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.
I should have worded that "middle class," although that's too broad of a term in my opinion.
I am aware that many poor people work. And no, I am not "out of touch with the poor." You don't know me, nor what my personal experiences have been, and it is wrong make such asinine assumptions. What makes you think I was never "poor?"
My point is that the system is broken. And 2Sleepy's post above here confirms that: Make over $400, lose benefits.
EITC, get thousands of dollars for being poor and having babies. And so on.
So in other words, there is no incentive to work those extra shifts to make more money, because you'll then lose your benefits.
Maybe you should get off YOUR high horse and understand that other peoples experiences being different from yours doesn't mean they're "out of touch."
A single parent/head of household making under ~$41,000 qualifies for EITC, with the potential of getting over $6,000. If one makes a cent over the set amount, they no longer qualify. So they just lost $6,000 because they earned a few dollars more. As a result, tons of people actually chose to work less.
Similar with SNAP, and other government aid programs. Why work more for a few dollars more if it means you'll miss out on thousands of dollars in aid benefits?
So again, IN MY EXPERIENCE, most aid recipients had the frame of mind that I described.
I'm glad you worked with CNAs and housekeepers. My ex owns a nursing agency, and I used to help out with the business. I am all too familiar with the many CNAs she employed who did not want to work over 32 hours or whatnot for the exact reasons I described above, even when offered double-shifts, which would include OT pay. SOME gladly took the extra hours, but MOST did not.
But yeah. Out of touch.
What you are saying is for the most part accurate but I don't think avoiding situations where just a few dollars will lead to the termination of benefits is scamming but rather it's a rational choice. The same people that some try to marginalize or claim are too stupid to manage their own affairs largely seem capable of sitting down and working through various scenarios that involve maximizing the money they will bring in. As long as they are acting within the program guidelines I say good on them!
Here's the thing: I've KNOWN quite a few people who were content living like that, and who refused to take on extra hours or switch jobs because, in their words, they'd lose their benefits. I'm not saying this is the case for everyone, but in my experience, most of them had this mindset. One of them was my ex's sister.
That doesn't necessarily mean they are content...that just means they think they would be worse off taking a job that pays just a few dollars above the arbitrary all-or-nothing income cutoff limit. Fear of losing health coverage for their children or themselves is often the biggest culprit here. Many aspects of our safety net system are rooted in political compromise rather than careful research, planning, and assessment.
Last edited by robertbrianbush; 01-24-2019 at 02:40 PM..
Are you aware that only 24% of the poor receive any type of federal housing subsidy, and that the section 8 wait list is 5-7 years in many areas? In Arizona the monthly TANF grant for a parent and two children is $277 with 12 months being the lifetime limit for the receipt of cash benefits, in Tennessee a family of 3 receives $185. The maximum SNAP benefit for a family of 3 is around $500 a month but that is before deducting any income or TANF benefits. In Colorado a family of three earning $420 is not eligible for any cash benefits. I'm using 2014 data but very few states have increased benefits by even a dollar since then https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43634.pdf
How anyone can claim that single moms are content living like that is just mind boggling. I've worked with poor women for years and none of them were content or happy. They face enormous obstacles, lack of job skills, transportation and childcare to name a few of their problems.
Well, all I can say is that our experiences with single moms are very different. Granted, I have only had direct and extensive knowledge of two of them, and you have had experiences with many more, so maybe the two I have known are just exceptions. I will grant that this is possible.
Btw, have you seen the movie, "The Florida Project"? Both of the women I have known are actually living, in large part, the life of the character of Halley, the fictional mom in it, who is very much like the two women I have talked about (although neither is living in a Florida motel, as one is living in a low-rent apartment and the other is living in a mobile home). The character of Halley does have problems, but she shows no indication of wanting to do anything more than "just" survive and have fun until she is faced with eviction (and possible homelessness), at which point she does make an effort to earn money, although not exactly in a way that most people would approve of. (The movie does make an excellent point of illustrating the "no win" situation many poor people face.) However, neither of the two women I wrote about in my earlier post have ever resorted to prostitution, or at least not to my knowledge. One of them has, however, had numerous arrests for various kinds of fraud, robbery and drug-related charges. (So not all single parents are honest, hardworking, and just unlucky.)
