Hungary links welfare to work..we should,too. (2014, money, income)
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.
' “There are between 300,000 and 500,000 people who are able to work, but their socialization to work is very weak,” said Lajos Kosa, the executive vice president of Mr. Orban’s governing Fidesz party. “They need to be led back to the world of employment, but they are lacking fundamental skills.” '
"Those fundamental skills include showing up for work on time or finishing an assigned task, he said."
That's what we need here. Too many people are languishing, unfulfilled, with no purpose in life. Well-intentioned or not, welfare programs keep them there. We should follow Hungary's lead. Not job training, no learning new skills, but picking up a tool and using it. Eight hours work for eight hours pay. Everyday, not just when you feel like it. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. We see it everyday.
Give people a chance to earn money and they'll earn respect. Then they can get on with their lives.
' “There are between 300,000 and 500,000 people who are able to work, but their socialization to work is very weak,” said Lajos Kosa, the executive vice president of Mr. Orban’s governing Fidesz party. “They need to be led back to the world of employment, but they are lacking fundamental skills.” '
"Those fundamental skills include showing up for work on time or finishing an assigned task, he said."
That's what we need here. Too many people are languishing, unfulfilled, with no purpose in life. Well-intentioned or not, welfare programs keep them there. We should follow Hungary's lead. Not job training, no learning new skills, but picking up a tool and using it. Eight hours work for eight hours pay. Everyday, not just when you feel like it. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. We see it everyday.
Give people a chance to earn money and they'll earn respect. Then they can get on with their lives.
There are FAR too many details left out here. First, who would the employers be? Second, how would you guarantee everyone a position? Third, how would you justify your choice of employer and position? Fourth, how would you assess who is capable of work and who isn't? Fifth, how do you justify the validity of that assessment? Sixth, how would someone who is disabled and incorrectly classified as able to work "appeal" the decision? Seventh, what do you do with people who are currently working full time and on welfare simultaneously? Eighth, what about someone who cannot work because they need to take care of an ill, disabled, injured, or elderly family member?
' “There are between 300,000 and 500,000 people who are able to work, but their socialization to work is very weak,” said Lajos Kosa, the executive vice president of Mr. Orban’s governing Fidesz party. “They need to be led back to the world of employment, but they are lacking fundamental skills.” '
"Those fundamental skills include showing up for work on time or finishing an assigned task, he said."
That's what we need here. Too many people are languishing, unfulfilled, with no purpose in life. Well-intentioned or not, welfare programs keep them there. We should follow Hungary's lead. Not job training, no learning new skills, but picking up a tool and using it. Eight hours work for eight hours pay. Everyday, not just when you feel like it. Idle hands are the devil's workshop. We see it everyday.
Give people a chance to earn money and they'll earn respect. Then they can get on with their lives.
There are FAR too many details left out here. First, who would the employers be? Second, how would you guarantee everyone a position? Third, how would you justify your choice of employer and position? Fourth, how would you assess who is capable of work and who isn't? Fifth, how do you justify the validity of that assessment? Sixth, how would someone who is disabled and incorrectly classified as able to work "appeal" the decision? Seventh, what do you do with people who are currently working full time and on welfare simultaneously? Eighth, what about someone who cannot work because they need to take care of an ill, disabled, injured, or elderly family member?
Well, you could just make it digging holes and filling them back up again. A lot of employers do that. One of the hospitals around here puts RNs in the laundry folding towels when they go out on workers' comp. See, towels don't weigh very much so almost anyone can do it, don't have to be standing. It doesn't have to be anything particularly useful. They could just go around cleaning up the streets with push brooms, painting over graffiti, doing park maintenance. You're paying these people anyway so you might as well get some sort of small civic benefit out of them. There's obviously a need for that kind of stuff since every time I go into a city like San Francisco, it's full of trash, smells like urine. After they've been successfully working for six months, you could train them to do something more useful. Say San Francisco could train them as bus drivers for when Muni goes on their paid strikes which they do every few years.
