.

But there are costs that aren't shown for the "take the welfare" route. A lot of standing in lines, filling in forms, putting up with delayed checks, and, most of all, having very little control over some pretty important aspects of your life. It would make me crazy, but there are people who aren't bothered by it.