U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-12-2018, 12:24 PM
 
850 posts, read 266,675 times
Reputation: 467

Advertisements

compeling sw recipients to work for their benefits is unlikely to produce the goal.
Firstly, it would result in distortion of the current markets as employers and cities would game the rules to their advantage.
This would lead to unintended disruptions in other areas.

For example, I lived in a country that instituted a program to combat unemployment during the great recession whereby SW recipients were put in a program of 'intership'. They would keep a portion of their benefit while they were placed in jobs as an "intern". The employer was incentivized through tax breaks and could pay the intern a much lower wage than an ordinary worker (less than min wage).

This resulted in employers shedding regular full time employees to be replaced with 'interns'.
The tax payer was basically subsidizing employers.

Additionally, coercive policies to compel people to perform work, will not result in any sort of quality work.
That shoddy work will have actual costs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-13-2018, 12:13 AM
 
1,590 posts, read 781,927 times
Reputation: 2125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jman0war View Post
compeling sw recipients to work for their benefits is unlikely to produce the goal.
Firstly, it would result in distortion of the current markets as employers and cities would game the rules to their advantage.
This would lead to unintended disruptions in other areas.

For example, I lived in a country that instituted a program to combat unemployment during the great recession whereby SW recipients were put in a program of 'intership'. They would keep a portion of their benefit while they were placed in jobs as an "intern". The employer was incentivized through tax breaks and could pay the intern a much lower wage than an ordinary worker (less than min wage).

This resulted in employers shedding regular full time employees to be replaced with 'interns'.
The tax payer was basically subsidizing employers.

Additionally, coercive policies to compel people to perform work, will not result in any sort of quality work.
That shoddy work will have actual costs.

Around here a lot of places don't want to hire regular employees. So, the food stamp recipients have to do volunteer work to keep getting food stamps so they can eat. The places know that, which is why some of them don't hire paid workers. They advertise for volunteers instead and sometimes the volunteer has to pay money for the background check. There is such a high demand for the volunteer positions by desperate people that people get turned down for volunteer positions for being an improper "fit."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2018, 12:10 PM
 
Location: U.S.A., Earth
4,361 posts, read 2,643,446 times
Reputation: 3824
Quote:
Originally Posted by galaxyhi View Post
McDonald's put out a "budget " showing how a minimum wage employee "could live on their paycheck ". Know what was prominently missing? HEAT AND/OR A.C.. for just one thing. TRANSPORTATION was another either not in the budget or severely underbudgeted. Do you think one In the north climates can live without heat? Or in the sweltering south, a.c.??
I remember that proposed budget. IIRC, there was another variation where you pay for those bills through your second job
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-17-2018, 03:31 PM
 
25,148 posts, read 11,793,209 times
Reputation: 11769
Quote:
Originally Posted by SportyandMisty View Post
Please note the error in Roosevelts proclamation:



The error, of course, is bolded above. Roosevelt was not "King" with unlimited powers. The President does not get to decide that.
What part of intent did you miss in this discussion?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top