To start off with, there's too many welfare recipients. You don't need to have a job for everyone. A job comes up, and you can take that job or lose your benefits. Since this is a teaching tool, make it just for two weeks. After two weeks you get your draw back and get put on the front of the line to work again. Next time, make it four weeks. After that, you can always come in on the front of the line but only get your draw if you work.
It'd be something close with a transportation allowance (bus pass preferably, might have to pay some government welfare drivers for jobs that aren't accessible but that's another job). You can either take that job or lose your welfare. A person on disability would have their disability (certified) taken into account. If they're disabled but not certified, they'd need to become certified. Cap the maximum working hours. If you're already working say 50 hours a week, then no additional work-for-welfare would be imposed. Short term unable to work would be handled under (paid) FMLA. Longer term they would apply for IHSS. If person they're caring for doesn't qualify for IHSS, to bad. The person they are providing care for can pay for those services, but to expect the government to pay your welfare just because you don't feel like working is unacceptable.
Is life going to be harder? Sure. Guess what normal productive people deal with every day? The same kind of difficulties balancing personal life with their work responsibilities.
There are FAR too many details left out here. First, who would the employers be? Second, how would you guarantee everyone a position? Third, how would you justify your choice of employer and position? Fourth, how would you assess who is capable of work and who isn't? Fifth, how do you justify the validity of that assessment? Sixth, how would someone who is disabled and incorrectly classified as able to work "appeal" the decision? Seventh, what do you do with people who are currently working full time and on welfare simultaneously? Eighth, what about someone who cannot work because they need to take care of an ill, disabled, injured, or elderly family member?
I have a fully developed and vetted program that will address every one of the questions you've asked and I'll be glad to mail it to you via UPS. It weighs 7 lbs.
Not really. I'm offering the Hungarian plan as a direction we should move. Fidesz is a conservative party in Hungary, even reactionary, so if they can come up with and actual put in place a communal work program, the US can, too. Although both the Fascists and National Socialists had similar programs. Which did work.
The NYT article does answer some of your questions. Some the Magyars must feel are unimportant, as do I. "Details". To be addressed by administrators. Either way, they did not let nay saying stand in their way of getting something done.
The important thing is to bring work back into the lives of people who are removed from it. It is so important to have something useful to do, to be responsible. Something for nothing is not good for people.
I'd add that there is never no work to do, no how matter how much work is done.
Well, you could just make it digging holes and filling them back up again. A lot of employers do that. One of the hospitals around here puts RNs in the laundry folding towels when they go out on workers' comp. See, towels don't weigh very much so almost anyone can do it, don't have to be standing. It doesn't have to be anything particularly useful. They could just go around cleaning up the streets with push brooms, painting over graffiti, doing park maintenance. You're paying these people anyway so you might as well get some sort of small civic benefit out of them. There's obviously a need for that kind of stuff since every time I go into a city like San Francisco, it's full of trash, smells like urine. After they've been successfully working for six months, you could train them to do something more useful. Say San Francisco could train them as bus drivers for when Muni goes on their paid strikes which they do every few years.
To start off with, there's too many welfare recipients. You don't need to have a job for everyone. A job comes up, and you can take that job or lose your benefits. Since this is a teaching tool, make it just for two weeks. After two weeks you get your draw back and get put on the front of the line to work again. Next time, make it four weeks. After that, you can always come in on the front of the line but only get your draw if you work.
It'd be something close with a transportation allowance (bus pass preferably, might have to pay some government welfare drivers for jobs that aren't accessible but that's another job). You can either take that job or lose your welfare. A person on disability would have their disability (certified) taken into account. If they're disabled but not certified, they'd need to become certified. Cap the maximum working hours. If you're already working say 50 hours a week, then no additional work-for-welfare would be imposed. Short term unable to work would be handled under (paid) FMLA. Longer term they would apply for IHSS. If person they're caring for doesn't qualify for IHSS, to bad. The person they are providing care for can pay for those services, but to expect the government to pay your welfare just because you don't feel like working is unacceptable.