Anyway, the fact is that there are many people -- and not just poor people, either; I can't stress that point enough -- who don't put forth any great effort until it is crucial that they do so. (And, yes, I also understand that being poor is often depressing, and that it is hard to put forth ANY effort is one is depressed!) Anyway, I do agree that it is not "easy" being poor, but there are some poor people who don't seem to have a problem with being so, but I realize that you and others might disagree, which is your right, of course.
Anyway, I hope you will agree with me that although not all poor single women are "devils", a great many of them are not blameless "angels", either. As with almost any category of people, there are some in the group who are "good" and some who are "bad", with the great majority of people being some kind of combination of the two.
And now, in a final effort to be very clear -- as I think this will be my last contribution to this thread -- I do feel very sorry for anyone who is poor through no fault of their own and does their very best to try to improve their situation. I think those people deserve a lot of kudos and a lot of encouragement -- and, yes, even more assistance than they presently receive.
Last edited by katharsis; 01-24-2019 at 02:42 PM..
Are you aware that only 24% of the poor receive any type of federal housing subsidy, and that the section 8 wait list is 5-7 years in many areas? In Arizona the monthly TANF grant for a parent and two children is $277 with 12 months being the lifetime limit for the receipt of cash benefits, in Tennessee a family of 3 receives $185. The maximum SNAP benefit for a family of 3 is around $500 a month but that is before deducting any income or TANF benefits. In Colorado a family of three earning $420 is not eligible for any cash benefits. I'm using 2014 data but very few states have increased benefits by even a dollar since then https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43634.pdf
How anyone can claim that single moms are content living like that is just mind boggling. I've worked with poor women for years and none of them were content or happy. They face enormous obstacles, lack of job skills, transportation and childcare to name a few of their problems.
Well said. A more realistic, humanistic view. Real life. They are not "living the life". I don't care if they buy chips with their SNAP benes. Daycare is very costly.
Well said. A more realistic, humanistic view. Real life. They are not "living the life". I don't care if they buy chips with their SNAP benes. Daycare is very costly.
Daycare is another benefit provided by the State - single mom works 20 hrs a week at minimum wage, the State provides free daycare for her child/children. It's called Care 4 Kids in my state. A single mother with one child earning less than 38K/yr would be eligible.
It's dumped two months of food stamp benefits at once. Sure, if the shutdown is only one more month, then fine. Any longer, and we've got serious problems.
Daycare is another benefit provided by the State - single mom works 20 hrs a week at minimum wage, the State provides free daycare for her child/children. It's called Care 4 Kids in my state. A single mother with one child earning less than 38K/yr would be eligible.
It varies by state. The only program available in all states is childcare while participating in the return to work TANF programs, but some states have put limits on that, for instance Arkansas will not pay for childcare for a family on TANF unless the parent works at least 30 hours a week. In Arizona and Kansas there are long waiting lists for subsidized childcare. In California if you qualify you pick your own licensed provider but in some parts of California it's impossible to find one that the state stipend will cover. https://singlemotherguide.com/state-...re-assistance/
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 6 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,953,728 times
Reputation: 50650
Quote:
Originally Posted by sixlets82
The question I would ask you is why should people who get EBT benefits be allowed to just get whatever they want while people on the WIC program are limited to certain items?? Is one group better then the other?? When we were children our family received WIC and we made it work just fine, while it's true that we weren't gorging ourselves on junk food we always had enough healthy food to eat and I'm glad for it, now as a parent I always make sure my children eat healthy from the good eating habits I learned as a child.
The Government Accountability Office (GAO) is concerned that infant formula provided as part of the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, better known as WIC, is being sold online.
Edited to remove link because Clara says the site has malware on it. The site in question is "The Hill." No signs of malware on my part, but might as well be safe.
Honestly, I think some people are going to cry about what's in other people's shopping carts no matter what, and people who want to abuse the system will find a way as well.
Last edited by Metlakatla; 01-24-2019 at 07:20 PM..
Status:
"I don't understand. But I don't care, so it works out."
(set 6 days ago)
35,627 posts, read 17,953,728 times
Reputation: 50650
Metlakatla, there is serious malware on the link you posted. I got a huge red flag, and then had to restart my Mac after I clicked on it.
You should delete that link.
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.
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.
You don't know me, nor what my personal experiences have been, and it is wrong make such asinine assumptions. What makes you think I was never "poor?" 
