Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
funny leftardz; they created more jobs when Republicans ran things. they must have just got "greedy" when your Messiah got elected
idiots and hypocrites
I know you are new here and trying to build some street cred
But your child-like taunts really aren't impressing anyone. You have alot of competition from our rightwing posters in baiting liberals
You just aren't that good at it
if you cant rebut what i posted with facts and logic; then why dont you go cry?
RW,
Now, what did you have to do that for? You scared him off, just when he was getting fun....
Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week
The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.
And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment
So if giving handouts are an incentive not to produce, does that mean conservatives are in favor of cutting all corporate tax breaks and subsidies?
Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week
The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.
And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment
lack of job openings for the last half a century? lets see spme satats on how many on Welfare are actually getting the open jobs vs how many currently employed are switching to those positions. funny how in our company we have hire easily over 1000 people in the last year due to expasion, retirment and turnover. not one of them had their previous position listed as welfare. infact not one applicant came from someone on welfare
My evidence is anecdotal - certainly doesn't outweigh the statistics that will give "the big picture" - but I've seen able-bodied folks who are all too content to gobble up every bit of aid they can get (both public and private) rather than take the entry-level type jobs that they are qualified for.
It always appeared to me that they work just as hard jumping through the hoops to get the aide as they would work at a job. I do have a bit of a problem with the move toward making the act of receiving aid so much easier and so much more confidential. Maybe there should be a little bit of stigma attached to it - for adults.
And I think we need to target aid a little better. I believe the idea of showering a community with aid in the hopes that enough of that aid will find its way into the hands that really need it, is just plain wrong. I am convinced that there is abuse in the assistance programs and I think there are many bureaucrats who accept that all too easily.
just mho
See what happens when you ask a con a direct question? They are forced to admit that their talking points are absolute bullshit.
My evidence is anecdotal - certainly doesn't outweigh the statistics that will give "the big picture" - but I've seen able-bodied folks who are all too content to gobble up every bit of aid they can get (both public and private) rather than take the entry-level type jobs that they are qualified for.
It always appeared to me that they work just as hard jumping through the hoops to get the aide as they would work at a job. I do have a bit of a problem with the move toward making the act of receiving aid so much easier and so much more confidential. Maybe there should be a little bit of stigma attached to it - for adults.
And I think we need to target aid a little better. I believe the idea of showering a community with aid in the hopes that enough of that aid will find its way into the hands that really need it, is just plain wrong. I am convinced that there is abuse in the assistance programs and I think there are many bureaucrats who accept that all too easily.
just mho
What you see is not always as it appears.
As a recruiter and temp agency owner, I found something quite interesting. Welfare, unemployment and other government assistance programs did not necessarily make them lazy. To the contrary, it enabled them to make a pretty good living.
I would call them with an entry level job at 35K...or a temp assignment at 20 an hour...
And many would do the math with me on the phone....they would say...
Well, I get 400 a week in unemployment and both of my sisters would pay me $10 each an hour to babysit ( off the books) while they are at work.....so I am making 1200 a week of which only the unemployment is taxable...giving me a net of $1100 a week or over 55K a year ...or I can take your job at 35K a year giving me a net of 28K a year.
What would you do?
Lazy? No. Entrepreneurial? Yes.
Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week
The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.
And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job — and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment
Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week
The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.
And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment
lack of job openings for the last half a century? lets see spme satats on how many on Welfare are actually getting the open jobs vs how many currently employed are switching to those positions. funny how in our company we have hire easily over 1000 people in the last year due to expasion, retirment and turnover. not one of them had their previous position listed as welfare. infact not one applicant came from someone on welfare
Maybe that is because there is no such government program under the name of "Welfare".
The middle class jobs that USED to be here in the Rust Belt are gone, and gone forever. New jobs have not replaced the old middle class jobs. Once, one could graduate high school, get a job in a mill or pottery or refractory and be set. That individual could buy a house, a car, raise a family and have a little left over for retirement. But today, there are no longer those opportunities for a pathway to middle class contentment.Some people are shut out of attaining the standard by forces largely beyond their control. A lack of jobs for instance. You are automatically ascribing sinister motives and alternatives to honest people trapped in a market that no longer provides a ladder from poverty into the middle class. In fact, that market no longer provides a ladder up through the middle class.
The market does provide it, what it doesn't provide is an instant middle class existence without either 1) hard work or 2) an education. or 3) time. We are talking <10% unemployment here, not 30%. If you want to find A job you can find one, you just might not find THE job.
And making poor life decisions does not constitute "forces beyond your control"
Flipping burgers, cleaning hotel rooms, cashiering at a convenience store are not the types of jobs necessary to sustain a vibrant middle class. And a vibrant middle class is necessary to sustain the American economy.
Holding two, three, four jobs and working 45, 50, 70 hours a week is not the way to build healthy families.
So if giving handouts are an incentive not to produce, does that mean conservatives are in favor of cutting all corporate tax breaks and subsidies?
when individuals on welfare start creating jobs, providing benefits, making product, increasing the GDP, doing research and development come talk to us. untol then, shevle your old, worn out, tired argument that has no bearing or similarity to this diccussion.
lack of job openings for the last half a century? lets see spme satats on how many on Welfare are actually getting the open jobs vs how many currently employed are switching to those positions. funny how in our company we have hire easily over 1000 people in the last year due to expasion, retirment and turnover. not one of them had their previous position listed as welfare. infact not one applicant came from someone on welfare
Maybe that is because there is no such government program under the name of "Welfare".
Nice try, tough guy.
HRA/DSS - Our Services - Cash Assistance