Is life going to be harder? Sure. Guess what normal productive people deal with every day? The same kind of difficulties balancing personal life with their work responsibilities.
I'm OK with everything until the last part. It's rather cruel to force people into poverty simply because they have enough of a heart to not abandon a family member that needs help. There should be an allowance for this of some sort, because often the criteria for qualifying for care are too narrow and due to the shortages of doctors, nurses, and other care professionals in many areas there may not be any other practical solution. There aren't even any laws forcing care providers to accept Medicaid patients.
Nearly all US welfare programs already have some form of work requirement for the able-bodied who are not caregivers for very young or very old dependents. Apparently, this is a little-known fact.
Nearly all US welfare programs already have some form of work requirement for the able-bodied who are not caregivers for very young or very old dependents. Apparently, this is a little-known fact.
In my earlier work years there were a couple times between jobs that I applied for foodstamp benefits. The only work requirement was that my benefits would be reduced by any earned income and I would not be eligible at all if I earned above a very limited income level. It was quite incentivizing to work "off-book" or "under the table" to avoid reducing my benefits. I was, unfortunately, too greedy and wanted a better standard of living than average so when it came along I took the good paying job anyway.
Sure, sure, everybody's such a scammer in their dreams. Meanwhile, benefits are equal to the set amount for your household size, minus 30% of your gross earnings. If your gross earnings are more than 130% of poverty level, your monthly benefit will be $0 to start out with. If your gross earnings are less than 130% of poverty level and you are an able-bodied adult not caring for a dependent and you do not have a job, you may receive benefits for up to 90 days. After that, you must have a job or be training for a job, or your benefits will end.
Well, you could just make it digging holes and filling them back up again. A lot of employers do that. One of the hospitals around here puts RNs in the laundry folding towels when they go out on workers' comp. See, towels don't weigh very much so almost anyone can do it, don't have to be standing. It doesn't have to be anything particularly useful. They could just go around cleaning up the streets with push brooms, painting over graffiti, doing park maintenance. You're paying these people anyway so you might as well get some sort of small civic benefit out of them. There's obviously a need for that kind of stuff since every time I go into a city like San Francisco, it's full of trash, smells like urine. After they've been successfully working for six months, you could train them to do something more useful. Say San Francisco could train them as bus drivers for when Muni goes on their paid strikes which they do every few years.
To start off with, there's too many welfare recipients. You don't need to have a job for everyone. A job comes up, and you can take that job or lose your benefits. Since this is a teaching tool, make it just for two weeks. After two weeks you get your draw back and get put on the front of the line to work again. Next time, make it four weeks. After that, you can always come in on the front of the line but only get your draw if you work.
It'd be something close with a transportation allowance (bus pass preferably, might have to pay some government welfare drivers for jobs that aren't accessible but that's another job). You can either take that job or lose your welfare. A person on disability would have their disability (certified) taken into account. If they're disabled but not certified, they'd need to become certified. Cap the maximum working hours. If you're already working say 50 hours a week, then no additional work-for-welfare would be imposed. Short term unable to work would be handled under (paid) FMLA. Longer term they would apply for IHSS. If person they're caring for doesn't qualify for IHSS, to bad. The person they are providing care for can pay for those services, but to expect the government to pay your welfare just because you don't feel like working is unacceptable.
Is life going to be harder? Sure. Guess what normal productive people deal with every day? The same kind of difficulties balancing personal life with their work responsibilities.
(edschultz ON)
HOOOLD IT right there!
(edschultz OFF)
As one who is not on relfere, and therefore not eligible for workfare programs, I object to handing out jobs to welfare recipients outside a competitive process.
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.
