So do they have welfare and foodstamps in Oahu? (Hilo: to live in, military)

[CyberCity]

Originally Posted by OpenD

No, seriously, he lives in New England, and there's been a lot of snow there. .

I was being un-serious, but seriously, I hope our Mod is staying warm and keeping safe.

[UHgrad]

Originally Posted by Bebe Kiddington

I need to know before I get there.

Hawaii is one of the best states in the country actually to not have a job. According to this site, the sum total of aid from Medicaid, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc... in Hawaii is roughly equivalent to making a full-time hourly wage of $17.50/hr of taxable income. This is equivalent to about $36k/yr. Throw in miles of beaches, year-round warm weather, and tons of wild fruit to pick and eat and you could do pretty well not working in the islands. And no, I am not being sarcastic in the least, check it out for yourself. The numbers may be a bit dated but it should be a good ballpark.

Welfare Pays Better Than Work, Study Finds: $36,000 a Year in Hawaii | Hawaii Reporter

Welfare Statistics | Statistic Brain

[CyberCity]

Originally Posted by UHgrad

Hawaii is one of the best states in the country actually to not have a job. According to this site, the sum total of aid from Medicaid, food stamps, subsidized housing, etc... in Hawaii is roughly equivalent to making a full-time hourly wage of $17.50/hr of taxable income.

That is if someone qualifies for all of those resources. For example, many unemployed (in this case, I mean those who are collecting unemployment) get an unemployment check, and that is it.

But you are right about for those who have managed to work their way fully in to the system. They often have it "better off" to NOT get off of welfare, food stamps, etc, because it many cases, they'd not come close to making $17/hr wages.

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by UHgrad

The numbers may be a bit dated but it should be a good ballpark.

About that...

First, both of those references trace back to a highly controversial, widely disputed 1995 study by the Cato Institute, an ultra-conservative think tank.

Second, this obsolete Cato study was published before the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) and other welfare reform legislation went into effect, which caused large fundamental shifts in the way welfare programs are administered in the US. Notice that both of your links refer to AFDC, a program that ended in 1996.

The idea that an able bodied adult can just tune out on work, head for the beach and start collecting fat welfare checks at will is a myth, and it's an obnoxious and bigoted myth. It denigrates those poor people who need public assistance for reasons that are beyond their control. In my volunteer work I've come into contact with many people who are on the TAFN (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) program, and I've got to say, none of them were in what I would call enviable circumstances.

[khyron]

Originally Posted by OpenD

First, both of those references trace back to a highly controversial, widely disputed 1995 study by the Cato Institute, an ultra-conservative think tank.

Second, this obsolete Cato study was published before the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) and other welfare reform legislation went into effect, which caused large fundamental shifts in the way welfare programs are administered in the US. Notice that both of your links refer to AFDC, a program that ended in 1996.

It's threads like this one, and comments like yours, that make me wish CD ran more like [another site's name not mentioned as per CD rules] where trolls can be instantly silenced by user voting and quasi-factual BS can be effectively negated with reason (and subsequent whiney face-saving, also, downvoted by users until it's buried from view).

[UHgrad]

Originally Posted by OpenD

About that...

First, both of those references trace back to a highly controversial, widely disputed 1995 study by the Cato Institute, an ultra-conservative think tank.

Second, this obsolete Cato study was published before the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) and other welfare reform legislation went into effect, which caused large fundamental shifts in the way welfare programs are administered in the US. Notice that both of your links refer to AFDC, a program that ended in 1996.

The idea that an able bodied adult can just tune out on work, head for the beach and start collecting fat welfare checks at will is a myth, and it's an obnoxious and bigoted myth. It denigrates those poor people who need public assistance for reasons that are beyond their control. In my volunteer work I've come into contact with many people who are on the TAFN (Temporary Assistance to Needy Families) program, and I've got to say, none of them were in what I would call enviable circumstances.

Yeah, I agree with everything you say and admitted that it was dated. I am just saying if you are trying to scam the system (as the OP seems to want to do) then Hawaii would be a good place to do it because it has a relatively generous social safety net compared to other places and is a great locale. That was the only data I could find on the estimated value of social programs by state. Please don't think that I am denigrating poor people by participating in a hypothetical and using the only available data I could find to do so. Those are two completely separate ideas altogether. Of course having read through the thread now it looks like this person was just stirring up trouble to begin with so my bad for responding.

[Mikala43]

Originally Posted by khyron

It's threads like this one, and comments like yours, that make me wish CD ran more like [another site's name not mentioned as per CD rules] where trolls can be instantly silenced by user voting and quasi-factual BS can be effectively negated with reason (and subsequent whiney face-saving, also, downvoted by users until it's buried from view).

Ok, I'm pre-coffee, but..........................


Nothing is stopping you from "effectively negating with reason" . Instead of your half thought out rant, how about some factual input?

Plus, you may want to be thankful that user voting cannot be used here on threads or users.

OpenD is nothing close to a troll, he provided actual information (skewed or not) and valuable input.


(Wait.... were you quoting OpenD, but talking to the OP?.......)

[HiloDiver]

Originally Posted by Mikala43

Ok, I'm pre-coffee, but..........................


Nothing is stopping you from "effectively negating with reason" . Instead of your half thought out rant, how about some factual input?

Plus, you may want to be thankful that user voting cannot be used here on threads or users.

OpenD is nothing close to a troll, he provided actual information (skewed or not) and valuable input.


(Wait.... were you quoting OpenD, but talking to the OP?.......)

Great post...well done with the added humor, too!

[OpenD]

Originally Posted by UHgrad

Of course having read through the thread now it looks like this person was just stirring up trouble to begin with so my bad for responding.

I'm skeptical of brand new posters who post something controversial or provocative for their first post, like this one. I don't know why this forum gets more than its fair share of trolls and pranksters, but somehow it does.

[HiloDiver]

Perhaps there aren't really that many different ones, OpenD, if you know what I mean.